BORN DEAD (J.B. Lenoir)

 

by Laurence Pierrepont & SoundCircus
Jocelyn Bonnerave, Pierre Carsalade, François Lorin,
Alexandre Pierrepont & Romain Tesler)

&

1 Time is of the essence ; the essence is beyond time (Matthew Shipp & Other Dimensions in Music)

 1830 : Algeria’s takeover by France.

1851 : Introduction of the « droit du sol » (right to ground) principle (but the foreigners can renounce to their French nationality when they come of age)

1881-1919: French colonization of parts of Africa and Asia.

1881: Introduction of the Indigenous code: exceptional jurisdiction for the Algerian Muslims.

1914-1918: Recruitment of the Indigenous for the trenches and war factories.  First generation of Northern African immigrants in France.

1954-1962: Wave of French decolonization:

            - 1954-1962: Algerian war.

            - 1961: Curfew imposed on Algerian Muslims on the French territory.

            - October 17th, 1961: Prefect Papon orders the slaughter of hundreds of Algerians who were peacefully demonstrating in Paris.

1945-1974:  Massive call of a foreign workforce throughout a period of strong economical growth.  Immigration is strictly perceived as work immigration.

1960-1980: Urban politics of the “Grands Ensembles”: birth of the “banlieues”, relegation of immigrant families to the outskirts of major cities.

1973: Start of the economic crisis.

1974: First decision to suspend immigration.

1977: Beginning of the assistance to go back politics.

1980: With the familial regrouping, the work immigration becomes a populating immigration.

1981: “La Gauche” (the left) is in power and wants to “change peoples’ lives”…

1983: Economic politics of “rigueur” (strictness): drastic reduction of the government’s social spending.

1983: Riots at the Minguettes, in the banlieue of Lyon.

1983: Demonstration of the “children of immigration” for equality (the Beurs)

1984: strengthening of the politics of assistance to go back, beginning of the rise of the Front National (nationalist, racist and anti-Semitic political party).

1991: Jacques Chirac condemns the foreigners who “earn 50 000 francs a month” (around 8 000$), their “noise” and their “smell”.

1993: Restriction of the right to ground use (Pasqua/Debré laws): “France does not want to be an immigration country.” (Charles Pasqua, Secretary of the Interior)

April 2002: Jean Marie Le Pen, leader of the Front National, runs for the second round of the presidential election.

2003: Strengthening of the immigration legislation under Nicolas Sarkozy, Secretary of the Interior.

 Today, immigrants are estimated at 9.6% of the total French population.

 

 2 There’s a riot goin’ on (Sly & The Family Stone)

      On October 27th 2005, at Clichy Sous Bois (10 miles on the outskirts of Paris), Zyed Benna (17 years old) and Bouna Traoré (15 years old) died electrocuted inside an electrical transformer where they had found refuge. Muhttin Altun (17 years old) was also heavily wounded in the same circumstances. The three youths were running away from the police and they were so scared that they chose the risk of dying to the certainty of humiliation and violence – a certainty which regulates the daily confrontations between these “youth from the banlieues” and the police force.

Everything has been indeed truly set for such a feeling of humiliation and anger to reign within the population. A few months earlier, the Secretary of Interior, Nicolas Sarkozy had manifested in a most vulgar way his cleansing impulses of using a “karcher” (high-pressure water cleaner) to blast off the “racailles” (thugs) from the banlieues. At the paroxysm of the crisis, as many rioters were asking for his resignation (an old French tradition…), he proudly stuck to his injurious talk and stand. The next day, Nicolas Sarkozy (candidate to the 2007 presidential elections) and the Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin (candidate to the 2007 presidential elections) tried to justify the police blunder for the TV audience by talking about a robbery attempt, worsening the feeling of injustice for the Clichy Sous Bois inhabitants: a recent investigation showed that the three youths had nothing to do with the robbery, and that the police were chasing them strictly for “preventive” reasons.

As with any police blunder, the anger of the Clichy Sous Bois youth was once again sparked off. The same evening, cars were lit on fire, firemen thrown rocks at. On the evening of October 30th, the crisis heightened in intensity after a second police blunder: a tear gas grenade was thrown by the police towards Clichy’s mosque, which was quickly evacuated after the gas seeped in. As soon as the next day’s evening, the number of burnt cars and vandalized public buildings (nurseries, schools, police stations, multimedia libraries, or shops) drastically increased, and the violence propagated throughout the entire department (Ile-de-France), and soon the entire country. The violence’s climax was reached on November 7th (10th night of rioting) with over 1,400 burnt vehicles. At the same time, “citizen vigils” were being organized by the residents of many communities to protect some public buildings (schools, gymnasiums) and engage in discussion with the rioters. On November 8th, the government declared the metropolitan territory to be under a “state of emergency”, allowing itself to restrict civil liberties – particularly the right to rally and to move about freely. This decree was only used once in the République’s history while facing difficulties with events concerning the Algerian independence war, and became another provoking factor for the rioters, whose majority come from families of immigrant descent.

The state of emergency is still in effect today.

President Chirac made his first declarations to the French people (radio and TV) on November 14th, after more than two weeks of silence. He exalted the French République’s ideals, called on to justice and firmness, without even suggesting anything concrete. Nicolas Sarkozy has talked about the possibility of selecting a “useful” immigration. Within the institutional intellectual world, Hélène Carrère d’Encausse (historian and member of the Académie Française) expressed an opinion well shared within her body of work by fustigating the polygamy of African families in France, which would be the main reason for the riots. Everything seems to be in order today, yet the same anger is still growling. Its very existence is found within structural reasons which are still neither looked at, nor understood or even discussed about.

 

 3 Ghost Dog Theme (“The RZA”)

 A different picture of the rioter

             The rioter is not an organized threat; he joins others in the emergency, then vanishes.

             The rioter is not a revolutionary; he is a rebel. He doesn’t confront the dominant system, he’s burning with anger until he can find a place in it. Revolutionaries may be of those who, with a different anger, study until night time in the high schools.

             The rioter is not illiterate; he writes with burnt schools, because he’s not heard when he speaks with the language they have taught him.

             The rioter is not a promising sportsman; he’s a young man whose blood is boiling, even to the point of setting gymnasiums on fire.

             The rioter is not a notorious drug dealer; where drugs are about, heavy peace reigns. Main drug dealers hate disorder. They’re not the only ones.

             The rioter is not a fundamentalist; where fundamentalists are, calm reigns. Fundamentalists hate disorder. They are not the only ones.

             The rioter doesn’t wear the rich people’s clothes; he wears the poverty of a poor world, and yes it’s true, sometimes he steals his poverty from the world.

             The rioter is not a famous rapper who makes his music with electronic machines; he was killed by electric machines, and he only became notorious after his electrocution.

             The rioter is not a living wolf; he’s a ghost dog.

  

4 Inner (and Outer) City Blues (Marvin Gaye)

           What is a « banlieue »? During the 1950’s and up to the 70’s, the French government decided to build the « grands ensembles » (literally, the “great togethers”) in response to the housing crisis right after World War II, and with the intent to socially modernize its environment. These structures were built on the outskirts of major cities in shapes of bars or towers, holding between 500 and 1000 housing units available to those with lesser revenues. As the baby boom came along, the population of these peripheral neighbourhoods became increasingly younger. In 1962, many studies showed that 50% of the population of these grands ensembles were under 25 (compared to 29% for Paris for 0-24 years old). One of the many problems were the lack of social and cultural centers to accommodate the youth, and it wasn’t until as late as the 70s that some of these structures were introduced in the neighborhoods.

The grands ensembles have become a world of their own, marginalizing the individuals from the main « city life » – a round-trip into the city can cost between 10 and 15$; these banlieues are theoretically dependent on the cities to which they are attached to but do not reflect their ideals. Hence are created multifaceted « urban » (or outer-urban) practices, such as hip-hop, graffiti, etc. giving the possibility for the shunned youth to shine. In France, we don’t have the Innercity Blues, but the Outercity Blues. It is the outskirts: a vibrant place so full of life where you might still feel forgotten and abandoned because of your social condition; where police incursions occur daily, fully padded and armed as if they were entering into « enemy territory » ; a place where the youth tries to voice their frustration from their geographic and social marginalization, but still yet not heard.

 

 5 Outer Nothingness (Sun Ra)

             The riots of November 2005 provoked a “sharp commotion” amongst the French political and media classes – two classes which, in France as in everywhere else, live their parasitic existence, apart from the social body on which they proliferate, answering to their own needs. Whatever the degree of awareness of the rioters, they have committed the crime of attacking the public order of which these two classes are responsible for (a lot more than the peoples whose only duty is to elect the former democratically) and which they defended with the usual weapons: repression (police and judiciary) and ideology. In this case, the ideological fight implies isolating the culprits, who obviously are irresponsible and antisocial, from the rest of the population, who obviously are honest and hardworking. As a matter of fact, if other categories of the population (the sons and daughters of the middle-class, for example) had taken part in these troubles, we surely wouldn’t have heard about riots and rioters (a term as of now used to condemn a furious youth), but about rebellion and rebels, or insurrection and insurgents. Instead, the political class’ argumentation, with its media accomplice, only had to work around variations of the term “racailles” (thugs), used and reused endlessly by Nicolas Sarkozy, chief of the government’s police. First teaching: we know today that the French society is made up of dozens, even hundreds of thousands of “racailles”, which means savages. When we started worrying about finding other reasons to the “savagery” of the urban violence, it was to incriminate the illiteracy or the polygamy of the rioters’ parents. What can the fathers, mothers and families of savages be other then savages themselves? We are asked therefore to believe that men and women who don’t know how to read and write – the French language of course – are incapable of transmitting certain values to their children. That the thought, the judgment and the discernment come with literacy only. To believe that all the lovers and mistresses of the men and women in politics (obviously married, therefore civilized), who as a matter of fact are one of the tabloids’ favorite topic, presenting them as the “people’s elected” in their most human light, are nothing but a more subtle or superior form of culture? And we are asked to prefer such “clarifications” to more materialistic explications, which would inconveniently show the outbreak of outlaws in so-called democratic societies. The rioters of November are too disoriented to represent the avant-garde of any kind of revolutionary movement; on the other hand they are in the best position to personify these outlaws: a youth issued from the immigration (meaning colonies which, we are reminded, were educated by the West), a youth without work, without gratitude, without hope, without ideals and soon without youth, subject to constant harassment and ordinary racism from the forces of order, truly useless and knowing it, a youth that only needs to be calmed down by the law of  show-business über alles – the most efficient secret police of the new world order. The vacuity of these riots (vandalizing places where you hang out, that you have a use for) shows the uneasiness of these societies where even the fact of saying and thinking misery, yours or other peoples’, has become miserable, shameful, where it is less and less necessary to assume that there is an everyday life and a reality. By creating havoc, no more no less, this crazed youth has unwillingly helped us all out: because the “savagery” called forth by the political and media class is first and foremost the cache-misère of the “civilization”. Let’s not get our minds off this myth as it is about to betray itself.

 

 6 Strange Fruit (Billie Holiday & Lewis Alan)

          “After all the violated treaties, the propagated lies, all these tolerated punitive expeditions, all these tortured patriots, this racist pride encouraged […], there is poison instilled into Europe’s veins, and the slow but sure progress of the continent becoming savage.” Aimé Césaire (in “Speech on colonialism”, Présence Africaine , 1955)

Fifty years later, the same Aimé Césaire refused to receive on his own land the French government’s representative who pretends to sandblast “his” banlieues’ walls by reactivating the former colonial law of curfew (1955 law revived in November 2005), and wants to reconcile the French people by teaching the positive impact of colonialism and by compensating former convicted OAS members, a racist movement fighting against Algeria’s independence during the 1960’s (February 23rd  2005 law). The poison is still following its course as planned within the capillary vessels of a République which boasts its indifference towards difference, as it had built its conception of the Universal on one of the most coherent systems of exploitation of a people by another.  The model brought about by the République’s ideals at the dawn of the colonial enterprise was truly built on the certainty of the French Revolution’s ecumenical vocation of social and political values, safe-keepers of the world’s peoples happiness. Within this unilateral perspective, the Other’s voice must be confiscated because it cannot be meaningful; the Other is the conqueror’s inverted mirror, and his only symbolical function is to reassure him in his ‘charitable work’. Hence the need for the “native’s” invisibility, who can neither be singular, nor thinking or acting, and unto whom the colonist must assign certain identifying aspects which encourage the confusion and justify their submission: thief, lazy, deceitful, savage, cannibalistic, sex-craving, etc. If his body is shown too much, it might interfere with the colonist’s certitudes, and he therefore might truly be facing destruction – the colonial violence is often committed by relentless ritualistic acts on the body: eviscerations, decapitations, torture, rape…

The contemporary resonance of this system is obvious. The ones who are today called blacks, tan, muslims, hooded, sons of polygamous fathers, incompetent, hoodlums, thugs; pointing fingers at their sisters and mothers – who are potentially veiled and raped; they are therefore genetically amputated from a part of their humanity, since they burn their own schools and their neighbors’ cars.

Ain’t they our children, those ghostly figures who hide their faces and their age underneath dark hoods? Children who consume themselves from the inside from being invisible in a land which, for most, is not a welcoming land but a cradle instead, and who cry for this France which is rejecting them like incompatible transplants? France throws up its children. They are the worm within the fruit. strange fruit. France’s colonial past’s history has not yet quieted down, and the minds still need to be decolonised.  To reactivate the former legislative tools of the colonial era, and revive the traditional stereotypes, is an insult to the “indigenous” fathers and mothers, and is a reminder to their children that they are still Earth’s orphans.

 

 7 Burnt ‘till recognition (Henry Threadgdill)

           It is essential to denounce the idea that obscure Islamic movements are at the origin of the riots. If there is truly a debate which involves Islam in the hoods, this popular and spontaneous rousing does not rest on the ethnic origin or the hypothetical religious background of the rioters, but on the common experience of these “banlieues youth” who feel excluded from the French society, an experience that has been socially put together and kept as such.  Outburst of words, confusion of the senses, contrary to what some would like us to believe, there are neither “racailles” (thugs) nor “Intifada” in the French banlieues.

Three weeks after the violence had receded, the newspaper “Le Parisien” published a report from the “Direction Centrale des Renseignements Généraux”, which is dependent on the Ministry of Interior, and of which we could have expected its description of the events to be biased. On the contrary, the report shows that the Islamic groups had “no role in the triggering of the violence or its expansion”, and that they actually would have found it “more useful for peace to come back in order to avoid the confusion.”

In France, Sarkozy’s speech, pointing fingers at organized groups, was indeed intended to maintain a climate of law-and-order paranoia before the looming presidential elections.  As for the dominating American media which has been incriminating the Islamic groups, it is a result of their full allegiance to the Bush administration. Since September 11th, the USA has been invested with a supreme civilizing mission which consists in defending western democracy from a crawling, gnawing “evil”, incarnated by the Islamic groups. “May the western world burn under their assaults!” One more lie from the Bush administration won’t hurt it in its mission to legitimize its external affairs politics.

 

 8 Free Money (Patti Smith)

           When an industrial group fires 600 of its employees, there’s nothing unusual about it; it is not called violent. When a few youths put fire to a carpet store and 30 people are temporarily laid off during the repairs, not only is this violent, but also intolerable!

 [A little reminder: let’s remember that we live in a liberal system which favors capital over work, sees economic growth as the ultimate end while trampling any belief of personal or collective blooming. These values are today engrained in our social organization, our infrastructures, and individuals are almost only looked upon in terms of their economic value. Investment is king. The political class has massively given in to this system, and the concept of readjusting the balance only works by default to soften the perverse effects of liberalism. The banlieues are the antechamber of this system.]

 The next scene could take place in the cafeteria of a big industrial site, maybe in front of a few video cameras. The CEO of this industrial group meets with one of the rioters during his lunch break. Clean cut and relaxed, he tells him in an overly benevolent manner:

 -By attacking the businesses, not only are you directly responsible for your neighbors and parents being laid off, but also for your neighborhood’s social and economic death. You leave companies no other choice than to invest elsewhere.

- As long as you and yours’ behavior remains the same, no progress will be made. You are a real burden to society, welfare scroungers who take advantage of the honest people’s work and who destroy public goods. If you want to make it out of this, have access to all kinds of consumer goods, you must do like everybody else. Roll up your sleeves, work hard in your company and believe me, you will get the life you deserve.

 

On the other hand, he doesn’t tell him:

- You are stuck. You are the system’s victim and catalyst at the same time. Liberalism divides the population into segments and widens the gaps on a worldwide scale. To stay alive, this system needs you as a “banlieue youth” in two ways. First as a customer, for the less educated you are, the more you may be sensitive to and be part of the consumer culture.  Education is the enemy of liberalism for it enables you to build yourself as an individual with your own values and references, and not the ones we choose for you.  That is why capitalism is so preoccupied with culture. Second, you will be used as workforce, for you don’t need to have diplomas to work on an assembly line or as security. Once you are neutralized, you will hold a precarious job in a company, allowing it to further free up more benefits.

- Globalization has effects on space and time; only the trades between major cities are accelerated. On a worldwide scale, entire towns and regions are dying; on a local scale, entire neighborhoods are cast aside. These new peripheral areas are deliberately sacrificed. This exacerbated tension between the Global and Local builds places of “non-lieux” within the territories, deep holes within which you must hide.

- Liberalism doesn’t care about existence and sucks the lifeblood of individuals. Wars and cataclysms are of the same order: they may thwart the trade some, but they allow above all for the reorganization of the economy and the signing of new contracts. So the system’s  internal logics call for the systematic diversion of any form of opposition or anti-establishment stance. As far as the riots you took part in, we decided to wave the law-and-order flag, in the name of safeguarding public order. For they mostly were pointing out the contradictions of the dominant liberal order. Your alarm system has been rapidly neutralized, the flames doused out, and once again, you will be the ones to suffer from these events.

           Convenient smiles and handshakes. The young rioter didn’t get a chance to say a word. The CEO pays the bill and leaves a sizeable tip.

  

9 The Revolution will not be televised (Gil Scott-Heron)

          Any large scale social conflict – violent or not, organized or not – is a particular means of communication between two masses of individuals which have no or little means to discuss.

If this communication becomes an incomprehensible monologue (in this case, self-destructive and rather nihilistic), it is only the result of chronic deafness. For over 20 years, the French politicians have ignored the banlieues’ social problems and revelled in ineffective publicity campaigns, which’s only purpose is to legitimize, maintain or renew their rule in office. The system’s forgotten are an invisible mass, whose representation is only shown through the media, and remains stereotypical: they are the threat from within, the repressed barbarism within the civilization.

Barbarian: in ancient greek, the word barbarian was employed to qualify peoples of whom the language was not understood, or seemed inarticulate.

           Not one politician has taken the time to talk to the rioters, except only to insult them (“racailles”, meaning “thugs”). What can you reply to a question you don’t understand? The simulation of a dialogue brought forth by the media was only intended to the “honest French people” – the insults themselves were nothing but a conniving wink addressed to this reasonable population. The political language of the “hommes d’Etat” (statesmen) doesn’t seem to be addressed to these “invisible barbarians”, who can only be submissive to or subdued by the social scene – never brought in the so-called dialogue.

 

“Zero Tolerance” pounded Nicolas Sarkozy, Rudolph Giulani’s French disciple. The words and the method are American.  Isn’t civilization universal?

           The rioters did not have any political message, not even slogans. They only spoke through the permitted set-up of the media of our glorious “society of information” – a unilateral system of communication, which truly started despising life so much when it began representing it through its daily talk-shows.

 

4 hours of television a day: you can be sure people don’t talk to each other anymore.

           The only possible converzation is a televisual monologue to which it is impossible to respond – try talking to your TV!? – unless through the saddening spectacle of self-destruction in front of the cameras. The media, by reproducing their perpetual role of social control, have therefore determined for the rioters to communicate their despair through the very means which condemns them in front of the “honest French people”: spectacular violence (we went from the individual news brief to the mass news brief).

          As of that, they confiscated a voice which never had the chance of being heard:

-     by focusing on destruction (inadmissible)

-   by relaying a stereotypical image of the “youth from the banlieues” (a“racaille”, a “barbarian”)

-     by focusing on the instant news, without allowing a long-term debate.

-   by forbidding any kind of exhaustive reflection, which would require giving all the needed time for talk, a “temps de parole” (talking time) which would not be dictated by the imperatives of TV news.

 

Today, peace reigns in the banlieues. Nothing ever happened. There’s nothing to talk about anymore on the 8 o’clock news.

           The message is simple, sadly a sign of the times: move along, nothing to see – or rather, do not move along, and watch your television.

 

 10 From “Poor Righteous Teachers” to “Cash Money Millionaires”…

           Following the riots, and in need to find a scapegoat for the violence that occurred, 200 French deputies have decided to take it up against a few rap artists, trying to mute their voices through “exemplary” prison time and fines. The front page of the daily Parisian newspaper, Le Parisien read today, on November 29th, “Should we be afraid of rap?” (this reminds us of other recent headlines, “should we be afraid of the bird flu?”) Hip hop seems to have become a disease that we need to get vaccinated against, protect our children from, shelter our sensible and orderly minds from these mindless spirits, who only try to propagate violence, disrespect and hate for the French, or even worse, France.

France has always been a big producer of hip-hop, for some time second in the international market after the US. There may be many reasons to this: that hip-hop is story-telling, an open window from one of those gigantic public housing towers into the rhythmic world of urban life; a way to value yourself as an individual through your rhyming, deejaying, dancing, or graffiti-making skills in a society which undermines in many ways any creativity which does not follow certain formatted structures; an escape from daily struggles through fantasized lifestyles; a voice to express social issues and conditions, anguish, rage, or condemn police brutality and harassment (Grandmaster Flash’s The Message has not aged a day); or simply a voice to express love and brotherhood, passion and reason.

Yes, hip-hop has many functions as a social regulator. But the face of “hip-hop” has changed. As certain producers have realized the amount of money that can be made from this expanding music market (didn’t this already happen with jazz, soul, etc?), a few rappers have been able to “Get rich or die trying”, making money the focus for many aspiring artists as a means to rise up from “Pure Poverty.” Money being such a better-understood means of communication by the media mass, the corporations, the commercial world, it has become the centre piece for most of the “hip-hop” invading our airwaves today. In 1993, Poor Righteous Teachers were dropping some “conscious style” on BET. Ten years later, the “Lil’s” had invaded Rap City (Lil Wayne, Lil’ Zane, Lil’Jon, etc.) and the new kings of rap were the Cash Money Millionaires. French hip-hop has also undergone the same kind of “pressure” to change, to become part of the commercial language, to become translated into euro/dollar bills. Yes, hip-hop is a money-making business here too, but not as exacerbated as in the US (where wealth can become quickly obscene). Some rappers understand that to become rich, you must muffle your voice, follow the system, or avoid talking about “sensitive” issues. Unfortunately, that is not the reality of life, and many who are not “taken in“ by the system find revenge through even more provocative lyrics in order to show that they are still alive and “fuck France” if she doesn’t want to hear them. It is enraging when you feel non-existent, abnegated in the eyes of the nation you were born in. Sometimes the only way to be heard is to scream even louder. This desperate scream has hurt sensitive ears, and instead of trying to understand “why the scream?”, it seems a better solution to sow the mouth shut.