Some of my friends and I share a joke that we loosely term as ‘famous last words’.
More commonly identified as the things well-known personalities say before they pass on, our version of the term is more of an ironic take on lines that people say which they might later regret.
I wanted to use a(n) (in)famous memory from the past to illustrate my point here, but I decided to use a less controversial example instead:
This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.
So I was very amused when I read a post today that I thought reflected some of the qualities that ‘famous last words’ possess:
why i haven’t been tuning in to the sg writer’s festival
Because there are only these few Singapore writers who are worth reading…– Alfian Sa’at, “why i haven’t been tuning in to the sg writer’s festival.”
Alfian is entitled to his views, but him saying that only five people have any merit in his book is very possibly tantamount to saying everyone else has no merit at all.
And I feel that statements like these only serve to hurt the place of Singapore literature in society because they have the power to propagate the notion that local lit is terrible, or in this case, only a select group of people are good enough.
Perhaps the writing of this group of people really does set them apart from the rest; maybe they really are better than everyone else and deserve to be read more.
Then again, could it merely be a form of cyclical reinforcement?
Where it is because the names of certain writers appear at the top of everyone’s list most of the time, they are read more than anyone else.
And because it would seem to be better to keep in line with the collective response than go against it, it is agreed that these certain writers are, indeed, good.
Hence, their names go on popping up on everyone’s list, and they are continued to be read, and mentioned, and so on and so forth in an incestuous cycle.
I think it’s symptomatic of our size as a nation-state: because Singapore is so small, all this literary incest is very easy to commit and perpetuate.
Moreover, I have a feeling that everyone may be so conditioned to elitism and hegemony that power/control in the hands of a few most of the time, regardless of the field one is in - be it sports, music, the arts - may simply be a normal thing.
So I think there will always be others worth reading, regardless of whether they suck or not.
It can be said that everyone who writes, regardless of the medium, has something to say - not just literally but metaphorically.
And regardless of whether said writer does not “know how to end” and chooses to end “with some bathetic diminuendo” (Alfian, 2007) instead, the writer has said what s/he wants to say, which deserves to be credited as well.
On that note, the mark of a leader, I feel, comes not from what s/he has done during her/his tour of leadership; the mark is measured by the extent of continuity that the leader ensures, so that no gap is left when the leader passes on.
In the case of Singapore lit, if the concern is with ‘lesser’ writers and their battle with bathetic diminuendos, should not the leaders in the field of Singapore writing, along with those who sing their praises, go along and help groom their ‘lesser’ peers ?
Because times are a-changing, and the field of Singapore writing is burgeoning, slowly but surely: I feel that a Renaissance of Singapore lit, if I may be so bold as to propose this term, is coming about.
So if the popularity of Singapore writers can be enhanced now, along with their supposed lack of quality, the Renaissance is going to be explosive, and will definitely come about faster.
Faster than you can say ‘famous last words’. Or even describe them, for that matter.
