I am deeply touched and humbled by the very serious attention paid to my article on the “Land of the Gods” in Amandala #2271 of Sunday, September 21, by my Maya brother to the north, Clinton Uh Luna, with his reply titled, “What we, the Maya, will not accept!”, in Amandala #2276 of Sunday, October 12. The length and detail of his reply, as well as the significant delay in releasing it, belies the fact that we both are turning over a “can of worms” here. I have likewise pondered long and hard in this response. And, my esteemed brother, Uh Luna, you have indeed taught me something; something very fundamental, and which has been lurking underneath my skin for a number of years; in fact, ever since our Independence, and yes, the announcement of our “national symbols”, including the altered version of the original poem, “Land of the Gods.”
What you have clearly and coherently established beyond any doubt in my mind, is that our national anthem, as it is, and even if it were changed back to “Land of the Gods,” still does not “do it for you”. That is sad, regrettable, and it should have been avoidable.
The fact is, our country assumed Independence in 1981 while still under a state of emergency, because of the highly unpopular, rejected Heads of Agreement; and the anger felt by many of our citizens could not so swiftly evaporate to unilaterally endorse the “symbols” foisted upon us by the same messenger for the Heads, our Independence Prime Minister. He had achieved his “Holy Grail”; the rest of us, at least many of us, including me, felt we were left out of a decision making process that should have galvanized our whole country into the euphoria of patriotism and national fervor that the coming of our Independence should bring. Instead, I was not moved, and the rains were not my problem, to join in the “street party” thrown by the government on Independence Day on Albert Street. Something was missing in it for me; and, I now suspect, for others too.
First of all, many of us had assumed, probably presumptuously, that when our Independence came, it would be on the 10th of September, and thus forever seal into one binding knot the soul of all our people. But even that should have been brought to a referendum. Perhaps Belizeans would have instead picked a day in March or April when the weather is more predictable for a good outdoor celebration. Perhaps “issues” with the Tenth would make it unpalatable for some as our Independence Day. National unity should have been the goal, and there is no better way than a referendum to determine the will of the people.
Over the years, I have tried to “get with it”, but it is clear that our nation was not properly birthed; a golden opportunity was missed. And we probably need to be “born again”, the correct way next time, with full people participation in the choice of the sacred symbols that should forever unite and inspire us. Nothing can change our Independence Day: that clock cannot be turned back. But our national symbols, especially our anthem, should inspire every Belizean who loves his country. If it doesn’t, then either something is wrong with our anthem (how it was chosen?), or something is wrong with you.
I’ll let you in on a secret; and it explains why I fully understand your point of view. I sometimes have toyed with the idea of singing. And, in the privacy of my room, I have even given serious efforts to creating a really powerful, unique and emotional rendition of our national anthem. But I found that, at a certain part of the anthem, I also choked on the words, those same words that give you trouble, and that I previously attempted to rationalize and justify. Instead, when I reach the part that says, “Our fathers, the Baymen,” I have found myself slipping in, “Our fathers, and the Baymen.” Now, I believe in art, and the artist’s right to have his work not be adulterated. But as you wisely suggested, the times perhaps dictated the tone of Mr. Haynes’ powerful poem. That is natural. Perhaps he himself would have found problems with it as our National Anthem in 1981, for reasons that you have highlighted.
My effort to find middle ground has apparently failed miserably. In trying to find a suitable explanation for our anthem’s apparent “powdering” of the Baymen, I had overlooked some of my own deep-seated concerns. But what has also now been revealed is the absolute disgust felt by our Northern columnist toward this aspect of the anthem. Certainly, I would not like to be misunderstood. I am a proud African Belizean, and I wouldn’t want any descendant of the slavemasters to ever entertain the notion that I hold any reverence for “them”, the slavemasters, as “our fathers”. No; perish the thought; though some of their blood flows through my veins, there is no “kneeling” here to the rapists of our African grandmothers.
I have no problem with the Baymen slavemasters, those who opted to stand and fight, being considered “valiant and bold”. But I feel better when I say, “Our fathers and the Baymen”. That’s what my “X” is all about – identity and dignity. Unlike you, my Mayan friend, I cannot trace my African name, and for that great loss I only have the Baymen slavemasters to thank. But for however brief a moment in history, and for whatever the reasons, my African slave ancestors did join in the effort to fight on the side of these same English Baymen slavemasters against the Spanish invaders. Had they chosen instead to assist the Spanish fleet with clear passage between the shoals, there could have been a very bloody battle indeed. And for that, I will give them their respect. Yet, I have difficulty also with that “our fathers” part of the anthem.
How much more repulsive, I imagine, is the idea (“our fathers, the Baymen”) to you, a Maya, the majority of whose ancestors resisted the attacks of the Europeans, British and Spanish, and retreated into the “interior” to try and maintain their own lifestyle as free people. The same, I would suspect, for our Garifuna brethren who, though not enslaved, were driven from their island homeland by the same English whose countrymen, the Baymen, allowed them refuge on this mainland.
This situation brings up another interesting aspect of this cultural mix. While the Maya were eventually conquered for the most part by the Spanish in Guatemala and Mexico, and thus “Christianized” and baptized in the Catholic faith; and the Garifuna also predominantly accepted the Catholic faith after being allowed to settle in Southern Belize; both these culturally free people maintained their languages, as well as their unique religious and cultural traditions “undercover”. But the cultural destruction of our African ancestors through slavery was so complete, that our present religious practices are totally reflected and controlled by the culture of our former slavemasters. From a cultural/religious standpoint, we, the descendants of African slaves in Belize, are to a great extent a lost and wandering tribe, searching for ourselves, our culture and our religion.
“Brainwashed” is the term you use, brother Uh Luna, and while I strongly differ with any notion about “glorifying” the slavemasters, we must acknowledge that it is an uphill struggle to undo the effect of our “stolen legacy”, deliberately displaced by an educational system designed and controlled by the same zealous missionaries who led the way in “pacifying”, Christianizing and thus facilitating the murderous colonizing and plunder of the world of the Maya and other indigenous peoples in this hemisphere, which they called the New World.
Part 2
The Amandala once questioned whether our country’s then Premier would become the “Independence Prime Minister, or Moses.” George Cadle Price had traveled all the way to the “mountain top”, with the battle cry of “Independence” and to the tune of “Land of the Gods.” He did become the Independence Prime Minister, though under undesirable circumstances; and he pushed through the “Land of the Gods”, with a concession to the Opposition as “Land of the Free”. But the process was flawed. PUP and UDP “leaders” are not the same as a national referendum of “the Belizean people” on such important matters. Yes, we are Independent, in a manner of speaking. But we have not yet been “liberated”; we’re still “keeping watch” for “freedom” “tomorrow’s noon”; and, judging from the deep feelings you have expressed, and that have been revealed in me, the anthem may represent one of the stumbling blocks towards our day of true Independence and united nationhood for all Belizeans.
After all, even before 1798, the original inhabitants, the Maya, did “drive back” some would be tyrants, until, in refusing to be enslaved, they were themselves driven back to take refuge in the western forest regions. The Maya, understandably, have absolutely no reason to want to express any form of kinship or shared struggle with the foreign invaders – Spanish or English.
I am now wondering. Are others of our Maya brethren quietly observing, but similarly un-inspired by that part of our anthem? Are our Garifuna brethren likewise affected? How about other more recent immigrants in this “melting pot” of cultures? When we begin to “go there”, it seems there is no end to our shortcomings. How about the Americans and their “bombs bursting in air”; do all whose ancestors came after the event feel neglected and left out? Can we ever please everyone?
One thing of note in “Land of the Gods” – it never mentions the word English, or Spanish, or any particular nationality or ethnicity; although the “Baymen” were understood in history to be English. But it condemns slavery, “oppression’s rod”; and we know who were the slavemaster/oppressors. And it exhorts all of us to “drive back the tyrants,” whoever they may be. That is a universal theme that should unite all of us, regardless of ethnicity and historical background. (And remember, it is the same British descendants of the slavemasters that we have looked to for assistance in keeping back the present day would be invaders from the West.)
But it is this “sons of the Baymen’s clan” and “our fathers, the Baymen” that is the stumbling block for some of us. Would that Mr. Haynes could have lived to see Independence Day, and taken pen in hand to re-work his masterpiece to fully embrace the birth of our new nation with all its ethnic diversity and nationalistic fervor. Although, we must admit that, despite the continuing Belize “Kriol” migration to the U.S. through the ‘60’s and ‘70’s, the demographics of Belize hadn’t changed that much since Mr. Haynes left these shores in the early ‘20’s until our Independence. At Independence in 1981, Belize was still predominantly an African-based population. The waves of Central American immigrants became a real flood in the mid ‘80’s through the ‘90’s; and the Asian influx with the passport sales occurred mostly in the ‘90’s.
But a Belizean saying says that it is the “hog weh get lick, weh baal”. If the process is flawed, the results will be suspect; and certainly somebody has cried out. The only way to ensure the majority supports the choice of symbols, is to let the people choose by referendum. Through that process, all can come to terms with the issues involved, and have their concerns addressed. There will inevitably be compromises, but certainly one of them should not be the inclusion of any aspect that is anathema to any one of our ethnic groups.
Our nation abounds with the spirit of many outstanding leaders, and thinkers, and artists and freedom fighters. We can each think of the names of many Belizeans, past and present, that inspire us. We are so richly blessed as a people. Let the discourse continue, towards a united Belize for all Belizeans. Perhaps our thinkers and artists and poets should start working on that lofty project, the re-wording of our national anthem, to be approved by a national referendum of the Belizean people. (I suspect we wouldn’t change the absolutely beautiful music, though, if put to the vote. Don’t you?)
Brother Clinton Uh Luna has started the ball rolling with his proposed, “Arise, ye sons of the Belizean soil.” His position is that we need to re-visit the “sons of the Baymen’s clan” and “our fathers, the Baymen” in our national anthem; and I concur. Our most popular September song, “The Tenth Day of September,” does not mention the “Baymen”, and neither does E.P. Yorke’s epic masterpiece, “Belize by the Sea”. Maybe that should have been our national anthem.