You could have developed the omitted bit further in the body of the critique, and dealt with the paradox that for a small nation with a tiny diaspora we have produced some very fine art (not to mention for a small nation with a high tolerance for mediocrity). I believe it is more a function of a lack of diaspora that renders the fame of Bahamian artists limited rather than a lack of quality — a lack of global exposure, if you will. Very few, if any, other Caribbean “greats” earned their global notice from within the borders of their homelands; it was by leaving that they attracted that notice, as the arbiters of “greatness” tend to reside far beyond the islands where most of us live. But that does not necessarily compromise the quality of what we produce. And yet your argument chooses not take that into account.

It was not to set up a straw man argument that I took out “This not to say that all Bahamian artists produce bad work. Far from it” but the fact that you never go on to deal with the positives. I read the caveat as just that — an attempt to avoid a sweeping generalization. I’m afraid I assumed that your position really was more in line with the default.

My bad.

If I only read this post and its initial quotation, and not the full essay that you cite, it would seem that I am saying that Bahamians, as a rule, produce mediocre work.

The opening quote, as shown, gives validity to your later summaries of my position. For example, when you say: “The default assumption about, the knee-jerk reaction to, all Bahamian cultural endeavour is Ward’s reaction — we are not that good” and again “Like Ward, most of us choose the worst of our cultural product to make our argument, and to justify our non-support of Bahamian artists.”

However, in the sentence that the ellipsis skillfully removes, I actually wrote, “This not to say that all Bahamian artists produce bad work. Far from it.” Thus, I am clearly acknowledging that there are Bahamians who create very good work.

While it is true that I could have expressed this fact in stronger terms, your opening ‘quotation’ misrepresents what was said. And seen in this context, the subsequent statements you make about my position are clearly false.

Second, I never said that Bahamians “are not that good.” I instead offered it as a point to consider. I ended that paragraph like this: “So, as we go about proclaiming a day for ourselves, we should perhaps contemplate what the latter conclusion, if true, would do to claims of inherent respect.” This question of ‘good’ or ‘not good’ is a small point in a larger argument, namely: what is the role of the artist in Bahamian society.

Therefore, I believe that this post employs a straw man argumentative fallacy and misrepresents what I actually said. I doubt that this was your intention in writing it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

I will probably encapsulate my objections to this post in an entry on my own site.

With the exception of this post, I feel that the series of debates on the Day of Absence went well. I must get around to writing a post about that experience as well. I am slowly getting around to real life, and will hopefully get back into the swing of things t’reckley.

Till then.