The MG Smith Conference etc

Well, the ACS 2008 Crossroads conference has finally come and gone like a tsunami that rolled ashore, lifting us off our feet and depositing us back on terra firma gasping for air as it eventually receded this Monday. At its peak the Cultural Studies conference featured 20 concurrent panels or sessions, and you had to be the most dedicated, strategic, panel surfer to experience more than a smidgeon of the entire programme.

The packed few days of the conference, from July 3-7, brought more than 400 academics from all over the world to the Mona campus of the University of the West Indies (UWI). And UWI, caught like a matron in the middle of an elaborate facial while preparing for her main event–the university’s 60th anniversary celebrations that kick off on July 12th—was her charming, gracious self, wowing visitors with her flamboyant natural beauty now enhanced by the brilliant new colours the buildings are being painted.

I view the repainting of the campus as a significant step in the repositioning of the University in the 21st century. Perhaps I’m oversensitive to colours, perhaps its my coolietude, but I don’t see why we should be so committed to what I think of as boring, institutional colours like off-white, beige and gray. UWI Press was the first to buck this trend a few years ago when it painted its new building burnt sienna. I’m told the University Buildings Committee had a collective apoplectic fit but was effectively faced down by Linda Speth, the no-nonsense director of the Press.

The Buildings Committee must have undergone a transfusion of new members since then because the Main Library has just been painted shades of turquoise. I absolutely love it but seem to be in the minority—I’m told that one colleague who otherwise champions the people dem culture demanded to know why the library was being painted “inner city blue”. I sincerely hope those responsible will remain steadfast and not water down the new colour scheme; the turquoise library nestled in the lap of the green hills beyond it looks like a gem. Look at this picture and decide for yourselves.


Back to the theme of this blog which is conferences. Academic conferences to be precise. I’ve been on a conference rollercoaster since February this year. The most memorable one was the collaboration between the University of Technology (UTech) and the Department of Architecture and Design at the Museum of Modern Art in New York in producing a conference on “Caribbean Modernist Architecture”. Held at the magnificent Jamaica Conference Centre downtown the symposium brought together architects, curators and historians of architecture from fourteen countries. The fees were steep and I wasn’t able to attend more than one or two sessions but it was one of the best conferences I’ve ever attended locally.

To hear architects from the region talking about the trajectory modern architecture took in their respective countries was stimulating. In Venezuela interdisciplinary design and research were important and modern art—the work of artists such as Vassarely, Calder and Jean Arp—was used to complement the built environment. In Mexico architects were preoccupied with a series of responses to the question of how to come up with a Mexican nationalist architecture. In Puerto Rico there was “no history but a monumental void” and so military bases became the first sites of modernist architecture and aesthetic advancement.


In June the Centre for Caribbean Thought organized a small conference in honour of MG Smith, which started off with a no-holds barred address by Professor Orlando Patterson of Harvard University. MG was an eminent Jamaican sociologist and poet who taught at UWI, Yale University, UCLA and University College in London during the course of his lifetime. Smith gained a reputation for his work on corporation theory, pluralism and plural societies (of which he thought Jamaica was one). As a poet Smith was a member of the ‘Drumblair’ group of writers, poets and dramatists who revolved around the Manley household. Smith was particularly close to Edna Manley who ran what amounted to a ‘salon’ in pre-independence Jamaica.

Patterson, who had worked at UWI with MG in the early days openly stated his differences with Smith declaring that as a social theorist he had been a failure. There was he recalled “endless bickering” over pluralism and the taxonomy Smith employed was patently inadequate. In any case according to Patterson “West Indian societies are clearly heterogeneous,” something that would not have been obvious to Smith whose problem was that he viewed West Indian society from an “upper class perspective.”

According to Patterson Smith “should have checked out more carefully those of us who were upwardly mobile…25 years after being born in the bush I was teaching at the London School of Economics. Thirty years later I was offered a position at Harvard.” So “it simply wasn’t true that there were core institutional divisions” between Blacks, Whites and Browns as Smith’s plural society thesis posited.

Incidentally there are scholars who disagree with this view; In an article titled “The Permanence of Pluralism” Columbia University-based postcolonial theorist David Scott (also Jamaican) argued in the wake of the 1998 Zekes Riots that “the ghost of MG Smith is haunting the landscape of the Jamaican political modern”. Meaning that the total breakdown of any pretence at social cohesion, leading to the profound crisis Jamaican society finds itself in today, could have been predicted by MG Smith with his thesis that the population of Jamaica “constituted a plural society, that is a society divided into sections, each of which practiced different cultures.”


Patterson looked to Smith’s personal life for clues to the inadequacies of his social theory. Born to a white English-born father and a ‘coloured’ mother who died in childbirth (a pity, Patterson pointed out, as MG would have benefited from knowing her family and perhaps even produced different, better informed work) Smith was sent to JC as a child where he was subjected to ‘sadistic canings’. “Smith in fact was brought up by a corporation—I think this has major implications later on” said Patterson going on to talk of MG’s unusual relationship with Edna Manley, the mother of his schoolmate Michael, whom he was “immediately smitten by.”

This was the part where the prim and proper audience, completely unused to such candid disclosures, especially in the august enclave of UWI’s undercroft, started to squirm in its seats, as Patterson dwelt at length on the putative “consummation” of this unorthodox relationship between a young man and an older woman. If Mark (“In Praise of Younger Women”) Wignall thought that having a younger lover was a privilege reserved for older males he better think again. Many a woman could write paeans in praise of younger men too.

Having delivered himself of MG’s various shortcomings Patterson acknowledged that despite this there was a “great deal that was justifiable about this conference”. Smith had been a world-class historical sociologist whose early work on the Fulanis of Nigeria and his study of community organizations in rural Jamaica were timeless classics. MG was a meticulous fieldworker whose ethnohistories were “meticulous excavations”. His best work according to Patterson was done when he wasn’t obsessed with theorizing; the problem arose when he imposed corporatist theory on his findings.

Patterson’s thorough and honest examination of MG Smith’s work and life may have raised a few hackles but it set off several impassioned, contentious and useful conversations over the next couple of days among the social and cultural theorists gathered at Mona. The highlight though was Rachel Manley’s talk (at the opening of the library exhibit on MG Smith) called “The Mike Smith I Knew” which turned out in effect to be a gracefully executed rescue of her grandmother Edna (or Mardi as she called her) and Mike, someone who had nurtured in Rachel a love of poetry.

Consummation and consumption were preoccupations of the present said Rachel, but not of the 50s and 60s, when the friendship between her grandmother and Mike would have been at its height. She had no idea whether they had had an affair or not; if it had happened it was without her knowledge and frankly she didn’t care. What she did know was that that was “a time when you consummated independence for an island…that was the romance of the time.”

Mardi, she declared, was a magnetic woman. She flirted with everything, she flirted with Jamaica. All the young poets and artists of the Drumblair group were in love with her. But Mike’s poems and Mardi’s art—those were the consummations.

It was a consummate performance on Rachel’s part, casually delivered, without a hint of the agitation that must have been behind it. Her talk illuminated the enigmatic man in whose honour this conference was being held and brought him to life for us. The next day we went back to the tendentious business of dissecting the body of his work. One thing is for sure–whether MG Smith’s framework of social and cultural pluralism has any validity today or not, he was integrally involved in the labour of building theory, of developing conceptual frameworks, valuable academic tasks that alas, seem to have been jettisoned from the agenda of social sciences at UWI over the years.

Author: ap

writer, editor and avid tweeter

14 thoughts on “The MG Smith Conference etc”

  1. Annie, the subtle flaw in Patterson’s argument is the strength of MG Smith’s theory.Patterson is a genius and this blinds him to the fact that a talent like his is meteoric rather than the slow, backbreaking work that institutional reform takes. JC as a paradigm of Jamaica is useful up to a point. Even when JC opened the door with Common Entrance exams,some of my friends were greeted with comments such as,”since when have they allowed the groundskeepers to come here?”Witness even the current struggle between Portia and Dr. Phiilips, some so much in terms of ideas, but the brown/ black divisions in Jamaica.Peace,Geoffrey

  2. Annie, interestingreview of the Crossroads conference.The intellectual tensions between heterogenity and pluralism as articulated by Patterson in his strident critique of MG Smith’s work, apparently, is based on the question of social,political, economic and educationalmobility, which in essence allows groups to break down the core institutional divisions and distinctions which exists between or among them.Both the heterogenous school of thought and the pluralist school, in essence, are not mutually exclusive, although there are definitely variations in both paradigms.Interestingly,both paradigms are extremely applicable and valid for understanding Jamaican society with its host of vexing social/cultural problems.Enjoyed the review, including Rachel Manley’s presentation on her famous grandmother,Mrs. Edna Manley.Nuff respect!

  3. I didn’t even know about that conference on architecture in February – I dont know where my head was – so I am disappointed that I miss it. Apart from the fact that i don’t respect Orlando Patterson very much (excavating his own biography would turn up some serious detritus), he fails sociology 101 by offering his own experience as a legitimate challenge to MG Smith. Anecdotes don’t and can’t stand in as evidence all by themselves. In fact, as he has framed it, Paterson invariably supported Smith’s view about the well-policed social boundaries that *seem* to operate as impermeable sky-high walls. Paterson likes to see himself as the ONE who escaped and who can tell what it is like to have done so. (In fact, this is a familiar narrative among this generation of men…) He don’t do too much to ensure that others can be like him, however. I think MG Smith’s framework on “pluralism” is static, highly problematic in its positivist orientation, and definitely informed by his view from on high, but that doesn’t mean that he should be caricatured. In fact, offered by someone – anyone – else, Paterson’s analysis – of situating MG Smith and locating his scholarship in the connections between his personal and intellectual life – would be great reading and discussion about the embattled histories of social theory, and is an important intervention to show the different kinds of labour involved in the making of intellectual contributions, rather than seeing theory emerging and yet disconnected from some naturally brilliant erudite individual. You are dead on right Annie – we don’t seem too concerned with that kind of important work these days. When coming out of Paterson’s mouth however, these issues feel more like grudgeful bile, much like the Jesse Jackson/Obama madness right now.

  4. I really like the colour a lot. I am imagining some funky mural, floral, and/or sculptural embroidery around it though.“Inner City Blue”? That just inspired another art project…

  5. I liked some colour schemes, not all. I wondered if it was properly thought out. I hated the partial painting of some buildings.I liked the use of colour to highlight the bookshop/ library etc. But this is how you recognise an amateur effort:-Have you seen the chapel lately from the back, by CARIMAC?(At Monday July 14)Why would anyone paint it? Yuk!

  6. no, hadn’t seen that–you mean they’ve painted the chapel?? that doesn’t need any painting, it’s beautiful as is…what a pity…they do seem to have a colour scheme carefully thought out though. notice both political parties are almost equally represented, green for humanities and orange for social sciences. pure and applied looks like its going to be a nice mustard or ochre. and the central admin bldgs are just beautiful, the new one painted white and aqua we’ll be able to direct visitors to our offices by colour!

  7. I can clearly remember what was an attempted well-reasoned discussion with a student from the Edna Manley College who had spent some time in the States and was exacerbated that American women (and men) did not seem to appreciate it when he made his thoughts known (in a call or a whistle) about the relative attractiveness of a woman on the street. To him it only seemed normal to complement the ladies who looked good.I worked to bite my feminist tongue thinking of all the times I’d wanted to crawl under the proverbial rock in college in the 1980’s and in Boston in the same era and how glad I was that America ‘evolved’ away from verbal aggression and into a more PC environment. Then I spent 6 months in Jamaica and became “used to” such utterances from a more vocal society. Like anything one gets used to it and – aggression aside – the underlying openness of it reflects. A direct, flirtatious style of communication resides in the Caribbean and is embedded in many aspects of social communication and interaction. To flirt with is a metaphor, the construct has deep roots and decidedly – due to the quotidian nature of enhanced verbalization – the barometer of some of the US’s southern neighbors is less sensitive in terms of crossing boundaries – which makes the students inquiry more complex than a similar conversation or even incident to the north. Il y a de quoi réfléchir. And then as a woman in the feminist camp I stumbled on a bigger question at the MG Smith conference – especially as an art historian who rejects not only patriarchs of the field but even ‘mothers’ of the arts. What to do with the flirtatious Edna Manley? Like the men of her nation she openly flirted with the people, ideas and arts of the nation. This came up clearly not at the EMC or even a Manley conference. It came thought the MG Smith conference and was brilliantly addressed by Rachel Manley. “Mardi, she declared, was a magnetic woman. She flirted with everything, she flirted with Jamaica. All the young poets and artists of the Drumblair group were in love with her.” Anne Paul is on the money with her resume of the presence and significance of Ms. Manley’s paper. But where things could-should be pushed a bit farther is with the very question of “flirting in the Caribbean” and what it means in society, politics, human relations and other aspects of life. As all Americans can get the reference to the recent archeological dig at what is probably Washington’s childhood home revealing no cherry tree stump – as a different reference will be understood in two hundred years when a thorough search of the Clinton library reveals no cigar – societies have defining values (adhered to or not) their myths and their objects. In fact, we often build institutions around them and hold conferences to discuss them, which is what should happen with the issue of flirtation in the Caribbean with all the complexity and historic reasons for its continued social coinage. Flirting is neither myth nor object; but is it a defining characteristic in terms of modes of communication? From the aggressive catcall to the politically correct flash of a smile there is need to reflect on the delightful, distracting, historic, problematic and pleasurable qualities of flirting in the Caribbean.

  8. Catherine,migod, thanks for this! yes, the flirting envelope could/should be pushed further. somehow i think UWI might be resistant to a conference on The Politics of Flirting in the Caribbean. thanks for the delightful thought though…and Longbench thanks as usual for the pithy comments, always appreciate them, glad we agree on colours too.annie

  9. I love the UWI colours but it is quite clear that the “green” is a token gesture to the ruling political party as the “green” is really “aqua” rather than the vibrant green of the party. Perhaps the bluish hue is in deference to the PM whose previous party sported the colour blue.I know little about sociological theory, etc but could Orlando Patterson and others like him be the “exceptions that prove the rule”?

  10. AnnieGreat post (you really caught up on your blogging!) and I’m so glad I read the comments–they are fascinating too. I don’t like the colour of FSS (burnt sienna-ish) but it’s better than the institutional dingy beige, and I think the campus is brighter and better off for the paint job. Diana

  11. yeah, that’s what i like about blogging, it’s open-ended–to be completed by the readers and their responses.also interesting which ones attract no comments whatsoever. it’s literally like someone reading you and saying in response “no comment”…i’m not sure how to interpret this–as lack of interest in the subject maybe or perhaps those blogs just haven’t found their audience?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: