Few days ago a rather new magazine Urban Culture published a list of the most influential people in Bulawayo. The list was met with mixed feelings with an underground movement feeling it was utter rubbish (as always in Bulawayo). A few vocal souls such as @kudzani_ndlovu on twitter said it loud and clear RUBBISH. Such vocal independence also prompted some backdoor utterances, mainly orchestrated by those on the list, challenging such views and even saying make your own list. I guess at this point you are now questioning my position, well i think it was a cool idea, cool list and all, yes that is my position.
By Munyaradzi Gova
I support the list because it was crafted by a young person or maybe persons from Bulawayo. The ability to take up such a responsibility is admirable let alone the way it was crafted which I will address as we go. The major argument was “if the list is influential or not”, my thoughts are, without giving much attention to the individuals on the list, the list itself is very influential. I say this because it has surely spanned a long debate in the city. This list tops the agenda of many caucus meetings which happen in this city, especially in the arts circles. I wonder if the business community bothered itself with the list anyway.
Now looking at the formulation of the list, this is where my issue with the list lies. What criteria did they use? This list made me check my knowledge of these two words, influential and popularity. According to my dictionary I learned that influence is domination, statute and having an effect on something while popularity is commerciality, marketability and regard. Well! Im not pretty sure if all the individuals on the list would fit into an influence cluster or rather underflow into a popularity cluster. I am also worried if the author was aware of the correct meaning of INFLUENCE.
If we look at the basis used, it is unknown. I say this because it is not published, I know some would be quick to say it was the individual’s opinion. I understand it being their opinion but now they dished it to a public audience and I feel we should be allowed to question. The basis for questioning means people are not satisfied with the list and would rather come up with a standard. A criteria that should be clear. Clearly the squabbles around the list are people trying to protect it from persons who actually have nothing to show besides being self proclaimed individuals who roam from point A to Point B in search of attention and popularity. We need to know if these people are being gauged by their regard in terms of business, arts, socialites or just loud mouths. I heard some rather ignorant rants about doing your own list if you don’t like this one, this is worrying to hear, are we now in the “listing” business. I think we should not allow every Tom and Jerry to just do their lists and we respond with a list if we are not happy, thats retrograde thinking. I feel That we should be allowed to question and correct.
The reaction to the list has shown that we do not have a naive audience and maybe the author needs to sit down, come up with a criteria and give us a properly researched work not the half baked cake they served us. In conclusion, the rebuking of the list was not because people want to make their own list, but because they want a proper list that may qualify as influential.
*Munyaradzi Gova, Radio Producer/Presenter and can be reached on Twitter: @ndiMunyahWacho, Gmail: munyahg@gmail.com*
