The value of time

Time. It’s a commodity that we take for granted when it appears to be in abundance yet frantically despair when we realise it’s slipping through our fingers with no redress. And for all its value, once it’s gone, it’s gone. Sadly, many of us only realise this when it is indeed too late and we’re ruing over lost opportunities or experiences that we chose not to embrace.

We reflect on our naivety, how green we once were and often how plain ignorant our younger selves now appear in hindsight. But despite this inevitable regret, many people never really appreciate the value of time. Rather than making good on time lapsed, we soon consign our regret to a place of nonchalance; forsaking the chance to reflect and shape our subsequent approach to how we appraise the commodity of time.

I’m someone who is filled with regret at how I once valued time. In my youth, I arguably placed time on a pedestal to the extent that I wasn’t willing to take risks or explore new opportunities because I felt it might have represented a waste of time; time that I couldn’t get back. I was right. However, there is no reward without risk and rightly or wrongly, every risk we turn down represents a lost experience. I valued time but I didn’t appreciate the nature of how it escapes all of us.

That caution developed into complacency. I thought I was preserving time but I was allowing it to pass while I made little or poor use of it. Furthermore, my mindset had now turned to one where my stance remained due to an inability to act otherwise as a result of circumstance and anxiety.

Steve Harvey spoke of a similar experience of those who fritter their time away in their youth, just to try and play catch up once they’ve realised their mistake. I didn’t exactly waste my time out of overt recklessness. Nonetheless I was reckless in how I considered time and it had exactly the same result.

I lost years to this period of my life and who knows what else. Though this gave me the jolt I needed to view time in the way it should be. I realised I needed to make good on my folly and, almost predator-like, I did just that. If I had an interest in something, I was pursuing it. If an opportunity presented itself, I was seizing it. Good, bad or indifferent, I realised that every experience in life contributed to our being. And in ways we might not imagine or appreciate at the time but might actually serve us in the future. I had been denying myself this with my failure to see the worth of my time.

I’ve maintained said approach and it’s served me and my mental health well as I feel more confident that I’m making good use of a commodity that I can’t get back once it’s gone. Alas, I can’t make good on everything; ‘tis the nature of time. But wherever possible, I’m salvaging from the wreck of my earlier failure.

In doing so, I’ve also learned to value my time as mine. Not in a selfish way of not wanting to share my time and efforts with others but in perceiving my time and the journey I take via the path it represents, to be mine.

Years ago, I bumped into a friend in my old neighbourhood who I’d not seen for a while. We got to talking and it was around the period when I started to realise how my value of time hadn’t exactly been prudent. I was lamenting at what I hadn’t done based on what was ‘expected’ by society; not what I hadn’t done to my own detriment due to what was good for me. My friend responded with a deeply apt rebuttal and said “life’s not a race”. That’s stuck with me since and I pay little regard to what I should have done based on society’s expectations or what others are doing and instead focus on myself and those important to me.

We can’t care about using the lives of others as a gauge for where we should be in our own lives because our allocation of time is ours, not theirs. Although so many people are caught up in doing just that. They don’t see the worth in their time because they measure it against someone else's or society’s. And when they do realise their error, it’s often too late as they’ve used their time to create a life that isn’t necessarily for them and with little or no recourse. People chase the job, house, marital status, children, superficial notions of success and anything else they assume they’re ‘supposed’ to have based on a futile comparison. All the while they’re failing to appreciate their time as their own. Why chase a life that isn’t yours just to later realise you’re out of time to get to your own destination?

Our perception of time goes beyond recognising the worth of our own time but that of others too. So many of us have an inability to understand the finite nature of time, either in a discrete sense within a given period or as life itself. We make demands on others, totally indifferent to the impact it will have on their own time, and fail to see or appreciate this through our own blinkered perception.

How many times have we taken up the time of someone as we see their time as akin to ours? We see their x hours in the same regard as what we have prioritised for the same period. It’s the selfish nature of the human condition that even with a commodity as valuable and finite as time, we find ourselves unable to recognise the value of someone else’s time with their perception rather than our own.

Conversely, we need to learn to share our time. Spending excessively long days at a job to only neglect our partners, friends and families clearly doesn’t signal a true valuation of time. Nevertheless, it’s a common story for many as society has realigned our priorities to prevent us from recognising where our priorities should lie. We need to need to find the sensibility and balance to see our time for ourselves while apportioning it accordingly for others around us. This requires an altruistic approach that seems sparse when considered in tandem with the notion of our time.

Like good health, we appraise time with nonchalance when it is plentiful and desperately when it becomes scarce or reflects regret of past actions or lack of. Yet both commodities are rarely given the status we give wealth and material and tangible possessions that can come and go - with the proviso that we have the time and health to afford us the chance to do so. Clearly we need to reappraise the commodities in life that we should view as valuable with more esteem than those that we can always make good on should we mess up. Unfortunately, time isn’t so forgiving and once it’s gone, it’s gone.

Channel 5’s Gangland wasn’t about uncovering gang culture, it merely perpetuated ignorant and negative stereotypes of black youths and the black diaspora

As part of a two-part documentary, Channel 5 recently aired the first episode of Gangland (at the time of writing, the second episode is yet to be aired). Gangland was advertised by Channel 5 in fairly broad terms as essentially an exposé into London’s gang culture. In fact, here’s exactly what Channel 5 said on its website:

Gangland is an original two-part documentary that gains unprecedented access to London’s most notorious young gangs, as they document what life is really like as part of a contemporary gang.

Like many people who decided to tune into Gangland, I expected balanced journalism that would explore the factors that led some youths to gang culture, the failures of society and the individuals in gangs that prefigured their involvement of said life and cautionary tales of those that have since renounced being in a gang through their own expectedly dire experiences or indeed lucky escapes.

Given it was set in London, I also expected the programme to cover gangs of all ethnicities in reflecting London’s ethnic diversity. All of this I thought would be presented against a backdrop of life in a gang that would reflect Channel 5’s social responsibility as a mainstream broadcaster, but also with an approach that showed the seriousness of gang culture in the city.

Alas, perhaps I asked for too much as all Channel 5 delivered with this show was an epic failure that perpetuated ignorant and negative stereotypes of black youths. That’s right, only black youths. Aside from the white girlfriend of one of the protagonists (who felt he was going to beat a case due to no evidence - yet Channel 5 have hours of footage of him incriminating himself), every person interviewed was black.

Gangland’s producer, Paul Blake, spoke of his motivation in making the documentary in the Guardian. The Guardian wrote ‘Blake spent over a decade trying to get a documentary made which would give voice to the thoughts and motivations of gang members’. Blake added “this documentary was born from the fact that I am a black man, born in this country, and I was just pissed off that no one cared about these young black kids who are dying”.

Perhaps that was his motivation and maybe even what he presented to Channel 5 before they requested he amend it to what we saw on our screens. Unfortunately, it isn’t what was achieved with Gangland.

For anyone aware of gang culture, the majority of what was aired on Gangland would not have tallied up with that perception. As a friend said to me, it was like watching a parody for the most part. If you’re in a ‘notorious’ gang and willing to come on a terrestrial channel, barely, if at all, disguising your appearance, and never disguising your voice while talking unimaginably recklessly in incriminating yourself and your peers, you really aren’t about that life. And if you really are in that lifestyle yet still talking like that, then as DJ Khaled would say, “you played yourself” and everyone else around you.

The black youths (because just to remind you, Channel 5 either couldn’t find any non-black gangs or gang members because they seemingly don’t exist in London) who were willing to brandish guns while talking about what they were willing to do, started off as uber cringeworthy. It was akin to many of the American rappers we’ve seen in the UK doing their very best to convince us they’re “from the hood” or a bad caricature of World Star Hip Hop. Attack the Block (and I don’t say that with any kudos for that film either) had more credibility than their utterances and I couldn’t take them seriously. But I quickly went from cringing to being flabbergasted at what I was watching.

One alleged gang member, safe in the knowledge that Channel 5 would never betray his location or any other personal information by which he could be located and identified, spoke about how he’d save a bullet for the police. All the while, they brazenly exposed operations as they spoke more and more with zero caution for themselves and anyone connected to them. Section Boyz might have said ‘trapping ain’t dead’ but those that appeared on Gangland appeared to be trying to bring it to death’s door via Channel 5 along with lengthy prison sentences supported by copious amounts of evidence. The lifestyle they purported clearly isn’t one to be glamourised but their incautiousness beggars belief.

The documentary portrayed the black community as idiots and individuals for whom the price of life is cheap. The reason I don’t caveat that as ‘black gang members’ rather than the black community is because if you aren’t acquainted with black people and perhaps live in a largely ethnically homogenous part of the UK, you might think all black people were like the image shown on the documentary as every person on the show was black.

It’s not as if the mainstream media don’t already drive a racist narrative to the extent that the black diaspora is still faced with prejudice based on such portrayals that we spend our lives refuting. Just look at the media’s annual reporting on the Notting Hill Carnival in contrast to the class A drug-fests that are many festivals yet the latter rarely gets bad press. I commented to a friend that I hoped my in-laws weren’t watching Gangland as they might think whenever I said I was cooking hard food for dinner I might have actually meant drugs rather than breadfruit and green banana.

Gangland left me angry and confused at those who agreed to be on the show but also at Channel 5. I don’t expect Channel 5 to do any favours for the black diaspora but I do expect a broadcaster to show some social responsibility and they have failed in achieving that with Gangland. The documentary wouldn’t actually be amiss on Fox News in a UK special presented by the vile Katie Hopkins.

Of the participants of the show, they were young and presumably eager for a platform to portray themselves in a way that they felt was credible. That in itself is incredibly sad that they’ve mistaken a life of violence and reckless talk as something to pursue and perhaps had no mentors, elders or voices of reason and experience in their lives to show them otherwise and more so so advise that featuring on this documentary was a terrible idea. Any ‘serious’ members in a gang, past or present, would have promptly advised them of that. Nonetheless, I should add that I’m not excusing those that appeared on the show.

The only credible individual of the documentary was Quincy, a former gang member who sought to be a cautionary tale for the life he once lived. Yet even the final edit of the programme seemingly tried to suppress that message. Furthermore, the ignorance that filled the remainder of the broadcast was what Channel 5 deemed more appropriate to air.

Gangland was an opportunity to raise awareness of real problems in London on a platform of balanced, investigative and analytical journalism that explored causes, motivations and solutions. Instead it became a showcase for 60 minutes that lacked credibility and furthered the media’s often racist narrative of negative stereotypes of black people.