Clyde McKenzie | What makes a National Hero?

Determining who should bear the title of National Hero in Jamaica has been a rather contentious issue. The recent announcement by Prime Minister Andrew Holness that a new Order of National Icon will have Miss Lou and Bob Marley as its first recipients has sparked quite a bit of public discussion, as it should.

Many have been clamouring for Bob Marley and Miss Lou to be declared national heroes. Prime Minister Holness is hoping that by “elevating” them to Order of National Icon, he will be able to placate those who believe that both of these Jamaicans should have a higher honour than the Order of Merit which they both currently hold.

However, there are those who believe that Miss Lou and Marley should not be declared national heroes as a matter of definition. These detractors point out that this does not mean that Bob and Miss Lou might not be greater than those we call national heroes. For these naysayers, Rafael Nadal should not be compared to Tiger Woods; a lawyer should not be compared to a doctor; an apple should not be compared to an orange.

A classic definition of a hero is “one, who through personal choice, has decided to put oneself at risk for a cause which is bigger than oneself”. Heroism, by this reading, is different from an act of bravery. If one valiantly defends his family against intruders who suddenly invade his home, he might be considered a brave man but not a hero. According to this classic definition, heroism is not accidental.

There is no doubt in my mind that a Boukman Dutty, a Martin Luther King or a Nelson Mandela would have satisfied the above-stated definition of a hero in almost any country. These men were clear in their mission, understood the dangers they faced, but were willing to pursue a cause which was bigger than themselves.

Yet, no nation is obligated to follow the classic definition of a hero to configure its national awards. Countries are free to choose the types of heroes they want.

There is nothing in the official criteria for National Hero in Jamaica (as currently stated) which would preclude Miss Lou or Bob Marley from being conferred with the honour. In fact, based on the stated qualification for the honour, both Miss Lou and Bob Marley would have met the requirements many times over.

I believe that the vagueness of the criteria, however, has hamstrung those who would make the decision on who should be declared a national hero. Maybe if we had greater clarity on the criteria we would perhaps have had more national heroes.

One should not have to be a warrior or a martyr to be declared a national hero. There is nothing wrong with the Bajan decision to declare Rihanna Fenty or Sir Garfield Sobers as national heroes. Nor do I have a difficulty with Antigua having Sir Vivian Richards as their national hero.

Yet, there are clear deficiencies in our selection process for national honours in Jamaica. How does one explain why Sister Ignatius Davis does not have a national honour? Why are Clement ‘Sir Coxsone’ Dodd and Arthur ‘Duke’ Reid not conferred with the Order of Merit? These are the very foundation of modern Jamaican music. Is there no honour for the founder of the Rastafarian movement, Leonard Howell?

While making Marley and Miss Lou National Icons might relieve the concerns among those who might not want these Jamaicans to be called heroes, if the newly proposed award does not have the equivalent standing of national hero, we might just be going around in circles. The other approach is simple: give both Miss Lou and Marley the title of National Hero.

The fact is that even if the Orders of National Hero and National Icon are given the same status, there are still those who will not be satisfied if Marley and Miss Lou are not given the title of National Hero. There are those who believe that ‘hero’ is the ultimate designation, even if we were to tell them that the Order of National Icon is of a similar value.

THE NOBEL APPROACH

For me, the issue is not what title we give to Miss Lou or Marley. What is important to me is that whatever honour we bestow on Bob and Miss Lou should be the highest in the land.

I have no issue with the employment of what I call the Nobel approach. Each year, the Nobel Academy awards prizes in various categories, including literature, medicine, chemistry, physics and economics. All prizes are of equal standing.

Implicit in the selection process for Nobel Laureates is the understanding that physicists should not be compared to chemists, or economists with writers. I can live with both of them being called ‘Icons’, as long as that is equivalent to ‘Heroes’.

I believe that one of the criteria for National Hero/Icon should be ‘outstanding achievements of a singular and transformative nature which has enhanced the image and/or development of the nation, both locally and internationally’.

I would like to suggest that there should also be an element of public sentiment influencing the process. Why do I suggest that public sentiment should be an important consideration? There might be a Jamaican who has truly outstanding achievement but who might not be favoured by his fellow nationals.

I think of the great Trinidadian writer Vidia Naipaul, one of three Nobel Laureates from the English-speaking Caribbean. I could see Naipaul easily satisfying the condition of outstanding achievement of an extraordinary nature (were he a Jamaican), but who might not find favour among his compatriots due to his attitude towards his country.

There is a school of thought which suggests that Marley (in particular) is an international cultural hero and that any effort to give him a national award is a demotion. My position on this is that given Marley’s international status, it would certainly seem odd for him to get anything less than the highest national honour in his own country. We can only give him the best that we have, and we should.

There is also the view that Marley is already a hero in Jamaica among the people and that he therefore does not need a national title, as he is already highly regarded by his compatriots. Yet, those who might be speaking on behalf of Marley might not be accurately reflecting what he would have wanted. Marley approved of his accession to the Order of Merit shortly before he transitioned. Would he have spurned the Order of National Hero or that of National Icon?

Based on the last choice he made on the issue, it doesn’t seem so.

Finally, I don’t believe that Marley and Miss Lou are being excluded from the Order of National Hero because of their race and class, as is being suggested in some quarters. Four out of our seven National Heroes are black people from the peasant class. The other three – Manley, Bustamante and Gordon – were all connected to the peasant and working classes, which was largely the reason they have received this honour.

If there is any bias which I discern in the selection of national heroes in Jamaica, it is that all members of the order were born before the Twentieth Century.

Clyde McKenzie is a music analyst and cultural commentator. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.