On Tuesday night I went to a Ugandan children choir's (Watoto) concert at Holy Trinity on South Street. I'm not very used to such overt Christian expression in St Andrews or anywhere else in Europe (except for maybe Poland, which is sometimes called the last Christian country in Europe), and I had also never seen Holy Trinity's sanctuary full with so many students. I thought there would be a descent-sized crowd, but I did not think I'd have trouble finding a seat. My flatmate and I eventually found a small space on a pew where we could squeeze together. I'm not sure why so many people were there or how they heard about it (I heard about it randomly at church Sunday), but maybe they knew about it because the St Andrews Charity Fashion Show chose to give a handsome donation to Watoto. Maybe they advertised the event?
The 90 minute concert was full of constant energy and happiness since the children thoroughly enjoyed singing. Still, I couldn't help but think about class. Over this past year, we have talked about how the international community shapes children identities in post-conflict societies. For instance, the international community (ie- through UN programs) sometimes sets up "18" as the age distinguishing adults from children. Why? Because that's the age of majority in many Western nations. However, different cultures have different ways of determining a child and adult. Sometimes it's based upon physical appearance and not how many years someone lives, so the Taliban can claim not to employ "child" soldiers because all their male soldiers can grow some kind of facial hair. The age distinction can cause problems when a 17-year old "child soldier" isn't eligible for certain peacebuilding programs that train his fellow soldiers who are 19-year old for professional jobs; instead, the 17-year old is sent into an education or family reunification program. Moreover, sometimes "adults" would rather go through an education program designed for "children" if given the option, but the international community sometimes says these programs are for children only. Many peacebuilding programs also strip children of their voices (or agency) because there is a perception that children aren't old enough to really understand what is going on and need adult supervision. Therefore, organizations and adults make decisions for children without really considering what the children want or need. This perception has caused international donors to give money to adult ex-combatants but not former child soldiers; the children aren't old enough or smart enough to understand the money isn't to reward them for fighting but to help them reintegrate into society. Finally, the West has an idealized perception of what "childhood" means, but this perception is not always a reality, even in the West.
I have a problem distinguishing between child victims (or perpetrators) of war and their adult counterparts because this discourse makes the children more tragic than the adults. Why is a rebel army recruiting 12 or 15 year olds at gunpoint and forcing them to commit atrocities more tragic than a 19 year old who goes through the same process? Because the 19 year old has been alive a little longer? It's all tragic, and it all deserves attention. However, there is a perception that adult men deserve less attention because they're barbaric savages while the women and children deserve more aid because they're helpless victims (this helpless victims rhetoric also excuses the international community from including them in discussions about what to do with aid because the women and children are just as incapable of protecting themselves as making decisions for themselves).
The Watoto concert seemed to play heavily on these Western perceptions of what "childhood" should be. On song asked, "Who will sing my lullaby?" During this song, another line asked, "Will you?" At this point, photos of white volunteers holding African babies appeared on the screen behind the choir; I found this image disturbing because I'm not too keen on Western volunteers spending tons of money to go to Africa to do something the Africans can do themselves, especially when the travel is so expensive and could be spent more efficiently (ie- pay Africans to do the work the volunteers would do). Also, who is going to sing lullabies to the war's adult victims? Didn't Christ die for everyone, not just the ones we feel sorry for? Yet will we ignore the adults because we're not comfortable with what they did: they aren't innocent enough? That's not following Christ's example. He went straight to the ones who would deny Him and crucify Him because it's the sick who need a doctor. A skit played on the idea that a childhood should be carefree and a state of not being quite yet but in the process of becoming (as opposed to a perception that children are full members in society and can make decisions for themselves). There were lyrics and videos that showed how the children couldn't go to school before Watoto, and now they can become doctors, lawyers, and teachers because of Watoto (as opposed to having the option to train for jobs available in the economy).
I can excuse most of this imagery that plays upon Western sentiments because Watoto is trying to raise funds to support their mission, but I do see this as a Western narrative. However, there was one part that shocked me. At the end of the concert, there was a video of the missionary couple who founded Watoto, Gary and Marilyn. In order to explain why the international community should worry about Ugandan children, Marilyn warned "they're going to turn into little terrorists" if someone doesn't do something about their situation. As Christians, we shouldn't get involved because the children might grow up to kill us. Instead, we should help even those who threaten us. Also, the children choir was directly in front of the screen as the woman accused them of having terrorist potential. I find the statement very insensitive and inappropriate.
So these previous paragraphs describe what I was thinking when I watched the children choir. Others I talked to mentioned how they loved seeing so much joy in the children and felt hope for their future. If I hadn't been through the Peace and Conflict Studies classes, I probably would have thought the same thing. I remembered Acts 26:24 when Festus accused Paul of going crazy because the missionary learned too much (hence, the title of this blog post, which is from the Wycliff New Testament translation because I liked this phrasing). Paul retorted that he wasn't crazy but was saying what is true and reasonable. I'm not sure how much of what I just said is true and reasonable, and I do not mean to say that donors shouldn't support Watoto. I just wanted to look at the presentation of children in a different light. I'm sure this organization has done much good, and Christians should support missions like this one. I do think, however, that Christians should ask and consider what the locals (in this case, children) want and need and not just assume or make decisions for them. Of course, this is not to say that Watoto does, but we should be aware that the discourse on children can overplay Western sentiments so that donors have to be careful not to make too many assumptions about children in post-conflict situations.
I've included a video from the concert, but here's a link for a video when Chris Tomlin sang with Watoto children choir.
No comments:
Post a Comment