NOW VIEWINGReception
HomeJourneyCollectionsStoriesPathsMusic RoomGamesExploreMapDebateNews
Debate & reception

DebateContested

Noise Abatement Act and street-dance lock-offs

One side

Residents' right to peace & lawful order

The other

Cultural space, livelihoods & the entertainment economy

What was argued

A neutral account of the lock-off debate: enforcement of the Noise Abatement Act is defended as residents' right to peace and lawful order, and criticised as a threat to cultural space, livelihoods and the entertainment economy. No verdict.

The records this concerns

Passa PassaStreet dances, noise and community tensionJamaica Noise Abatement Act (1997)Weddy Weddy Wednesdays

Sources

Laws of Jamaica (Noise Abatement Act); Jamaica Gleaner entertainment desk

Debate

The Noise Abatement Act vs the street-dance economy

One side

Street dance as neighbourhood noise/public-order nuisance

The other

Street dance as legitimate inner-city cultural economy and livelihood

Ongoing dispute over Jamaica's Noise Abatement Act (in force since 1997) and its curfews on all-night sound-system events. Residents, police and some officials treat street dances such as Passa Passa (Spanish Town Road/Tivoli Gardens, from 2003), Uptown Mondays and Weddy Weddy as a public-order and noise nuisance; promoters, selectors and dancers argue the crackdown 'cripples' events that are a livelihood and an informal cultural economy. The Jamaica Information Service reported planned stakeholder consultations on amending the Act, and the Jamaica Gleaner covered the industry side (e.g. 'Noise Abatement Act restricts music being turned into money', 2022; 'Dancehall's dancers go hungry', 2013).

Read the argument →

Commentary

The video light: aspiration or exhibitionism?

One side

Aspiration, glamour & visibility for the poor

The other

Exhibitionism & materialism

A neutral account of commentary on the 'video light': some read it as aspiration, glamour and visibility for the poor, while others read it as exhibitionism and materialism. Contested interpretation, no verdict.

Read the argument →

Editorial

Who owns the move? Dancers as uncredited creative labour

One side

Dancers as originators owed credit and pay for moves that drive songs

The other

A system where recording artists and promoters reap the returns

As street-dance videos and DVDs made dancers briefly famous in the 2000s, commentary questioned the economics of the dance-song feedback loop: dancers invented moves (Bogle, Willie Bounce, Dutty Wine, Nuh Linga and others) that fuelled hit records and riddims, yet often went uncredited and unpaid while artists and promoters captured the value. The Jamaica Gleaner's 'Dancehall's dancers go hungry' (28 Apr 2013) documented dancers' complaints that the collapse of street dances under the Noise Abatement crackdown left them without income.

Read the argument →

All debate & reception →