light suddenly

a blush of brightness on the broken bark

wakes in the forest all our hope of day

so much is lost when choices all seem grey

 

this is a lesson that you have to mark

not all our good is earned for simple pay

a blush of brightness on the broken bark

 

what once was jungle now seems a safe park

these are the signs that indicate safe way

the proper actions of a scripted play

a blush of brightness on the broken bark

(no subject)

The following letter was sent by three veteran Caribbean journalists (two Jamaicans and a Guyanese) to the editor of the the New Yorker. It is doubtful that it will see the light of day in the US press, so, at the urging of al_zorra I reproduce it here.

To: themail@newyorker.com

To the Editor

As journalists and human beings we all understand that public life is not a kindergarten and that politicians and others in the public eye are always at risk of hard rough challenges. We also believe that journalism has the right and the duty to expose falsity and corruption wherever they are found.

That being said, we believe there are certain bounds within which responsible journalism must find itself constrained: we have no right to rob people of their dignity, their privacy or their reputations. And, as your Justice Holmes once said, 'Freedom of speech does not give anyone the right to shout "Fire" in a crowded theatre'.

Your editor, David Remnick is quoted by Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post as defending the Obama cover as a 'satire' “ as a way of making fun of all the rumors'. We confess that we and everyone to whom  we have spoken,  must have missed the point of the satire. We see no 'fun' in it. What we see appears to be  a clumsy, maladroit drawing which is obviously directed at the Obamas personally and not at 'rumors'.

Satire “ if it is satire “ requires wit and point, it requires art, in turning the obvious on its head to illustrate the truth hidden beneath. Satire does not need to be amusing, but it should be able to provoke an insight, a glimpse of a larger truth and the recognition, wry or rueful, perhaps, that we have been led, perhaps even tricked, into a new point of view, a perspective hitherto unnoticed.

Your plain, bald posterisation of the major untruths circulated against Barack and Michelle Obama does not provide any of this. In the present state of race relations in the United States and round the world, this is incendiary stuff, the equivalent of shouting fire in a crowded theatre.

It seems  calculated to provoke hatred and contempt for Barack and Michele Obama and other people of colour,  and like, the Danish cartoons featuring the prophet Mohammed, likely to incite violence.

All of us have been readers of the New Yorker over the years and none of us can remember anything so patently inhumane or  propagandistic ever appearing before anywhere in the magazine.

We think you owe the Obamas and  the world, an apology

We are three senior journalists from the Caribbean with over a hundred years of experience among us

John Maxwell <jankunnu@gmail.com>
Canute James <canute.james@cwjamaica.com>
Rickey Singh <rickeys@sunbeach.net>