“What? Nobody got shot?”: Representations of Caribana violence
Despite the low actual occurrence of violence at the festival, the threat of possible violence is high on the minds of police planners. Keeping Caribana under control is extremely important to them and they probably start planning for the next parade before the CCC does. Peter Jackson tells us that
“the police begin planning for Caribana as soon as the previous year’s festival has finished… Although the policing of Caribana is negotiated with the Caribbean Cultural Committee, at monthly meetings throughout the year, the police regard certain things as non-negotiable” (Jackson 138).
Should the fact that the CCC supports ‘non-negotiable’ demands by the police be seen as co-operation or coercion? Far from loosening up the police have implemented new forms of control, such as barricades along the parade route in 1993, more than likely in response to the events of the previous year. The Toronto Star reported on its front-page that “Metro police Inspector Ernie Beale said barriers erected along the entire parade route this year was the key to the trouble-free atmosphere. “The barricades are working great and the crowd has been real good” (Zwolinske A1).
That an “unrelated” and unprecedented event did not reoccur was credited to the new security provisions, the barricades, and not to the fact the parade itself is seldom, if ever, out of hand, is at best, shoddy reporting (Gallagher 401-2). It would appear that the ultimate goal of the Toronto police, is the total elimination of all incidents; they want a perfect parade. While their dedication is commendable, it is of course, impossible to expect two million people in various degrees of intoxication to be as well-behaved as church mice. It seems however, that until Caribana meets up to these unrealistic expectations it will probably continue to get slanted commentary like this from the Toronto Star,
“Everyone was happy… includ[ing] the police, who said there was only one minor incident in which a man was arrested for refusing to move out of the path of a parade float. Other than that, police said, the parade was a complete success” (Brown A1).
The fact that the minor incident above was even reported is note-worthy, and that the police would only give their provisional approval to that year’s parade because of it, is almost laughable. This over-reporting contributes to the idea that Caribana is inherently violent. The above quote also suggests that this trouble-free parade in 1998 was the exception to the rule, but the evidence shows that uneventful Caribana’s are the rule. Despite this fact, the Police formula appears to consist of increasing their presence and their security measures until there are absolutely no violations and if there are violations, even minor ones, increase police presence and security measures even more. The overall pattern is clear, the police may wine and gyrate to the music but they aren’t going to take off their bullet-proof vests any time soon (Burman 224).

August 2nd, 2009 at 8:29 am
Pride has never has a homocide where millions of people gather each – just like Caribana – but unlike Pride looking at pure stats, statistically Caribana party-goers are more prone to be violent.
August 4th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
@ Seth. You missed the point. (or proved the point) Completely. We are talking about representations of violence.
The gay pride parade is used as a counter point to highlight how violence is portrayed in the media. It is pointless to compare the two as festivals because they are different kinds of events.
The point is not which festival attracts a more violent crowd, the point is how ‘the story’ of Caribana can not be told without some mention of violence, whether or not any violence even took place.
The question is why does the media work to portray Caribana as inherently violent even when nothing happens?