Two lesser-known rappers Ozi F Teddy and unidentified one have risen to infamous stardom very recently with their lyrics bringing into sharp focus the linguistic debate and how it fuses with expressive, creative, and literary works in the enhancement of what becomes products that we consume delightfully.
To cast light on the raging debate across social media networks since last week, I pull into play critical institutions of society that play a central role in creating language registers and ensure enforcement of acceptable employ of standard use of language to define communities and individuals. In analysing language and its appropriateness, I will assess the consistency of literary and legalistic characteristics in the lyrics by these youngsters.
Obscenity gets one into trouble with the law, meaning that one can go to jail because obscenity violates the penal code. Profanity lands one in trouble with religion, and the Bible, the Torah and the Quran are reference materials where Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are mentioned. Vulgarity, definitely invites the wrath of one’s family because it is against the core values espoused by every member to use insults when talking to one another, let alone to an elder. Then the fighting words are those that intentionally get at demeaning other people because of their statuses and how they are wired naturally or the choices they have made about philosophical or political persuasions that affront others across the fence, often in an attempt to take away their fundamental human rights.
Family
A child is born into a family that has values defining their beliefs and customs. In imparting values to our children, we are taught and teach them a language that mirrors our ethos. We teach them to use a language that builds communities rather than divides, a language that respects rather than demeans others, a language that affirms rather than condemns, and so forth. This is the cardinal duty of the family, hence when a child uses uncouth language, those listening always outspokenly attack his parents, and label them failures to have groomed an ill-mannered child. The attack is often unfounded because no parent who does not insult others would revel at their child insulting everyone they encounter. And I have never been convinced that the bashers have any basis except to be reactive in their outbursts because the same attitude is not extended to children who make immoral choices like prostitutes, those siring babies with the whole nation, or even marriage wreckers as reflecting their families’ value system. They are seen as people who erred in life. However, it remains paramount that language upholds family values, hence, “Leina wee!”
Religion
Individuals choose a faith heritage that emboldens their values from when the family introduced them to the real world. A faith community that one subscribes to has a set of linguistic properties that is acceptable for use whether in private or public. For example, Christians are not expected to cuss much worse than in public. When a member of a religious community crosses the line in the use of unacceptable language, rabbis, teachers, priests, sheiks must rise to the occasion to institute discipline. Often, the determination of the violations is premised on the consciousness of what is right or wrong, good, or bad – choices that are anchored on morality (setho). Religious communities are, therefore, best placed to take corrective action against certain immoral conduct of their members, though it is increasingly becoming common that it is the religious leaders themselves caught on the wrong side of the moral code – “do as I preach, but not as I do.”
Secular state
Secularism determines that nations should be governed by a set of laws to regulate conduct, and if there are transgressions, agents swiftly swoop on the culprits. Fighting words that are loaded with hate for fellow citizens and obscene language that depicts genitalia, sexual intercourse, or excretory natures of others fall in this category as they violate the penal code. Botswana is a secular state, and for that, its laws are applicable, and arrests have been made and more will be in the future. Offenders of the penal code will face the wrath of the law in the courts and be sentenced.
Having demonstrated the four types of violations in the use of language and the three institutions that have designed the language codes acceptable to each one, I now move on to trace the intersection between these four violations and the poetic licence in whose context, “pina ga e na bosekelo” is bandied around as insulation. I heartily believe in the poetic licence for artists to express their creativity to put across significant messages to the larger society, at times, such warranting to be barbed, especially targeting the powers that be for a positive change to take place. These literary expressions have universally been accepted as protected speech so much that lawmakers have recognized the worthiness of pardoning such expressions against prosecution, leaving them to the dictates of the family and religious communities to take corrective measures if they deemed there was a need.
Satire
This is a technique, mostly, humour that is employed by writers, playwrights, poets, cartoonists, and musicians in fictional accounts that give a rendition of life, but not stating the obvious characteristics in the ridicule of leaders or at times speaking up against their penchant for corruption and abuse of power. Elsewhere, courts have had the stakes raised high where leaders have rushed to obtain court injunctions against artists in works of fiction. Once an individual embarks to employ satire in nonfiction works, it is important to accompany such ridicule with researched and tested facts to defend against defamation suits that can come by way of slander in spoken/sung word (poets and musicians) or libel for writers and published works. Satire is protected speech so long it has been wisely and responsibly used in a work that is not obvious to target an individual while projecting authenticity as a telling of the actual event to rally a people behind the message. If such work produces an action whereby average-thinking people understand the producer to be addressing the reality as it unfolds before their eyes to get in gear, then such work has crossed the line of being protected speech, and therefore, can be prosecuted in the courts.
Hyperbole
This figure of speech is known for blowing things out of proportion by whipping up people’s emotions to believe what is being said, whereas the artist is meaning to entertain. Tabloid journalism is a good example of this technique, especially in the headlines that never reflect the content in the news stories, or if any, a small fraction of why a reader would have picked the newspaper from the stand or shelf in the first place. Juicy, often the lies paraded as truth to lure an unsuspecting reader or listener benefit from the employ of hyperbole. Radio and television hosts who are heavily invested in national issues one way or another cannot avoid hyperbole either, because it is always to their advantage to exaggerate the facts and even when they come across as having researched a topic. Hyperbole is protected speech.
Parody
This technique is employed by cartoonists and comedians mostly, but it is also common among writers and poets as well as musicians to imitate the original idea and expand it for entertainment purposes while it may be obvious that it is someone else’s work. When I watched the second clip that I assume was removed from the “All-Parties” Facebook page of a young man who treats himself as another rapper, I immediately noticed that while he may have composed his lyrics, the bloke was mimicking Ozi, and it is apparent that he is looking for likes from those entertained. Parody, like satire, is used to ridicule, criticize, and lampoon leaders for their follies. It is a figure of speech that is also insulated against litigation.
Plain language
Having discussed the three expressive techniques that go to the heart of creative industries including musical performances, one then is drawn to the fact of what is plain language in these two rappers? The one whose performance followed Ozi is categorical that he is addressing His Excellency, the President of Botswana Mokgweetsi Eric Keabetswe Masisi and his administration for their failure to tackle the covid-19 pandemic. He mentions him by name. The protected speech of satire and parody falls off because he is specific that he is targeting a known public figure who is the leader of a government that he holds in disdain. He even invites the government to deploy her agents to come after him, suggesting that he is aware of the possible ramifications of his action to lampoon and lambast President Masisi.
Ozi, on the other hand, does not mention names. However, he talks of a failed government during covid-19, resulting in a plethora of challenges he is lamenting about including corruption, collapsed healthcare system, three years of absence of leadership, calling out the unnamed leader to step down, creatively labels the administration a slumber-party, vaccinate Botswana, calling them liars and then directs the graphic genital in Setswana to the government he holds in contempt. Ozi mentions the deployment of the troops to Mozambique, singing in front of the national flag probably to signify patriotism, he incites an overthrow of government because he is fed up, the musician is drained by the lies of 2016 Vision, government resources that are unevenly distributed are reminiscent of the apartheid regime, referring to his target as “lelopenyana” that is undependable.
Was it wrong then to arrest Ozi and will it be wrong to arrest the other rapper? Not by any stretch of the imagination given what is protected speech under the law. It is well documented in many sources that President Masisi is a Lelope and to affix a suffix that belittles the noun is only a show of disgust the musician has for him and his administration. It is plain that the artist is sending a pointed message to the head of state, how else does he talk of deployment of the army to Mozambique, not some fictional place? Basic social studies lesson introduces one to the fact that the president is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, so here Ozi cannot defend that he is not targeting President Masisi. He alludes to the absence of decisive, foresight leadership after three years, and if this youth standing before the national flag can claim to be addressing another nation, whereas it is President Masisi who has been at the helm for three years, his lawyer should be the best brain to persuade the judge. His diatribe is directed to President Masisi.
Ozi decries the hopelessness brought about by the pandemic of covid-19 felt across the shattered landscape, another tested fact that cannot be contested, proposing vaccination rollout as an emergency intervention to save lives that are perishing daily. Who can treat this as fiction? You must live on another planet to believe that he is addressing a different crisis.
Conclusion
The “pina ga e na bosekelo” protected speech, therefore, cannot apply in both cases. In determining what is possible to arraign the two men before the courts, I posit that it is clear who the target audience of their messages; they don’t need to agree to be charged under the penal code – there is evidence all over as to what speech they have abused under the pretext of poetic licence that is an enjoyment of those rights in the creative industries. Readers of my paper should note that I have disregarded profanity and vulgarity, which are in abundance, but as I opened my argument, insults are not the business of the institutions of law and order, and therefore, cannot be grounds for prosecution. Those are left to the moral tastes of families, churches, temples, and mosques where the elders and religious leaders must take corrective actions if they deem relevant and necessary against the two lads.
Other than the artistic expressions by these two youths, the past three years have shown us that as a nation, we are fed up with a leadership that does not deliver on its promises. It may be that by and large, we bottled up feelings in fear of the DIS in the previous administration and that we are now imploding. Such security apparatus would have not hesitated to deal severely with behaviour and conduct displayed by these budding rappers. It is shocking to observe just how at the stroke of the pen, nowadays we are able to express our dissenting views directed at the President in plain, rude, and contemptuous tone as to call him a liar without using fake accounts, as would have been the norm four years ago. Perhaps we have gotten back our Botswana to exercise fundamental freedoms and civil liberties, or we have just become this angry lot that is no longer processing thought before we act or speak out in public. Whatever reason there is to this whole expression of thought and feeling, we can’t deny that we have taken it to another level – one that is unprecedented. To that end, I am not sure who to thank, perhaps the President and his administration, or deservedly the citizens for reclaiming their land from elected leaders. Should it be a reality as some intimate might in 2024 that we find this nation under the direction of General Ian Khama, one would be fascinated to observe this excitement, once again!
(Rev Ditsheko is a literary and mass communications scholar, creative writer, and journalist; he is writing as an expert in these fields).
