Corruption, tribalism and democracy: coded messages in Wambali Mkandawire's popular songs in Malawi

Critical Arts, July, 2009 by Reuben Chirambo

Abstract

Popular music in Malawi cites corruption and tribalism as amongst the major threats to democracy in the country. Corruption, which involves the plundering of national public resources by a few individuals, affects the distribution of and access to these resources by the majority of Malawians. Tribalism, on the other hand, threatens the social and political stability of the multi-ethnic nation, and democracy itself. However, despite the relative freedom of speech Malawians enjoy at present, critical discussion of these issues in public is often stifled by censorship. This is because such critical discourse challenges the dominant view of the ruling groups, which denies the prevalence of corruption and tribalism in the country. In other words, talking of corruption and tribalism amounts to an indictment of the political leadership, and is not easily tolerated. This article examines corruption and tribalism as coded messages in deliberately ambiguous metaphors in Wambali Mkandawire's popular songs. It argues that Wambali's presentation of corruption and tribalism as evils in Malawi constitutes a counter-discourse of the dominant view of the ruling social groups.

Keywords: corruption, democracy, Malawi, metaphors, popular music, tribalism

Introduction

In this article, I examine Wambali Mkandawire's popular songs within the definition of popular culture (that includes popular music), as 'a site of struggle between the forces of resistance of subordinate groups in society and the forces of incorporation and dominant groups' (Storey 1993: 13). Fiske means the same thing when he says 'popular culture is the culture of the subordinate who resent their subordination' (1989: 3). Fiske further observes that theories of hegemony 'stress the power of the dominant to construct the subjectivities of the subordinate and the common sense of the society in their own interests, [and] their power is the power to have their meanings of self and social relations accepted or consented to by the people' (ibid). Arguably, the power of the subordinate is manifested in their resistance to such subjectivities and common sense or hegemony through, among others, discourses such as in popular music. By common sense, Fiske is referring to what Gramsci (1971) calls the shared worldview between the dominant and subordinate groups, propagated by the dominant social groups through political and ideological leadership. In other words, popular culture is the site of contestation by the subordinate groups of the dominant worldview of the dominant social groups. But popular culture is not exclusively used by the subordinate groups in that, as Hall argues, it is also 'partly where hegemony arises, and where it is secured' (1998: 453) because both dominant and subordinate groups find space in popular culture to create hegemony (in the case of dominant groups), and to contest such hegemony (in the case of subordinate groups).

In terms of leadership in African politics, African regimes - whether semblances of democracies or dictatorships - have variously attempted to be hegemonic, that is, cultivating some forms of consent to their leadership in order to complement their use of force, especially when dealing with the ordinary people. In Gramscian terms, they try to balance the use of coercion and consent. Such consent is, among other things, cultivated through popular culture (mostly dances and songs of praise), and cultural and religious symbols (such as praise names/titles aimed at creating affection between the leaders and the people they lead) (Hayward & Dumbuya 1983; Le Vine 1977). Examples of these phenomena abounded in Ghana under Kwame Nkrumah, in the Kenya of Mzee Jomo Kenyatta, and the Zaire of Mobutu Sese Seko, among others. Malawi is also a good example: the first post-independence regime of President H.K. Banda and the Malawi Congress Party (MCP) (1964-1994), despite being described as a vicious despotism (Zeleza 1995) also established itself as one of hegemony. As a dictatorship, the regime's coercive methods included detention without trial, extra-judicial killings, and the forced exile of opponents. As hegemony, the regime mobilised the consensus of mostly ordinary people to propagate a legitimising and popularising discourse, constituted mainly through traditional songs turned political songs, and a host of praise names and titles for Banda which included Ngwazi (Conqueror), Nkhoswe (guardian, protector and provider of his people) (Chirambo 2005, 2006). Banda also established an extremely fraternal and intimate though paternalistic and patronising relationship with the majority of ordinary people in the country, which created the element of hegemony or consent for the dictatorship. The post-Banda regimes (after 1994), even as democracies, have tried to build popular support and legitimacy through popular culture, by courting traditional and popular musicians to sing their praises, for example.

However, despite the measure of hegemony, most political regimes in Africa feel the need for political control of popular culture, fearing it as a means of counterhegemonic discourses, to express the discontent of the people. Fiske argues that 'attempts to control the meanings, pleasures, behaviors of the subordinate are always there, and popular culture has to accommodate them in a constant interplay of power and resistance' (1989: 3). During the dictatorship of Banda and the MCP in Malawi, control of popular music in particular was overt, through direct censorship of material (i.e. banning orders), detention without trial, and the torture or political persecution of artists (Africa Watch 1990). Between independence in 1964 and the mid-1970s, the government of Banda and the MCP, through the Censorship Board, had already banned over a hundred songs and other similar materials in the name of protecting Malawians from immoral influences (Malawi Government 1975), though as Mapanje (1989) notes, the truth was that it protected the political regime from so-called 'subversive discourses'. However, even under these circumstances popular music in Malawi - being profoundly oral and dependent on performance for meaning, just like oral literary performances - was 'less amenable to censorship and control' (Vail & White 1991: 77), and was able to carry criticism of the regime.