Connect with us

Opinion

Between Fela and Whizkid…. 2

Published

on

Fela

By Bola BOLAWOLE

Michael Jackson has now arrived in Jamaica for a meeting with Bob Marley. Read on!

Advertisement

“Kingston, Jamaica, October 23rd, 1978. 8:30 p.m: The exclusive Pegasus Hotel’s penthouse suite was buzzing with quiet conversation when Michael Jackson walked through the heavy wooden doors… Michael had an agenda beyond social pleasantries.

Also read: Fenerbahce Sign Ngolo Kante with Erdogan’s Support

He wanted to propose something that would reshape both (his and Bob Marley’s) careers forever.

The contrast between the two men was immediately striking. Michael wore an expensive silk shirt, perfectly tailored pants, and his signature sequin glove, representing everything successful about the American music industry.

Advertisement

Bob, in contrast, wore simple jeans and a cotton shirt, his dreadlocks flowing naturally, embodying the authentic spiritual energy that had made him reggae’s most respected voice…

Bob looked up as Michael approached, setting down his guitar with the measured calm that characterized everything he did. “Michael Jackson,” Bob said with a slight smile, gesturing to the empty chair across from him. “The prince of pop music. Bless up, brethren.”

Michael slid into the chair, immediately struck by the difference between this intimate setting and their brief backstage encounter three years earlier.

Advertisement

Here, face-to-face, he could see the profound intelligence in Bob’s eyes—the spiritual weight he carried, the way he seemed to be listening to something beyond their conversation.

“Bob, it’s an honor to finally sit with you properly”, Michael said, his nervous energy evident despite his attempt to appear confident. “I’ve been hoping for this opportunity for years.

Bob’s expression remained warm but curious. “What brings the King of Pop to Jamaica, Michael? What’s on your heart?”

Advertisement

Michael leaned forward across the small table between them, his excitement building as he outlined his vision. “Bob, I want to propose something that could change music history. A full collaboration—an album, a world tour, maybe even a concert film. We could combine your consciousness with my reach, your message with my platform.”

Bob studied Michael’s face carefully, reading not just his words, but his intentions… “Tell me more about this vision,” Bob said, folding his hands on the table.

Michael’s excitement grew as he painted his picture, gesticulating with typical enthusiasm. “Picture this: your spiritual lyrics with my melodies and production values. Your authentic message
reaching mainstream audiences who have never heard conscious music. We could reach 100 million people with messages about unity, love, and social justice.” Michael outlined the scope of his vision with genuine passion.

Advertisement

Record executives had estimated the project could generate over $50 million in revenue.

The tour would hit every major American city, introducing reggae to audiences who had never heard conscious music before.

Bob listened intently, occasionally nodding, but his eyes never left Michael’s face.

Advertisement

Across the table, he could sense Michael’s genuine enthusiasm—but also the fundamental misunderstanding that lay beneath the proposal.

“And how would this collaboration work practically?” Bob asked quietly. “Would my message change to fit your audience or would your audience change to receive my message?”

The question hung in the air between them like smoke from sacred fire.

Advertisement

Michael hadn’t expected such a direct philosophical challenge, and Bob’s steady gaze made it impossible to avoid the deeper implications of what he was proposing.

“We could find a middle ground, hopefully” Michael suggested. “Keep your message but make it more accessible to mainstream audiences who might not be ready for the full intensity of Rastapharian philosophy.”

Bob leaned back slightly, creating physical space that somehow made his next question more powerful. “What does more accessible mean, Michael?”

Advertisement

Sitting across from Bob in the intimate setting of the suite, Michael felt the weight of having to articulate something he’d never fully examined.

“Maybe less political content, more universal themes like love and unity that don’t make people uncomfortable—songs that can play on mainstream radio without causing controversy.”

Bob’s response was gentle but penetrating, his voice cutting through Michael’s commercial enthusiasm like truth through illusion.

Advertisement

“Universal love that avoids uncomfortable truths isn’t universal love, Michael. It’s comfortable love. And comfortable love never changed anything.”

The face-to-face setting made every word feel more significant, more personal.

Michael could see the compassion in Bob’s eyes, but also the unwavering commitment to principles that couldn’t be compromised for any amount of success.

Advertisement

Bob continued with an insight that would haunt Michael for years. “When you perform, Michael, what are you trying to accomplish? What do you want people to carry with them when they leave your concert?

Michael straightened in his chair, suddenly feeling like a student being examined by a master teacher. “I want to entertain people, make them happy, give them an escape from their problems, and I want to wake people up.”

Bob replied, his voice carrying the same authority that made his music so powerful. (In contrast, explaining what he seeks to accomplish when performing, Bob said): “To help them understand their problems and find the strength to solve them. Both callings have value, but they cannot be the same thing.” Bob’s voice took on the teaching quality that made his conversations as influential as his songs.

Advertisement

“Michael, you have tremendous talent, tremendous gifts from Jah. Your ability to move people through music is extraordinary. But this collaboration you are proposing—it would require one of us to compromise our essential nature.”

The conversation continued for over an hour with Bob patiently explaining his philosophy while Michael tried desperately to find ways to make the collaboration work.

But sitting face-to-face, seeing Bob’s unwavering spiritual commitment up close, Michael began to understand that this wasn’t about business strategy or creative compromise.

Advertisement

It was about two fundamentally different approaches to the purpose of music.

Bob continued with profound gentleness. “When Marcus Garvey spoke about black pride, white people were uncomfortable. When Martin Luther King spoke about justice, white people were uncomfortable. When Jesus spoke about loving your enemies, everyone was uncomfortable. Discomfort is often the first sign that consciousness is awakening.”

Bob paused, allowing his words to settle. “When you perform, you give people what they want—happiness, excitement, escape. When I perform, I give people what they need—truth, consciousness, spiritual awakening. Both serve Jah’s purpose, but they cannot be the same thing.”

Advertisement

“But think about the impact we could have together”, Michael said desperately, leaning forward across the table. “The number of people we could reach with positive messages.”

Bob’s response became legendary among those who witnessed the meeting. “Michael, reaching many people with a diluted message is less powerful than reaching fewer people with a pure message. Quality of consciousness matters more than quantity of audience. Better to awaken one person completely than to entertain a million people temporarily.”

Michael felt the collaboration slipping away, but he made one last attempt. “What if we could do it your way? What if I adapted my style to your message instead of asking you to adapt your message to my style?”

Advertisement

Bob appreciated Michael’s willingness to consider this approach, but his answer revealed the deeper issue.

“Michael, you are already perfect at what Jah called you to do. Your gift for bringing joy to people is precious and necessary. Don’t diminish that gift by trying to become something you are not. And don’t ask me to diminish mine by becoming something I am not.”

As their meeting neared its end, Bob said: “You are a star, and stars are meant to shine bright and bring joy to people. I respect that calling deeply. But I am not a star. I am a messenger. And messengers must deliver the message exactly as Jah gave it to them.”

Advertisement

Bob stood slowly, extending his hand across the table. “We both serve the same creator through different expressions. Your path is perfect for you. Mine is perfect for me. To change either would diminish both.”

When they shook hands, Michael felt both disappointed and enlightened. Bob had rejected the biggest collaboration offer in music history…The proposed Michael Jackson–Bob Marley collaboration never happened. But both artists went on to achieve their destinies authentically.

Michael became the undisputed king of pop, using entertainment to bring joy to billions worldwide. Bob remained reggae’s spiritual messenger until his death in 1981.

Advertisement

Years later, Michael would credit that face-to-face meeting with teaching him about artistic integrity. “Bob taught me”, Michael said, “that every artist has to choose between being famous and being important.”

Bob chose importance over fame every time…When Bob died in 1981, Michael was among the artistes who publicly honored his memory…The face-to-face meeting that could have created music history’s greatest collaboration instead created something more valuable—mutual understanding between two masters who recognized that their separate paths served the same goal of uplifting humanity through music.

The Michael Jackson–Bob Marley collaboration that never was reminds us that sometimes the most important artistic decisions are the ones that prioritize authenticity over opportunity, message over money, and spiritual integrity over commercial success.”

Advertisement

We can pigeon-hole Fela and Bob Marley together and Michael Jackson and Whizkid likewise.

Everyone is blessed with talents; everyone is used by God for different purposes; everyone is a star in his own right; everyone, like Frantz Fanon posits, discovers their mission, to fulfil or betray it, taking different routes.

There is no basis, therefore, for comparison. We cannot compare apples with oranges.

Advertisement

Also read:  Fenerbahce Sign Ngolo Kante with Erdogan’s Support

Financial success and audience followership are poor yardsticks of measurement because conscious music (Bob Marley/Fela) is not the same as entertainment music (Michael Jackson/Whizkid).

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

Xenophobia: Africa must unite, not divide

Published

on

Xenophobia

By Ehi Braimah

 

Advertisement

Amid the diplomatic tensions between Nigeria and South Africa, another Nigerian named Ibeh Chika Simon, 42, died during a South Africa Police Service (SAPS) operation in Bellville, Cape Town, in Western Cape Province on July 23.

Amid the diplomatic tensions between Nigeria and South Africa, another Nigerian named Ibeh Chika Simon, 42, died during a South Africa Police Service (SAPS) operation in Bellville, Cape Town, in Western Cape Province on July 23.

Also read: Senate Warns South Africa Over Xenophobic Attacks

Witnesses and community groups alleged he was tortured, beaten and suffocated with a plastic bag during the raid. Another Nigerian, Patrick Chuks Egwabor, was reportedly shot and injured during the same operation.

Advertisement

Nigerian Consul-General in Johannesburg, Ninikanwa Okey-Uche, strongly condemned the death, and demanded a transparent, independent probe into recurring extrajudicial deaths involving security personnel.

Nigerians and other African migrants are being killed and forced to leave South Africa arising from the resurgence of xenophobic violence which, clearly, is one of the greatest moral contradictions confronting post-apartheid Africa.

Three decades after the dismantling of institutional racism, the country that inspired the world with Nelson Mandela’s message of reconciliation is witnessing repeated attacks against fellow Africans whose only “crime” is seeking opportunities to work, trade and build better lives.

Advertisement

Sentiment analysis indicates that the hostility directed at African migrants in South Africa is driven by a complex mix of extreme socio-economic frustrations, political scapegoating, inequalities, historical isolation, hunger, laziness, unemployment, and viral anti-immigrant activism.

The local elections are due in November, and as South Africa prepares for the vote, political analysts and rival parties have heavily criticised Jacob Zumah’s MK Party of fueling anti-immigrant sentiments.

MK Party has been accused of weaponising public frustration over extreme unemployment, poverty and state failures to gain electoral advantage.

Advertisement

Recent campaigns by the March and March Movement and Operation Dudula, which demanded that foreign African nationals leave South Africa ahead of the June 30 deadline, represents not merely an attack on migrants but a direct assault on the ideals upon which modern Africa was built.

While inflammatory rhetoric often targets Nigerians, Zimbabweans, Malawians, Mozambicans, Zambians, Ethiopians, Ghanaians, Somalis and other African nationals, it is striking that white immigrants and foreign investors rarely become the focus of such organised hostility.

This selective outrage exposes the uncomfortable reality that the problem is not immigration alone; it is Afrophobia directed against fellow Africans.

Advertisement

South Africans who embrace xenophobic violence have become poor students of history. They appear to have forgotten the enormous sacrifices made by African countries during the long struggle against apartheid. Nigeria, in particular, stood firmly with South Africa when much of the world hesitated.

Successive Nigerian governments contributed financially to the liberation struggle, imposed sanctions against the apartheid regime, offered scholarships to South African students in exile and mobilised international opinion against racial oppression.

Millions of ordinary Nigerians voluntarily contributed through the Southern African Relief Fund, believing that the freedom of South Africa was the responsibility of all Africans.

Advertisement

Nigeria was not alone. Zambia provided sanctuary for liberation fighters. Tanzania hosted the headquarters of liberation movements.

Mozambique, Angola, Zimbabwe, Botswana and many other African nations paid heavy economic and security costs because they stood on the side of justice.

Across the continent, African governments accepted refugees, financed resistance movements and defended South Africa’s right to freedom in international forums.

Advertisement

The vision that inspired these sacrifices was much bigger than the liberation of one country. Ghana’s first President, Kwame Nkrumah, dreamed of a politically and economically united Africa capable of determining its own destiny.

Nelson Mandela similarly believed that South Africa’s freedom would remain incomplete unless the entire continent prospered in peace and solidarity.

The African Union, which succeeded the Organisation of African Unity, inherited this vision of continental integration, cooperation and free movement.

Advertisement

Today, that noble dream is under serious threat.

When African migrants are hunted in townships, their businesses looted, their homes burnt and their families terrorised, Africa loses a part of its collective soul.

The victims are not statistics. They are fathers, mothers, students, traders, artisans, professionals and entrepreneurs who have invested years of hard work in building livelihoods.

Advertisement

Many possess valid immigration documents; work permits or permanent residence status. Yet, legality often provides little protection when mobs take the law into their own hands.

The humanitarian consequences are heartbreaking. Families are uprooted overnight; children abandon their education, and businesses painstakingly built over many years are destroyed within hours. Savings accumulated over decades disappear in acts of arson and looting.

Many migrants return home traumatised, carrying nothing except painful memories of violence and rejection. Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Malawi, Zambia, Mozambique and several other African countries have repeatedly received distressed returnees who must begin life all over again.

Advertisement

The Nigerian government has repeatedly expressed concern over the deaths of Nigerian nationals in violent attacks over the years, underscoring the urgent need for stronger protection and accountability.

Regardless of the precise number, every life lost represents a profound tragedy and a reminder that no African should die simply because he or she chose to live or work in another African country.

The economic argument often advanced by xenophobic groups is equally flawed. Foreign African entrepreneurs frequently establish businesses in communities underserved by formal retail chains, create employment for local residents, pay taxes, rent commercial property and contribute to economic activity.

Advertisement

Rather than causing unemployment, many become job creators. South Africa’s unemployment crisis stems from deep structural economic challenges that cannot be solved by intimidating vulnerable migrants.

Equally troubling is the rise of hate speech that portrays African migrants as criminals responsible for every social ill. Such dangerous generalisations inflame public anger and legitimise violence.

Criminal behaviour should always be addressed through law enforcement against individuals, not through collective punishment based on nationality. The rule of law cannot coexist with mob justice.

Advertisement

As African leaders prepare for the African Union Extraordinary Summit on Conflict Prevention and Resolution in Angola from August 29 – 30, xenophobia and Afrophobia deserve urgent attention.

The African Union cannot remain silent while one of its founding principles is systematically undermined.

The AU’s Agenda 2063 envisions “An Integrated, Prosperous and Peaceful Africa.” That aspiration cannot coexist with violent campaigns demanding that fellow Africans leave another African country.

Advertisement

Moreover, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights guarantees dignity, equality before the law and protection from discrimination.

The Protocol relating to the African Economic Community and the African Continental Free Trade Area equally seek to deepen regional integration by facilitating the movement of people, goods, services and investment.

Continental economic integration cannot flourish where fear and violence replace trust and cooperation.

Advertisement

South Africa’s government bears the primary responsibility for protecting everyone living within its borders, irrespective of nationality.

Peaceful protests may be protected under democratic principles, but intimidation, incitement, destruction of property and mob violence are criminal acts that demand firm prosecution. Failure to hold perpetrators accountable only emboldens future attacks.

Although President Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa sent a delegation led by Ronald Lamola, the country’s minister of International Relations and Cooperation to Abuja for diplomatic engagements over the attack on Nigerians, Ramaphosa should be told in clear terms that his government is not going far enough to solve the problem.

Advertisement

There’s no way South Africa can stand alone as an island, separated from the rest of Africa and an interconnected world.

Nigeria’s President, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, should be commended for showing restraint over the provocations from South Africa that undermine decades of cordial relations between both countries.

How can a South African Minister be saying on national television that Nigeria should show them where the drug dens are?

Advertisement

Governments across Africa must strengthen cooperation on migration management, documentation, intelligence sharing and employment policies. Migration is a global phenomenon that requires coordinated solutions, not xenophobia.

Political leaders, religious institutions, civil society organisations, schools and the media must actively promote tolerance and remind younger generations of the shared history that united Africa against colonialism and apartheid.

Africa’s destiny lies not in division but in unity. Kwame Nkrumah’s dream of continental integration and Nelson Mandela’s vision of reconciliation remain as relevant today as ever.

Advertisement

To betray fellow Africans through xenophobia is to betray the very struggle that delivered South Africa from apartheid.

The answer to unemployment is economic reform, not hatred, and effective policing, not ethnic profiling, will address criminality.

Cyril Ramaphosa must understand that accountable governance, not scapegoating and criminalising vulnerable migrants, will reduce frustration among jobless South Africans.

Advertisement

Africa cannot build a single market while destroying our common humanity.

The African Union must speak with one voice against xenophobia and Afrophobia, demand accountability for perpetrators of violence and reaffirm that every African deserves dignity, security and equal protection under the law wherever they lawfully reside on the continent.

History will judge Africa not only by how it defeated apartheid, but also by whether it refused to replace one form of intolerance with another.

Advertisement

Also read: Senate Warns South Africa Over Xenophobic Attacks

Africa must unite, not divide. That is the only path to fulfilling the dreams of Kwame Nkrumah, Nelson Mandela and the founding fathers of African unity.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending