The calypso confusion

TIMES INT'L

Dear Editor,
Guyana does not have true practitioners of the art of calypso. I was listening to the radio, and it was clearly brought out – the difference between what our performers do and what the genuine traditional artistes practice.
Concerning the furore of whether or not the National Communications Network (NCN) banned the 2013 entries, it seems as if no one issued any, and or at least no one wants to take responsibility or offer explanations.
From an artistic and lyrical point of view, I believe the pieces this year were not up to standard. Lord Canary opined, in an interview sometime back, that calypso is about ambiguity of language. This is akin to double entendre, which is the French for double meanings. This kind of indulgence shows that true calypsonians must use ensconced utterances to send their messages and make their points. Therefore it was the lack of art that I found to be most disgusting.
As for calypso writing and singing – musicians as a whole must not only be responsible – they must couch what they are singing in the actual language of a calypso. The literal is not the way it works.
Calypso was used to implicitly hit out against colonial masters – they knew they were being ridiculed, but they could not quite prove it. That is the legacy of calypsos and it must live on.
Yours truly,
Clayton Coleman

Related posts