Consciousness-raising seems to be a several-fold process. It doesn't happen overnight or in a flash, rather, it evolves through a series of encounters of various kinds. Little fragments here & there, the combination of which culminates into a kind of intriguing void, a question mark, the beginning of a search for answers, and a better understanding. And in parallel, the developing realisation, the troubling discovery that something isn't been spoken about nearly as much as it should be, given what's actually happening.
But of course, selective attention shouldn't be something that surprises me anymore, and yet it does - for instance the way the media & goverment in west european countries seems to still focus mainly on events in their ex-colonies (as opposed to other developing countries). Media coverage and governments statements of outrage or solidarity in any country seem then to be correlated essentialy with the proportion of the population there with origins back in that country, rather with the level and scale of oppression, violence and/or conflict taking place. Case in point - Mugabe turns out not to be the household villain name he is in the UK, in France for example, where on the other hand they tend to talk far more often about Senegal, Mali... Maybe this sounds normal but in any case it's worth bearing in mind when assessing the relative gravity of the most lamentable plights of people around the world - i.e. that any such assessment is bound to be a million miles from objective.
I'm ashamed to say that before I did a minimum of reading up on the matter, I didn't know that Sri Lanka has been marred by a vicious civil conflict for over two decades. Lately there has been a steady trickle of news stories on the BBC website about the situation, for instance, containing tentative predictions that the Sri Lankan government forces are on the verge of victory against the Tamil Tiger rebels.
But overall, perhaps for the absence of petrol, pirates or a prominent enough position on the axis of evil, the ongoing conflict doesn't seem to warrant all that many news inches, or much discussion at all. Atrocities such as suicide bombings, children & civilians engaged on the frontlines, and assassinations on a massive scale (dare we say - genocide?) quitely play out as if there was nothing urgent nor untoward about the situation at all.
I'll recount the fragments which first triggered my subsequent reading-up on the matter.
First, there was the interview we did, as part of our research/documentary on the lives of immigrants in our quarter of town. It was with the owner of the Sri Lankan restaurant opposite the port, a tiny little place but probably the best place to eat in this town for its quality to price ratio, and run single-handedly by an absolute gem of man known to most as "Lal" (Sri Lankans seem to want to continually outdo each other in terms of the maximum number of syllables that can be crammed into their given names, so please forgive my ignorance for failing to recall the entirety of his.)
In our interview Lal recited a refrain that was strangely familiar in that we heard it several times from various interviewees (Somalian & Kurdish, notably), something along the lines of "I had to leave because, in my country, there is a war going on" and afterwards more or less leaving it at that without following up the statement with any additional details or sentiments.
Then there was the article I came across the other day in L'Internazionale (italian publication which gathers articles from the world press). It was by a certain Lasantha Wickremantunge and absolutely astonishing in that it denounces the Sri Lankan authorities for their hand in his own murder, which would take place only a few days later, as well the general brutality and oppression of the regime. You can read the full article on the IFJ's webpage:
And then they came for me.
And finally there is M.I.A., whom I discovered over the summer thanks to my travel companion (whose blog you can read over on the left, incidentally). An appreciation of her music (for the lyrics and the distinctiveness of the sounds rather than for its "listenability") led me to read up on her background which subsequently led me to wish I hadn't. Turns out that M.I.A. (or Mathangi "Maya" Arulpragasam - what a name), in addition to having an enviably revolutionary background, is an accomplished graphic artist, fashion designer, music producer, singer/songwriter and, as of about a week ago, mother. All by the tender age of 31.
Furthermore, in her music she accomplishes something quite amazing - producing energetic electronic music for the raving masses, while at the same time managing to engage in quiet and subtle political commentary.
"Nobody wants to be dancing to political songs. Every bit of music out there that’s making it into the mainstream is really about nothing. I wanted to see if I could write songs about something important and make it sound like nothing. And it kind of worked."
M.I.A., perhaps because of her background and personal convictions (which I tend to believe are always strongly linked) seems incurably political, kind of despite herself. It is almost as if she has to hide it, overcome it to be a successful musician, but for those who do search for politics in music, it satisfies this desire for substance and meaning, while hiding it from those who would rather not know.
But of course, there's two sides to every story. An
article describing criticism of M.I.A.'s alledged political positions as interpreted from her music, contains some harsh criticism. In it M.I.A. is suggested as being "an apologist for the separatist Tamil Tiger rebels".
"Sri Lankans who have seen her videos say they interpret some parts as showing support for the Tigers, or at the very least glorifying their cause."
The debate about the Media in Sri Lanka, the bias of foreign news sources, musicians or other outlets, illustrates the level of sensitivity of Sri Lankans to what some may perceive as a biased portrayal of the various factions involved in the conflict. Even the BBC has been criticised for allegedly failing to keep to proper norms of neutrality as the following
article describes.
But according to the article containing the criticism, M.I.A. isn't all that well known in Sri Lanka, and outside of the country the impact of such resonances is muted since there is so little information and discussion about the ethnic conflict.
Aside from the depths of the entrenched divisions, what is clear is that both sides are guilty of unspeakable crimes of war, and ruthless fighting, at unfathomable cost in terms of human suffering and loss of life. Under such circumstances, where human rights are abused as a matter of course, is absolute and total neutrality really the first priority when dealing with the topic?
Whatever interpretations one lends to the music of M.I.A., linked to her background, personal experiences, and opinions (to which we are all entitled), perhaps the real and first "call of conscience" ought to be to pay attention to, and talk about what is happening, rather than denounce arguable, and often well-motivated, symbolic demonstrations of partisanship.
