The other day a gent stopped me on the street and told me that he always reads my comments in the newspaper. That pleased me greatly of course, but when he said it was the first thing he looked for and was the only reason he gets the paper regularly now, I felt rather flattered and didn’t quite know what to say.
Then he went on to praise my writing style saying, “It is easy for people to read, while at the same time offering plenty of food for thought.” He said my comments about loud music were so true and wished me luck with my anti-noise campaign.
Buoyed up by these effusive compliments, I was about to thank him for his kind words, when he shook his head mournfully and sighed, “What a pity that you are only a voice in the wilderness.”
I came crashing down to Earth in a hurry. I assumed he meant that my efforts were futile. “Are you saying that my efforts are going to waste?” I asked, somewhat deflated. He chuckled and shook his head, “Your words aren’t wasted with me,” he said, “but figuratively speaking, you know it’s a wilderness out there – a real jungle!” and he flung his arms out in a sweeping gesture.
When I reached home again I pondered about that brief encounter. I recalled the term the man had used to describe the condition of our island and its people. I consulted a dictionary to make sure I understood properly.
These are among the definitions for “wilderness” I saw: barren – empty – uncultivated – a wild condition or quality – a large confused mass or tangle of persons or things – wild place.
Among the definitions for “jungle” were: typically in tropical regions, and inhabited by predatory animals – any confused, tangled growth, collection, etc. – [slang] a place or situation in which people engage in ruthless competition or in a struggle for survival. I quickly realised that although the man had said he was “figuratively speaking,” there could also be a quite literal connotation in respect to some of the proponents of loud music in our midst.
“Ruthlessness” is clearly an appropriate term to describe those who play loud music, knowing very well that it will disturb others. I would add the term barbaric or savage for those who turn the volume down when the police intervene, but pump it right back up again as soon as the police have gone.
They not only show complete disdain to those who suffer from loud music, but also complete disdain for law and order and the authorities trying to ameliorate the situation. This is certainly not the hallmark of a civilised society, but reflects “a wild condition or quality” as defined in the dictionary.
In respect to the loud booming sounds projected by roving cars with boom-boxes, and high powered audio equipment at bars and other venues, some adherents claim it is part of our culture, an outgrowth of the booming drums of our African ancestors.
But booming drums were not unique to Africa and were common in many different cultures. The main purposes of the drum in most, if not every ancient culture, was for communication (at distances), ritual (religious or spiritual) or ceremonial (anniversaries, coronations, etc.)
They might warn villagers that an enemy was coming, help hunters scare animals into a trap, or simply be part of a festive celebration. But the drum was always used in a prescribed manner for the benefit and betterment of the community.
The modern electronic boom-box with its indiscriminate usage by every inconsiderate Tom, Dick, and Harry bears no real relationship to our ancestral drum.
The ancestral drummer used the instrument in a very specific manner for a very specific purpose and the messages that his drum would project throughout an area would have had greater social depth and meaning for all within earshot, than any of the boom-box messages of today. With the development of the telegraph, telephone, internet and other modern (non-intrusive) devices, our ancestral drum can no longer serve all of the practical purposes it once did. To pretend that ear-shattering volume, or gut-rumbling boom-box sounds that disturb sensitive people should be hailed as part of our cultural heritage, is absolute rubbish.
Most modern countries make an effort to eliminate cultural traditions that have proven harmful in some way to their societies. As an example: For centuries, from about A.D. 960 until about the mid-1600s women in China had their feet tightly bound from a very early age. This was to prevent their feet from growing, as men considered a woman with small feet to be very beautiful and would only seek to marry those. It became a way of life for millions of Chinese women even though it crippled and caused them great pain. That part of their culture crippled the whole society and it wasn’t until around 1911 that this harmful practice was finally banned for good.
I believe that this modern boom-box craze is seriously harming our society. I know that many other people besides me are suffering too. Stress, headache, anxiety, disorientation, anger, frustration, depression, loss of concentration, insomnia are some of the most frequent reactions that are brought up. But there are also many other concerns, such as about what will happen to property values as areas become inundated with unnecessary noise and boom-box sounds. And of course I’m deeply concerned about the effect this boom-box culture is having on the young minds in our society. The Chinese paid a terrible price for following the popular fashion of binding females’ feet from infancy. I hate to think of the terrible price our people may have to pay for following the fashion of binding the young minds in our midst to the boom-box mentality.
I encourage everyone to “think outside the box.” Think about an anti-noise campaign. Think about giving me a call and let’s see what we can come up with together.
Or alternately you can just think about as my learned friend says, “A voice in the wilderness.” Amba Trott. 469-1424, 765 3559.
