|
According to Webster’s Dictionary,
silence means “forbearance from speech or comment.” Also, one of our courts of
law narrows it down as “the fact of abstaining from speech” (
U.S.v. Velarde-Gomez, 269 F.3d 1023, 1031 (9th Cir.
2001)).
For purposes of my presentation,
which examines silence at the Nigerian Village Square, the “silence” of my
interest is “forbearance from comment” and not forbearance from speech. Speech
presupposes a live interaction.
Further, while a person’s act of
silence may have other interpretations, I am restricting myself today to just
two meanings – does your silence mean a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’? Which one of the two
interpretations best describes your silence after you read an article and
exercise your forbearance from commenting on the article. Silence can mean a
‘yes’ (agree) and can also mean a ‘no’ (disagree). Let me explain.
First, the “Yes”. By refusing to
comment, following your reading of an article, and thereby keeping silent, one
school of interpretation holds that you acquiesced to the message, opinion,
fact, and truth, of the article. In other words, you have subscribed to the old
saying that “silence is consent”. See, for example, Stefan H. Krieger, A Time
to Keep Silent and a Time to Speak: The Functions of Silence in the Lawyering
Process, 80 Or. L. Rev. 199,
220-21 (2001) (citing communications scholars who agree that silence can be
interpreted to mean agreement or assent).
Second, the “No”. Again, by
refusing to comment, following your reading of an article, another school of
interpretation holds that you have a negative view of what you have just read,
that you disagree with the message, opinion, fact, truth, of the writing. In
other words, you subscribe to the old admonitory guiding light that “if you
have nothing good to say about someone or something, it is best not to say
anything at all”. Again, see Stefan H. Krieger, A Time to Keep Silent and a
Time to Speak at page 248 stating that “in some cultures and contexts,
silence may actually constitute disagreement or dissent with a statement or
condition.”
How then can you, a member of an
interactive website, such as the Nigerian Village Square, assuming you have actually
read the article and have an opinion and enough time to comment, still exercise
that forbearance from comment? Consider the possible consequences of your
silence to a young writer, a boastful writer, a mischievous writer, a writer
who may be one of your favorite writers or one who may be the worst writer in
your eyes. Let us see how a writer may interpret your silence.
NVS writer, Boss (Babatunde Omenka
Saro Shehu), who believes in “silence is consent” submits articles to NVS. None
of the people who accessed the articles ever posted comments on them. Now Boss
goes about happily boasting that one hundred percent of NVS readers who read
his articles agreed with his message based on their silence because, after all,
“silence is consent”. I think Boss would be justified.
Would it be wrong then for Boss,
the NVS excellent writer, to walk down Oxford Street in
London
with a trumpet, singing his own praises, crafted to a danceable
rap tune?
My name’s Boss the writer
With my golden typewriter
I write for a Village Square
Where readers really care
My readers never comment
And me they never torment
I tell you one hundred percent
Their silence means consent
I would say that Boss the man would
have every right, so long as he believes that “silence means approval” or
silence is consent, to trumpet his positive interpretation of the silence of
the villagers.
On the other hand, if Boss believed
in the saying that “if you have nothing good to say, it’s best not to say
anything at all”, his reaction would be different. He would be dejected. He
might walk down the street of
Enugu , or
Lagos
, with his drum tucked under his arm, lamenting his misfortune
thus
Me I write for Village people
But they treat me like a cripple
I write and write and publish
They avoid the thing like rubbish
Them read my writing and run away
‘Cause them no get good thing to say
With no good thing to post about
Them chop and clean their mouth
Why do so
many articles and works pass through the front page of the Village Square
without somebody commenting on them? I saw you read an article on the front
page. You understood the points or the pointlessness of the article. You wanted
to post a comment on it, but, on second thoughts, you decided to keep silent
and moved on. Why?
Are you
keeping quiet so that the writer/artist can understand that you have nothing
good to say about his/her work? Or do you keep quiet so that he/she can
understand that your silence means consent to his views/opinions/message? The
writers and artists of the NigeriaVillageSquare will appreciate your answer.
If your
goal for maintaining a dubious silence is to create a duality in the mind of
the writer and let him or her believe whatever he or she pleases, then I say
that is fine too.
What if
the writer were a dictator and he threatens to imprison you unless you vocalize
your opinion, unless you post your comment? Let’s examine that question from
the amusing, but true, case of a real dictator:
Dionysius was a military dictator in the ancient Greek
colony of
Syracuse . Just like
today’s dictators, he was despotic, cruel and, well, dictatorial. This tyrant
was also a poet who enjoyed reading his poetry to captive audiences for the
applause.
One day Dionysius was enraged that another poet of his
time called Philoxenos did not like a poem that Dionysius had written.
Philoxenos had gone as far as openly expressing a negative view of the poem.
The dictator promptly ordered him arrested and thrown into prison. Days later,
the prisoner’s friends pleaded with the dictator for mercy. The dictator
relented and released Philoxenos.
Following his release from prison, Philoxenos, once
again, was at a poetry reading session where Dionysius read one of his poems to
the audience. Of course the audience clapped for the dictator after the
reading. Philoxenos was the only person in the audience who kept silent.
Considering that silence could have dual meanings, the dictator then turned to
Philoxenos and asked for his opinion of the poem. Philoxenos, fearing that he
was damned, but still holding on to his desire to keep his opinion silent,
responded: “please take me back to prison.”
Your silence, at the front page of the
Nigerian Village Square, makes a loud noise in the ears of writers, both positive
and negative. Silence, even to a dictator poet, is difficult to ignore because
by your silence you are a critic. Would you make your opinion clear to the NVS
writers or would you, like Philoxenos of ancient
Greece
, say “I will rather go to prison?”
|
Posted by Robot| 22.09.2008 06:11