Tweet
Bob Marley - the greatest Jamaican artiste of all time?
By Clyde McKenzie
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Is Bob Marley the 'greatest Jamaican artiste of all time'? If the answer is yes, what is the basis for this determination? If no, what criteria were used to arrive at this conclusion? If one is arguing that he is not, who is? Are there objective means of ascertaining who should bear the title of the "greatest of all time" or are we on a fool's errand engaged in a futile search for an elusive ideal?
Science icon Professor Stephen Hawking when described by an interviewer as the "most brilliant man in the world" struck back saying that this could not be true as only days before he was declared the "second most brilliant man in Britain after Richard Branson". Professor Hawking's witty response to the interviewer is a testament to the vagaries inherent in trying to declare anyone "the greatest" or the "best in the world". What is clear to me is that in many instances talent and flair is conflated with "greatness". In fact, in the current debate on the propriety of designating Marley "the greatest Jamaican artiste of all time", there are those who are contending that he was not a better singer than Tosh, Cliff or Livingstone. Yet one should be careful with this type of argument. Vocal quality is not the only or the most important feature of a great artiste. There are other characteristics which must be taken into account when making a determination on artistic "greatness".
It is not a question of whether Bob had better "pipes" than those with whom he is being compared. The fact is that Bob's voice was an ideal vehicle for conveying the revolutionary passion which informed his impressive body of work. Marley would not have been able to carry his message in the manner he did had he the vocal quality of Luther Vandross or Johnny Mattis. After all, another iconic figure in the realm of popular culture, Bob Dylan was told that he sounded like a wolf. I am almost certain that Dylan would never have had such an exalted status in modern popular culture if his voice had been deemed to be more refined.
Yes, there may have been more naturally talented vocalists and artistes than Marley but were they "greater" than he? History is replete with so many individuals who displayed remarkable potential but who were just not able to respond appropriately or consistently to the imperatives of success. In his most recent bestseller, Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell (his mother is a Jamaican) points out that what we deem to be talent is far less important in determining how successful one will be in any given undertaking. He notes a number of factors including persistence, timing and mentoring. Gladwell points to the year 1955 as an ideal year to have been born if one wanted to attain a leadership role in the modern computing business.
Steve Jobs, the man who co-founded Apple computers and then came back and rescued it from oblivion (introducing the iPhone and the iMac) was born in 1955, the same year as Bill Gates of Microsoft fame. Was 1945, the year of Marley's birth significant for reggae acts. Would this have given him an advantage that an artiste born at a different time might not have had? It seems clear to me that almost all the members of the most famous iteration of the Wailer's (Peter, Bunny and Bob) were born around that time (give or take a few years). Cliff and Toots would have been born around that time as well. Gladwell spoke of the "rule of 10,000", a necessary precondition for attaining expert status in any professional endeavour. This is equivalent to working for approximately 10 years at a task. However, some persons - because of the intensity of their work schedule - are able to achieve ten thousand hours over a shorter span of time.
Gladwell points to the Beatles' sojourn in Hamburg which was so rigorous that it allowed them to satisfy the "10,000 rule" over a shorter period of time. Bob Marley was tireless in his efforts to hone his craft and skill. Did he reach his ten thousand hours at the time when Reggae was beginning to blossom internationally? It is my belief that Bob's exalted status in the pantheon of modern pop culture has much to do with the flowering of his talent and the emergence of some of the most important liberation movements taking place at around the same time. His music and message were able to provide energy for liberation struggles around the world. Reggae was the most important musical medium for channelling the concerns of the oppressed and Marley through his incisive commentaries - was able to satisfy the need for moral support among liberation and nationalistic movements around the world. Marley is the very personification of biological, historical and social circumstances which will never again be embodied by any other individual.
Marley's primary concerns were the refinement of his message and the perfection of his craft. Financial considerations were secondary. He was prepared to make the kind of sacrifice and risks that others who were too short term in their time horizons were unwilling to contemplate. No account of Marley's success could be complete without a fulsome account of the role of Chris Blackwell in the marketing and promotion of his career. Marley was not the first or only Jamaican artiste Blackwell had earmarked for international stardom, there were others who took up supposedly more lucrative deals and eventually realised that all that glitters is not gold. Marley was able to enjoy the creative freedom which a small label like Island (not forced to make quarterly earnings statements) could provide. The major labels (publicly owned) have no such luxury and for them the music is pure business. Interestingly, it is those who treat the music less as a business who seem to often enjoy commercial success.
The fact that Island was later bought out by a label with greater marketing muscle did help to spread the Marley message. When Island was sold, Marley's creativity could no longer be tampered with and so the distribution power of a major label could then be advantageous. It was the best of both worlds for Marley's music.
Bob Marley was a rock star, a fact which was greatly enabled by his mixed heritage. Some persons speak to the fact that Marley was a hybrid in an almost disparaging tone. This is a ridiculous point which many Marley supporters seem defensive about. Saying that Marley is successful because he is of mixed heritage is like saying that Jordan is a great basketballer because he is tall. His heritage is part of what Marley brings to the table. Yet Jordan would not be great simply by being tall nor would Marley be the iconic figure he is today because he happens to be of a lighter hue.
There is another factor which I believe is important to Marley's mystical aura and that is his early transition. The fact is no one will carry an image of Marley that is not youthful and vital. We don't know what it is like to see a Marley old and decrepit and devoid of creative instincts. Marley, like Marilyn Monroe, Collie Smith, James Dean and Che Guevara will remain forever young in our imagination, a most important feature of eternal appeal.
[email protected]
By Clyde McKenzie
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Is Bob Marley the 'greatest Jamaican artiste of all time'? If the answer is yes, what is the basis for this determination? If no, what criteria were used to arrive at this conclusion? If one is arguing that he is not, who is? Are there objective means of ascertaining who should bear the title of the "greatest of all time" or are we on a fool's errand engaged in a futile search for an elusive ideal?
Science icon Professor Stephen Hawking when described by an interviewer as the "most brilliant man in the world" struck back saying that this could not be true as only days before he was declared the "second most brilliant man in Britain after Richard Branson". Professor Hawking's witty response to the interviewer is a testament to the vagaries inherent in trying to declare anyone "the greatest" or the "best in the world". What is clear to me is that in many instances talent and flair is conflated with "greatness". In fact, in the current debate on the propriety of designating Marley "the greatest Jamaican artiste of all time", there are those who are contending that he was not a better singer than Tosh, Cliff or Livingstone. Yet one should be careful with this type of argument. Vocal quality is not the only or the most important feature of a great artiste. There are other characteristics which must be taken into account when making a determination on artistic "greatness".
It is not a question of whether Bob had better "pipes" than those with whom he is being compared. The fact is that Bob's voice was an ideal vehicle for conveying the revolutionary passion which informed his impressive body of work. Marley would not have been able to carry his message in the manner he did had he the vocal quality of Luther Vandross or Johnny Mattis. After all, another iconic figure in the realm of popular culture, Bob Dylan was told that he sounded like a wolf. I am almost certain that Dylan would never have had such an exalted status in modern popular culture if his voice had been deemed to be more refined.
Yes, there may have been more naturally talented vocalists and artistes than Marley but were they "greater" than he? History is replete with so many individuals who displayed remarkable potential but who were just not able to respond appropriately or consistently to the imperatives of success. In his most recent bestseller, Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell (his mother is a Jamaican) points out that what we deem to be talent is far less important in determining how successful one will be in any given undertaking. He notes a number of factors including persistence, timing and mentoring. Gladwell points to the year 1955 as an ideal year to have been born if one wanted to attain a leadership role in the modern computing business.
Steve Jobs, the man who co-founded Apple computers and then came back and rescued it from oblivion (introducing the iPhone and the iMac) was born in 1955, the same year as Bill Gates of Microsoft fame. Was 1945, the year of Marley's birth significant for reggae acts. Would this have given him an advantage that an artiste born at a different time might not have had? It seems clear to me that almost all the members of the most famous iteration of the Wailer's (Peter, Bunny and Bob) were born around that time (give or take a few years). Cliff and Toots would have been born around that time as well. Gladwell spoke of the "rule of 10,000", a necessary precondition for attaining expert status in any professional endeavour. This is equivalent to working for approximately 10 years at a task. However, some persons - because of the intensity of their work schedule - are able to achieve ten thousand hours over a shorter span of time.
Gladwell points to the Beatles' sojourn in Hamburg which was so rigorous that it allowed them to satisfy the "10,000 rule" over a shorter period of time. Bob Marley was tireless in his efforts to hone his craft and skill. Did he reach his ten thousand hours at the time when Reggae was beginning to blossom internationally? It is my belief that Bob's exalted status in the pantheon of modern pop culture has much to do with the flowering of his talent and the emergence of some of the most important liberation movements taking place at around the same time. His music and message were able to provide energy for liberation struggles around the world. Reggae was the most important musical medium for channelling the concerns of the oppressed and Marley through his incisive commentaries - was able to satisfy the need for moral support among liberation and nationalistic movements around the world. Marley is the very personification of biological, historical and social circumstances which will never again be embodied by any other individual.
Marley's primary concerns were the refinement of his message and the perfection of his craft. Financial considerations were secondary. He was prepared to make the kind of sacrifice and risks that others who were too short term in their time horizons were unwilling to contemplate. No account of Marley's success could be complete without a fulsome account of the role of Chris Blackwell in the marketing and promotion of his career. Marley was not the first or only Jamaican artiste Blackwell had earmarked for international stardom, there were others who took up supposedly more lucrative deals and eventually realised that all that glitters is not gold. Marley was able to enjoy the creative freedom which a small label like Island (not forced to make quarterly earnings statements) could provide. The major labels (publicly owned) have no such luxury and for them the music is pure business. Interestingly, it is those who treat the music less as a business who seem to often enjoy commercial success.
The fact that Island was later bought out by a label with greater marketing muscle did help to spread the Marley message. When Island was sold, Marley's creativity could no longer be tampered with and so the distribution power of a major label could then be advantageous. It was the best of both worlds for Marley's music.
Bob Marley was a rock star, a fact which was greatly enabled by his mixed heritage. Some persons speak to the fact that Marley was a hybrid in an almost disparaging tone. This is a ridiculous point which many Marley supporters seem defensive about. Saying that Marley is successful because he is of mixed heritage is like saying that Jordan is a great basketballer because he is tall. His heritage is part of what Marley brings to the table. Yet Jordan would not be great simply by being tall nor would Marley be the iconic figure he is today because he happens to be of a lighter hue.
There is another factor which I believe is important to Marley's mystical aura and that is his early transition. The fact is no one will carry an image of Marley that is not youthful and vital. We don't know what it is like to see a Marley old and decrepit and devoid of creative instincts. Marley, like Marilyn Monroe, Collie Smith, James Dean and Che Guevara will remain forever young in our imagination, a most important feature of eternal appeal.
[email protected]
Comment