POLITICS, LIKE, SUCKS

How do you make people interested in politics?

And how do you then make them interested enough to get involved in politics?

How does a disinterested person become an activist?

Is it even worth attempting?

South Africa is/was a highly politicized country. Apartheid gave us all something to have an opinion about, a side to join, a cause to believe in, a future to fight for. Good or bad. We all cared, because the stakes were so high.

Yesterday, the students in both my Communication classes and Human Development classes gave a resounding thumbs-down to any kind of political interest.

“Do you watch the news on TV?”    NO!

“Do you read newspapers?”    NEVER!

“Do you go to political party rallies?”     WE JUST WANNA PARTY!

Last week at an otherwise great gig in Durban, the crowd just stared blankly during my songs that had political content (“Rant”, “A Luta Continua”, “Government Song” etc).

White, black, Indian or other, younger South Africans have not inherited the previous generation’s passion for political engagement. Most black kids I know love the ANC Youth League president Julius Malema because he’s a large personality, not because of anything inherently political he has to say. That’s normal: kids just want to be kids. We want to move on, not live in the past. That’s why Winston Churchill was voted out of office just after WW2.

So how do you politicize people?

How do you turn them on to their own political power?

How do you show kids that politics isn’t just boring old men in three-piece suits, but everything to do with their own future?

Above all, how do you encourage democratic people to act democratically, hold their own government accountable and actively oppose bad governance?

Your suggestions, please.

DANCING ABOUT ARCHITECTURE

Somebody, more than likely Elvis Costello, once said that "writing about music is like dancing about architecture". A hotly contested opinion, the point is obvious: music criticism a pretty futile endeavor. Kind of like Richard Dawkins writing about religion, or Julius Malema saying, well, anything. The best response to critics is usually to ignore them. When it comes to criticism, however, all people involved in artistic creation have two things in common: we love a good review, and we hate a bad one.

So what was I to do when I came across a confusing review of "Come Out Fighting" in local SA rag Locally Whipped? Normally I'd cut it out and file it away with my accumulated press clippings (to 'ignore' in the future, of course), but this one made me think. Here's why.

Despite a strange assertion that "Own Way Home" has a very evident 'Nashville sound', the short review seems to be in favour of my record until the last sentence: "All in all, Ellis has made a great debut album and hopefully he won't get lost in the array of solo artists out there in South Africa." So far, so ok. Then, "If you like solid, feel good music, then give this a try but nothing extraordinary has been laid down on this album."

At the risk of sounding sour-grapey, here's my problem: if there's anything I've ever tried to steer clear of in my life as a songwriter, it's 'solid, feel-good music'. This is not a feel-good album. If anything, it's a feel-pissed-off-let's-do-something-about-it kind of record. Then, to go from 'great record' to 'nothing extraordinary' in a few words sounds like another reviewer wrote the end of it. A consistent opinion would have been nice. Most of all though, the words 'nothing extraordinary' made me think. Was I trying to make 'extraordinary' music? No. Am I trying to be an extraordinary artist? No. Is extraordinary even possible these days? How can you really compete with Lady GaGa in a meat dress? I don't think we'd even raise a bored eyebrow if Jacko came back from the dead and made a better album than Thriller and played all the London dates after all. We live in super-hyped, over-exposed, technologically-enhanced times, and nothing, and I mean nothing, surprises anymore. Tiger Woods? Oh well. Wayne Rooney? Yawn. Meat dress? Wow! Oh, it's just a dress...

I got a three-fingered review for my un-extraordinary, feel-good record. It's wise to ignore criticism, good and bad, but it's also nice to give a one-fingered response sometimes.

Post Script: "Rock journalism is people who can't write interviewing people who can't talk in order to provide articles for people who can't read." Frank Zappa

MY TWO CENTS

It’s been a few weeks now since That Interview was published in South African newspapers and online. To some degree the storm has abated a little and I thought it might be a good opportunity to throw my hat in the ring, for what it’s worth.

Where to begin? The article itself? The article’s unfortunate title? The variety of comments the article inspired? What about the level of hatred and condemnation thrown at me by incensed Christians? The smell of burning Tree63 CD’s wafting across the hills and valleys of Christendom?

The response the article generated showed me a few things: firstly, that people are starved for intellectual debate. Human beings long for a reason to rip out the drip feed of modern media and lunge with their brains at each other. Secondly, there are many, many more disenfranchised, disappointed ‘Christians’ out there than the modern church would like to acknowledge. George Barna was right, after all. Thirdly, judgemental, self-righteous hatred knows no bounds in the modern church. I’d momentarily forgotten how ugly Jesus’ ‘followers’ can be, and boy was I reminded. Fourth, the general populace is less and less able to read critically as the years go by. Status updates will be the death of the human race. Oh, and lastly, it seems that the most vitriolic amongst us always sign our names ‘Anonymous’.

I laughed a lot at some of the comments the article received online. The guy who said, “Christian singers are traditionally poor spokespersons for Christianity because they are biblically illiterate and theologically naive… Ellis proves that point. Ellis' BA thru UNISA won't help him a bit as UNISA is so far left of the truth that they couldn't find their way back to the truth if they had a GPS lead them out of the morass of philosophy”. (That was a BTh pal, from one of the most highly-regarded theology programmes on the planet). Or the person who decided that the article was some kind of ‘publicity stunt’ to sell more records.

I cringed with embarrassment too. The average response from Christian readers was a condescending “I’ll pray for you”, as though I’d fallen off some great height and was lying in traction somewhere. I was accused of being “asinine… pathetic… deceived… Bono”. Bono?! One ex-CCM American person even decided to remind me how unsuccessful Tree63 really had been in the U.S., just in case I actually did think I was ‘the poster child of Christian rock’. Non-Christians wading through this morass of invective were noticeably puzzled by it all. “Aren’t you guys all Christians?” someone asked, as though that would somehow automatically curb infighting.

There was good news though, as there always is. Firstly, the positive, affirming, supportive responses, from Christians as well as non-, far outweighed the negativity. I had not set out to hurt anybody, and most seemed to have been able to take it for what it was: a shock-journo improving newspaper circulation. Sure, I was a little stung by some of the comments, but overall I ended up feeling supported, encouraged and more than a little strengthened by the majority of responses. That’s a gratifying feeling when the flames are licking at your feet. Secondly, the article inspired people to think, weigh in, contribute, and talk. That is what I’m most excited about: stirring up debate that requires people to at least think about these important issues and be prepared to discuss where they stand on them. We don’t need mindless vitriol and knee-jerk ugliness, we just need to be prepared to think as individuals and toss ideas back and forth as we all walk that dusty road to or from God.

So, to those encouraged: thank you, it’s going to be an exciting journey. To those who were hurt: cut off the headline (it’s hilariously outrageous!), re-read the article, and read it carefully this time. You might find some surprises there.

Right, now for round two: