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?”

Robot  # 1 | 22.09.2008 06:11

I saw you read an article on the front page of this website. You read it, digested it, and moved on ...Read the full article.