Dear Editor,
Every time I read about or listen to the utterings of individuals who have had the opportunity to attend a university (especially those who have majored in the humanities) I try as best as I can to evaluate and balance their point of view by juxtaposing it with that of the thoughts expressed by profound Barbadian writer George Lamming on the question of education and the intellectual. And so, after reading the Stabroek News on December 7, 2009, under the bold heading ‘UG graduates need well paying jobs to stay here -valedictorian,’ a few thoughts crossed my mind. First, let me extend belated congratulations to valedictorian Loria-Mae Angela Heywood and all other graduands. As was reported, Loria-Mae Heywood during the course of her address with much support from batch mates called for an “enabling environment cultivated by a responsive and responsible government thus bringing about a sense of hopefulness among graduates.” She went on to state: “The past has been strewn with intelligent and qualified graduates emigrating to greener pastures merely to earn a decent living…”  But this is not just the graduates’ problem, it is almost the same in every department of work, except in the upper bracket of the privileged few whose thinking is no different from that of Ms Heywood and are only here because their desires are being met. But the big question that I put to Ms Heywood and her batch mates is how must this “enabling environment…” come about? How can this desirable change be made? Whose responsibility is it to effect the change? Surely the change she is talking about is not for the benefit of some, but for all our people.

Of course she is so correct; the past has been strewn with intelligent graduates emigrating to greener pastures to make a decent living. But that was and still is because like her they were occupied with self, first, second, and third, although some did have a very plausible explanation to the contrary – the need for self development so as to better serve people and country. This is sound, but only a few have shown that to be true. It’s all a question of possessions and being secure, and no one should be blamed for wanting to be so. Invariably, howeer, one becomes so secure in his/her material comfort that nothing else, no matter how evil, matters.

As I said in a letter in SN on March 19, 2009, shouldn’t the coveted education of our men and women, in some cases acquired at the expense of the working class, be used for the services, protection and upliftment of the people? Most certainly! But that becomes difficult for them because material wealth controls their actions, and hence they turn a blind eye to wrongs and injustices until things get out of hand and threaten self. This is what self interest does; when you become consumed by it, you become silent, thus lending tacit support to unwholesome and questionable happenings, using flimsy subterfuges to soothe a troubled conscience. And this in part is why we are the way we are today. This is what most of our intelligent and qualified graduates have helped to bring about; the very condition that Ms Heywood and her fellow graduates are now saddled with and which they are not prepared to endure. I can remember so well some years ago attending a political meeting and hearing two prominent intellectuals bemoaning the quality of students the UG was producing. Sadly from then to now it has not been that easy to detect a qualitative change in their outlook. It makes me wonder whether UG students are taught what to think instead of how to think. What is the purpose and intent of education? A large majority of these students have elected to remain apolitical; is our highest institution of learning, shaping, enriching and motivating young students to reach beyond self? Why for over two decades has this institution not been able to spin out one beautiful mind, one single free-thinking perspicacious revolutionary intellectual to change the status quo? I noted that Ms Heywood was an International Relations major who also won the President’s medal for the most outstanding student – which is good. How would she repay her country with that distinguished award? In what light would she like the world to view her native land?

How does she see herself in the service of her country? Who does her labour serve? Let not the colourful phrasing and rhetoric be just another set of words meant only to soothe the ears. And rest assured that once this trend continues in the next 10, 20 years, each succeeding graduating batch will be echoing Ms Heywood’s sentiments about the state of affairs, only by then it will be worse.

Yours faithfully,
Frank Fyffe