It is kind of a system shock going from THE BELL JAR to this book. One of the big themes in Plath's book was gender roles, feminism and all that stuff. It was a women's book about women's problems. After all of that sensitivity crap, it was good to get back to some good old fashioned male-centric literature. Imagine my surprise when I found out not only was the main character a championship wrestler but had three wives and an entire barn full of yams. While Esther is sitting around moping about why she can't write any poetry, Okonkwo is out doing things, things like killing people and taking their heads, and beating his children, and digging holes for yams, which I guess, maybe aren't the best ways to spend your time, but at least he is DOING something, which is more than Esther can say. Sure, detractors can say that Okonkwo's over powering masculinity is just a cover up for his scared inner child who is ashamed of his dead beat dad. And you know what, they're probably right. But isn't there some nobility in burying all those feelings deep down inside of you instead of sitting around whining all day? Isn't that part of Hemingway's Hero, keeping your troubles from troubling other people? I admit that Okonkwo is a jerk, but he is a successful jerk, a respected jerk, and he really, really isn't that bad deep down inside. He's just a scared little kid looking for some reassurance and a little fatherly guidance. And you have to sympathize with him. The cover says this is like a Greek tragedy, so we know that Okonkwo is pretty much screwed from the get go.
***WARNING!!! THIS BLOG POST HAS LITTLE IN THE WAY OF ORGANIZATION, LET ALONE COHERANCE. PROCEED AT YOUR OWN RISK. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED***
I mentioned Greek TRAGEDY in my last blog. From what I've heard, tragedy is a very complex form of art. Aristotle, the most prolific Greek philospher, devoted an entire book to the dissection of the mechanisms of tragedy. It is from his POETICS that we get the ideas of harmatia (tragic flaw), catharsis, perpetia etc. I think we all know about tragic flaws because even though there are like, maybe five blog posts up now, so far they all mention Okonkwo's flaw: his fear of appearing weak. The question is though, what's the point? Why does a tragic hero need a tragic flaw? This gets us to the next word on the list that probably isn't as familiar. It’s CATHARSIS which means something like purification. The whole point of tragedy (or at least what I've heard) is to achieve catharsis for the audience, to purify the audience. Aristotle's idea (again from his POETICS) is that a tragedy should take real life events (mimesis), except on a grander, more noble scale, then slowly and cleverly set in motion their downfall, pulling the audience along emotionally, creating fear and pity inside of them. The pity and fear part is important. It is through this creation of pity and fear in a mimesis that purifies (catharsis) the audience. Or at least that's the way I understand it. I might very easily be wrong (but it makes sense for what I'm going to say next so I'm just going to let it be).
There were two parts that made me think of this catharsis thing. The first is the part immediately after Okonkwo has beaten his wife during the Weak of Peace. Even though he complies with the reparations demanded by Ani’s priest, the villagers snicker at what they see as a lack of true repentence. The interesting thing here, is the irony that is created. The fact is that Okonkwo is indeed repetenent. It is his hamartia (fear of appearing weak) that he keeps him from publicly showing his regret (31). These simultaneous insights, that Oknonkwo is repentant and believes that he has made his peace and the villager’s thinking that he is insincere, makes you sympathize with Okonkwo, or to use a better word PITY him. You as a reader can see the whole picture and you can begin to see his downfall in his hamartia. You also simultaneously get more insight into his NOBILITY: he is inwardly pious and sincere. This makes him more sympathetic than the strong man that the narrator normally presents him as and because you can relate to him more, you start to FEAR for him when you his neighbor’s whispherings because you realize that he is indeed vulnerable.
However, that takes place in like the second or third chapter. There is still a lot of book left to go. This is sort of a mini-catharsis, or sample catharsis. It just serves to build up the tension (the fear and pity) so that it can be released in the climax. As the book continues on these incidents should become more intense, and more painful for the reader. Take for example Ikemefuna murder. The narrator has slowly dropped hints about Okonkwo’s affections for the boy. This humanizes Oknonkwo, but it also causes tension because we know that Ikemefuna is desperate for Okonkwo’s affection but is unsure if it exists. Therefore, Okonkwo killing his beloved surrogate son causes catharsis, because it just seems like it sucks so much. I don’t know what else to say except that it sure caused me to a lot of pity. He seems so pathetic, trapped into all of this pain by his fear of being weak. The only thing that I don’t get theough is the purification part of catharsis. His pain doesn’t make me feel clean or pure. It makes me feel crappy. I guess I’ll just have to wait to the end of the book to get the full affect though.
While reading these chapters, I found myself constantly wondering "What's the point?" The more I thought about it, the more I realized that this question has been hanging on the periphery of my consciousness during the entire book. The first few chapters had proto-plot elements, but in these chapters, with the bride price, the demon child and the trial, it seems like the plot has just fizzled out. Now a new question entered my mind. Why even right this book in the first place. So turning to the back cover and the author bio (he was born in Nigeria and teaches in the United States) and considering the year of publication (1959), I have a (sort of shaky) theory. I think Achebe's main purpose in writing this novel is to provide the Western world with an authentic, humanistic view of African society. The 1950's were the first truly media dominated decade, and the media of the time promulgated existing stereotypes. My guess is that Achebe was taken aback by the media's depiction of savagery in his homeland. That is why this book has chapters like eight, nine and ten. They don't move the plot along, but they educate the reader about African tribal life. The method of deciding the bride price was extremely civilized. The trial was very similar to Western jury trials. In this new context then, what does the story of Okonkwo mean? I'm not sure. I am hesitant to say that he is an African every-man because he is an oddity in his own tribe. I would like to say that he is a representation of the flaws inherent in African society, but that just seems shortsighted. I think I'm going to have to reserve judgment on this character until I finish the book.
I had always assumed that the events the book describes took place in the 1600s, but now I think that circa 1885 is a more likely time frame, mostly because of the subtle allusions to white men and the wide spread proliferation of guns. It’s not a hard mistake to make considering how little changed in that region in three centuries, but still, the later date, the advent of European colonialism, changes the dynamic of the book. In fact, “change” is the key word here. It’s not hyperbole to say that European colonialism effected the most far reaching cultural revolution in African history. I think then that Okonkwo’s fall might be a metaphor for the fall of old Africa, but considering that I haven’t finished the book, I’ll have to save those thoughts for later. Instead, I’m going to focus on more elements of tradition in the book and how they are beginning to appear inadequate to the characters. The end of Ch. 13 is a meditation by Obierika that encapsulates a lot of these senseless traditions. He questions Okonkwo’s banishment and infanticide. Both of which seem senseless wastes to him. Now, I was skimming over some of the other blog posts and I noticed Diana’s start to this section. “I love the fact that some of the people are finally starting to ponder their traditions rather than blindly following them.” For some reason, this comment just seemed weird to me, but I couldn’t figure out why. So I thought and I thought, and I’ve got a little theory. In our modern American age, it seems to me that the virtues of change and progress are hardwired into our collective consciousness. We also grew up in an age of political correctness and inclusively. People’s personal rights and freedoms are viciously protected and upheld. From a young age, we are taught that conforming is bad, that originality should be treasured. What I’m challenging is our assumption that the Umuofia need to change. “Need” isn’t the right word. “Should” or “inevitably will” are better. Think back to the book’s epigraph, a quote from W. B. Yeats “Second Coming.” It says the reason things fall apart is that they lose their center. I think that the center refers to a communities tradition. When you think about this in the historical context, it makes sense. A lot of these African tribes were better off before the Europeans showed up. They weren’t as modern, and they didn’t have European ideas like monogamy, but they had virtue and justice. Women didn’t have as many rights, but women were taken care of. They had a defined role. Everybody and everything had a defined role. But with the advent of colonialism, the entire social order is thrown into disarray, and possibly worse than colonialism is post-colonialism. As African governments tried to create nations, there was a strong movement back towards tradition. Africa today is a humanitarian nightmare. The interesting thing though, and again, the book has to be looked at in a historical time frame, is that the book doesn’t seem (yet anyway) to take a side between tradition and change. It just presents this struggle. If anything, Okonkwo’s skewed view of masculinity can be seen as a metaphor for tradionalist Africa’s concept of a modern Africa. I’m sorry that I didn’t really elaborate on these ideas or even present them logically. I’ve just got too many ideas.
I'm not really sure what to make of these chapters so I'm just going to throw out ideas and hope that connections become apparent. The way I see it, two important elements are introduced in these chapters: the contrast between motherland and fatherland and the coming of the missionaries. When I think of Mbama, or whatever the motherland was called, I think of the rain, not necessarily vegetation and life, but definitely rain. In Alex's blog, she makes the connection between Okonkwo's emotions, especially his sorrow, and the rain. Obviously, this rain is supposed to be a female image. This contrasts with the dry earth of the fatherland. Then there is the earth goddess, Ani. Yams are male produce. Just throwing those things out there. Also, Okonkwo has lost his drive, one of the most important elements of manliness to him. He even admits that he is acting like a woman. Just wondering, is Okonkwo's idea of masculinity the same as everyone else in his tribe's? It must be because they all joke together about effeminate men. Okonkwo also takes on a child role with Uchenda, who is like a mother-father because he is so old he has lost most of qualities Okonkwo associates with masculinity: being able to work, fight, and order women around. He also gives Okonkwo seed yams, something his own father couldn't do. Uchenda calls Okonkwo son. Didn't Okonkwo's mom die when he was young? Yeah, so maybe his trip to the motherland allows him to grow up again with a male and female balance. Also, why his regrowing up thing is going on, Nwoye is also growing up. He leaves home and carves out his own identity. I kind of see a cycle here. Unoka pissed off Okonkwo so much that Okonkwo made his entire identity the antithesis of his father's. Okonkwo killing Ikemefura pissed off Nwoye so much he has dedicated his life to becoming the opposite of his dad in order to piss him off. Which reminds me of something interesting. The relationship between Jesus and God that the missionaries talk about, I wonder if there is anything there. I don’t know. I’ll have to see how this pans out.
Now on to the missionaries.
There is a pretty definite parallel drawn between the missionaries and the locusts. The only thing though, is that everyone liked the locusts coming and they tasted good. Also, didn’t the locusts immediately precede Ikemefura’s murder? I wonder if Okonkwo will kill Nwoye. I was also surprised how the book portrays the missionaries with pleasant imagery, like rain and soothing. That’s all I’ve got for the missionaries. I really just want to see where this book is going.
Huh. Where did all the women go? I don't know if it's my imagination, but it seems like as soon as Okonkwo and family get back to Umuofia (I've given up trying to spell the Igbo words correctly) all of the female characters disappear. No, disappear isn't the right word. It is more like they have been silenced. As a side note, I've finished the book now, so my analysis will spill over into the coming chapters. Anyway, all of the female characters have fallen into the background. While in previous chapters they contributed to the dialogue, now the novel merely narrates their speech. And for that matter, I could only find one instance in the novel after the return to Umuofia that a woman is even mentioned as speaking and that is when Enzima asks Obeirka what the men are going to do to save her dad. There is significance in this silence, boy is there a lot of significance.
A major, major theme in novel is language. Remember all the proverbs, and emphasis on oration, and the frustration with language barriers? What Achebe is on to is the awesome power of language. There was an idea popular in the 1950s called Structuralism. Its basic tenet is that our perception of reality is largely based on the language (i.e. the grammar, vocabulary, syntax) that we use to describe it. One aspect of structural analysis is the identification of binary opposites, such as good and bad, man and woman, west and east. According to structuralism, one of these opposites is given a superior role and one an inferior. One is considered positive and the other is the negative, positive and negative not being used in the "good" and "bad" sense, but more in the logical sense (i.e. positive being the presence of something and negative being the absence). I think the idea, when applied to colonialism deals with how forcing the language of the conqueror onto the conquered molds their perception of reality. So the English, who believe that they are the center of the world, that they the “subject” force their language (and their culture etc.) onto the Igbo The English remain the “subject” and the Igbo become the object. The Igbo become the OTHER (which I think is a Hegelian concept).* Their identity is now defined out of contrast to the British. In the British language, they are savages, uncivilized, that is what they become. Sort of. I’m kind of not getting these ideas out the way I want, but moving on. Historically, women have occupied this Other role for men, who dominated society. This all ties in with the big contrast between male and female in the book. When the British come, the Igbo become the female. So, having lost their culture and lost their language, they have no identity. They lose their roots. I think if this book was written for two purposes. ONE to give the Ibo descendents in Nigeria a language, a past, and an identity that is not defined by colonialism, and TWO to destroy the concept of Africa as Other in the Western mind. This blog was just to get some preliminary thoughts down. I’ll try to pull it all together for my final blog entry.
*Rereading my blog, I don’t think I explained this idea well enough. The main purpose of identifying an Other is to develop your own self-consciousness. Think about it this way, if the entire world was red, would you have any concept of what the color red actually is? No, you need another color, any color, to provide contrast. This is the only way to comprehend red. Now take the same example, but instead of red, think of yourself. To recognize your own consciousness, you have to realize the consciousness of another, someone different than you. That is what the Other refers to.
I'll begin this blog where the other one left off.
I think the most important question when trying to understand this novel is what audience the book was intended for, African or Western. If he wrote the book for a Nigerian audience, I believe that the book was meant to give the descendents of the Igbo a new language rooted in their old cultural identity. This is because of the ideas mentioned in the previous blog, that by having to use English, the Igbo are forced into the Other role. Realizing that return to their original language was impractical, Achebe Africanized English. The story also gave them a background and an identity that was not built in reference to the British. More than anything else, I see the book as an effort to return to the "center" (thus the reference to the center in the books epigraph) that was lost when the Igbo's identity collapsed under colonial rule.
Now, if the book was written for Western audiences, I believe that it is still intended to have the same effect: the restructuring of cultural/linguistic paradigms. Basically, it was supposed to be a wake up slap to the Western world, saying that the colonized people were people with a culture and a heritage and not just silence. By the way, I just remembered that besides the "Dark Continent" Africa was previously known as the "Silent Continent."
Now, within this framework, who is Okonkwo? I think I can finally understand. Looking back at my blogs, I had many different theories while reading the book. I thought he might be an African everyman, a symbol of tradition, an example of what caused Africa's downfall and many other thigns. Now I can see that while close, none of those quite hit the nail on the head. The way I see it, Nwoye is supposed to be a stand in for colonial Nigeria, evidenced by how quickly he adopted colonialism. He is the "modern" Nigeria that completely turned its back on its old traditions "Okonkwo." Achebe wrote the book then to Nwoye ( the people of Nigeria) to help them come to terms with their dad (their heritage). It is an important part of identity formation to atone with your father. It involves the transition from seeing your father as a god to realizing that he is human and has faults. However, you still need to identify with him on some scale in order to mature. This book was written to allow the people of Nigeria to come to terms with their heritage, the good and the bad elements, good elements such as the rich culture and strong independence as well as the bad such as polygamy, domestic abuse, a pagan religion, and lack of modern technology, all of which are present in Okonkwo. This is why Okonkwo is such a complicated character, why you simultaneously loathe him and sympathize with him. It is why the last images of the book are of him hanging and his identity being simplified into a paragraph in the one minister’s book. Okonkwo was dead in modern Africa, and its up to Nwoye to become a man now and bringing some of Okonkwo with him.
Didn't the passage of background information say that Antigone was a victim of Creon's hubris? Some of you are suggesting that Antigone is the tragic hero. Thoughts on that.
9 comments:
THINGS FALL APART
CH. 1-4
It is kind of a system shock going from THE BELL JAR to this book. One of the big themes in Plath's book was gender roles, feminism and all that stuff. It was a women's book about women's problems. After all of that sensitivity crap, it was good to get back to some good old fashioned male-centric literature. Imagine my surprise when I found out not only was the main character a championship wrestler but had three wives and an entire barn full of yams. While Esther is sitting around moping about why she can't write any poetry, Okonkwo is out doing things, things like killing people and taking their heads, and beating his children, and digging holes for yams, which I guess, maybe aren't the best ways to spend your time, but at least he is DOING something, which is more than Esther can say. Sure, detractors can say that Okonkwo's over powering masculinity is just a cover up for his scared inner child who is ashamed of his dead beat dad. And you know what, they're probably right. But isn't there some nobility in burying all those feelings deep down inside of you instead of sitting around whining all day? Isn't that part of Hemingway's Hero, keeping your troubles from troubling other people? I admit that Okonkwo is a jerk, but he is a successful jerk, a respected jerk, and he really, really isn't that bad deep down inside. He's just a scared little kid looking for some reassurance and a little fatherly guidance. And you have to sympathize with him. The cover says this is like a Greek tragedy, so we know that Okonkwo is pretty much screwed from the get go.
THINGS FALL APART
CH. 5-7
***WARNING!!! THIS BLOG POST HAS LITTLE IN THE WAY OF ORGANIZATION, LET ALONE COHERANCE. PROCEED AT YOUR OWN RISK. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED***
I mentioned Greek TRAGEDY in my last blog. From what I've heard, tragedy is a very complex form of art. Aristotle, the most prolific Greek philospher, devoted an entire book to the dissection of the mechanisms of tragedy. It is from his POETICS that we get the ideas of harmatia (tragic flaw), catharsis, perpetia etc. I think we all know about tragic flaws because even though there are like, maybe five blog posts up now, so far they all mention Okonkwo's flaw: his fear of appearing weak. The question is though, what's the point? Why does a tragic hero need a tragic flaw? This gets us to the next word on the list that probably isn't as familiar. It’s CATHARSIS which means something like purification. The whole point of tragedy (or at least what I've heard) is to achieve catharsis for the audience, to purify the audience. Aristotle's idea (again from his POETICS) is that a tragedy should take real life events (mimesis), except on a grander, more noble scale, then slowly and cleverly set in motion their downfall, pulling the audience along emotionally, creating fear and pity inside of them. The pity and fear part is important. It is through this creation of pity and fear in a mimesis that purifies (catharsis) the audience. Or at least that's the way I understand it. I might very easily be wrong (but it makes sense for what I'm going to say next so I'm just going to let it be).
There were two parts that made me think of this catharsis thing. The first is the part immediately after Okonkwo has beaten his wife during the Weak of Peace. Even though he complies with the reparations demanded by Ani’s priest, the villagers snicker at what they see as a lack of true repentence. The interesting thing here, is the irony that is created. The fact is that Okonkwo is indeed repetenent. It is his hamartia (fear of appearing weak) that he keeps him from publicly showing his regret (31). These simultaneous insights, that Oknonkwo is repentant and believes that he has made his peace and the villager’s thinking that he is insincere, makes you sympathize with Okonkwo, or to use a better word PITY him. You as a reader can see the whole picture and you can begin to see his downfall in his hamartia. You also simultaneously get more insight into his NOBILITY: he is inwardly pious and sincere. This makes him more sympathetic than the strong man that the narrator normally presents him as and because you can relate to him more, you start to FEAR for him when you his neighbor’s whispherings because you realize that he is indeed vulnerable.
However, that takes place in like the second or third chapter. There is still a lot of book left to go. This is sort of a mini-catharsis, or sample catharsis. It just serves to build up the tension (the fear and pity) so that it can be released in the climax. As the book continues on these incidents should become more intense, and more painful for the reader. Take for example Ikemefuna murder. The narrator has slowly dropped hints about Okonkwo’s affections for the boy. This humanizes Oknonkwo, but it also causes tension because we know that Ikemefuna is desperate for Okonkwo’s affection but is unsure if it exists. Therefore, Okonkwo killing his beloved surrogate son causes catharsis, because it just seems like it sucks so much. I don’t know what else to say except that it sure caused me to a lot of pity. He seems so pathetic, trapped into all of this pain by his fear of being weak. The only thing that I don’t get theough is the purification part of catharsis. His pain doesn’t make me feel clean or pure. It makes me feel crappy. I guess I’ll just have to wait to the end of the book to get the full affect though.
THINGS FALL APART
CH. 8-10
While reading these chapters, I found myself constantly wondering "What's the point?" The more I thought about it, the more I realized that this question has been hanging on the periphery of my consciousness during the entire book. The first few chapters had proto-plot elements, but in these chapters, with the bride price, the demon child and the trial, it seems like the plot has just fizzled out. Now a new question entered my mind. Why even right this book in the first place. So turning to the back cover and the author bio (he was born in Nigeria and teaches in the United States) and considering the year of publication (1959), I have a (sort of shaky) theory. I think Achebe's main purpose in writing this novel is to provide the Western world with an authentic, humanistic view of African society. The 1950's were the first truly media dominated decade, and the media of the time promulgated existing stereotypes. My guess is that Achebe was taken aback by the media's depiction of savagery in his homeland. That is why this book has chapters like eight, nine and ten. They don't move the plot along, but they educate the reader about African tribal life. The method of deciding the bride price was extremely civilized. The trial was very similar to Western jury trials. In this new context then, what does the story of Okonkwo mean? I'm not sure. I am hesitant to say that he is an African every-man because he is an oddity in his own tribe. I would like to say that he is a representation of the flaws inherent in African society, but that just seems shortsighted. I think I'm going to have to reserve judgment on this character until I finish the book.
THINGS FALL APART
CH. 11-13
I had always assumed that the events the book describes took place in the 1600s, but now I think that circa 1885 is a more likely time frame, mostly because of the subtle allusions to white men and the wide spread proliferation of guns. It’s not a hard mistake to make considering how little changed in that region in three centuries, but still, the later date, the advent of European colonialism, changes the dynamic of the book. In fact, “change” is the key word here. It’s not hyperbole to say that European colonialism effected the most far reaching cultural revolution in African history. I think then that Okonkwo’s fall might be a metaphor for the fall of old Africa, but considering that I haven’t finished the book, I’ll have to save those thoughts for later. Instead, I’m going to focus on more elements of tradition in the book and how they are beginning to appear inadequate to the characters. The end of Ch. 13 is a meditation by Obierika that encapsulates a lot of these senseless traditions. He questions Okonkwo’s banishment and infanticide. Both of which seem senseless wastes to him. Now, I was skimming over some of the other blog posts and I noticed Diana’s start to this section. “I love the fact that some of the people are finally starting to ponder their traditions rather than blindly following them.” For some reason, this comment just seemed weird to me, but I couldn’t figure out why. So I thought and I thought, and I’ve got a little theory. In our modern American age, it seems to me that the virtues of change and progress are hardwired into our collective consciousness. We also grew up in an age of political correctness and inclusively. People’s personal rights and freedoms are viciously protected and upheld. From a young age, we are taught that conforming is bad, that originality should be treasured. What I’m challenging is our assumption that the Umuofia need to change. “Need” isn’t the right word. “Should” or “inevitably will” are better. Think back to the book’s epigraph, a quote from W. B. Yeats “Second Coming.” It says the reason things fall apart is that they lose their center. I think that the center refers to a communities tradition. When you think about this in the historical context, it makes sense. A lot of these African tribes were better off before the Europeans showed up. They weren’t as modern, and they didn’t have European ideas like monogamy, but they had virtue and justice. Women didn’t have as many rights, but women were taken care of. They had a defined role. Everybody and everything had a defined role. But with the advent of colonialism, the entire social order is thrown into disarray, and possibly worse than colonialism is post-colonialism. As African governments tried to create nations, there was a strong movement back towards tradition. Africa today is a humanitarian nightmare. The interesting thing though, and again, the book has to be looked at in a historical time frame, is that the book doesn’t seem (yet anyway) to take a side between tradition and change. It just presents this struggle. If anything, Okonkwo’s skewed view of masculinity can be seen as a metaphor for tradionalist Africa’s concept of a modern Africa. I’m sorry that I didn’t really elaborate on these ideas or even present them logically. I’ve just got too many ideas.
THINGS FALL APART
14-17
I'm not really sure what to make of these chapters so I'm just going to throw out ideas and hope that connections become apparent. The way I see it, two important elements are introduced in these chapters: the contrast between motherland and fatherland and the coming of the missionaries. When I think of Mbama, or whatever the motherland was called, I think of the rain, not necessarily vegetation and life, but definitely rain. In Alex's blog, she makes the connection between Okonkwo's emotions, especially his sorrow, and the rain. Obviously, this rain is supposed to be a female image. This contrasts with the dry earth of the fatherland. Then there is the earth goddess, Ani. Yams are male produce. Just throwing those things out there. Also, Okonkwo has lost his drive, one of the most important elements of manliness to him. He even admits that he is acting like a woman. Just wondering, is Okonkwo's idea of masculinity the same as everyone else in his tribe's? It must be because they all joke together about effeminate men. Okonkwo also takes on a child role with Uchenda, who is like a mother-father because he is so old he has lost most of qualities Okonkwo associates with masculinity: being able to work, fight, and order women around. He also gives Okonkwo seed yams, something his own father couldn't do. Uchenda calls Okonkwo son. Didn't Okonkwo's mom die when he was young? Yeah, so maybe his trip to the motherland allows him to grow up again with a male and female balance. Also, why his regrowing up thing is going on, Nwoye is also growing up. He leaves home and carves out his own identity. I kind of see a cycle here. Unoka pissed off Okonkwo so much that Okonkwo made his entire identity the antithesis of his father's. Okonkwo killing Ikemefura pissed off Nwoye so much he has dedicated his life to becoming the opposite of his dad in order to piss him off. Which reminds me of something interesting. The relationship between Jesus and God that the missionaries talk about, I wonder if there is anything there. I don’t know. I’ll have to see how this pans out.
Now on to the missionaries.
There is a pretty definite parallel drawn between the missionaries and the locusts. The only thing though, is that everyone liked the locusts coming and they tasted good. Also, didn’t the locusts immediately precede Ikemefura’s murder? I wonder if Okonkwo will kill Nwoye. I was also surprised how the book portrays the missionaries with pleasant imagery, like rain and soothing. That’s all I’ve got for the missionaries. I really just want to see where this book is going.
THINGS FALL APART
CH. 18-21
Huh. Where did all the women go? I don't know if it's my imagination, but it seems like as soon as Okonkwo and family get back to Umuofia (I've given up trying to spell the Igbo words correctly) all of the female characters disappear. No, disappear isn't the right word. It is more like they have been silenced. As a side note, I've finished the book now, so my analysis will spill over into the coming chapters. Anyway, all of the female characters have fallen into the background. While in previous chapters they contributed to the dialogue, now the novel merely narrates their speech. And for that matter, I could only find one instance in the novel after the return to Umuofia that a woman is even mentioned as speaking and that is when Enzima asks Obeirka what the men are going to do to save her dad. There is significance in this silence, boy is there a lot of significance.
A major, major theme in novel is language. Remember all the proverbs, and emphasis on oration, and the frustration with language barriers? What Achebe is on to is the awesome power of language. There was an idea popular in the 1950s called Structuralism. Its basic tenet is that our perception of reality is largely based on the language (i.e. the grammar, vocabulary, syntax) that we use to describe it. One aspect of structural analysis is the identification of binary opposites, such as good and bad, man and woman, west and east. According to structuralism, one of these opposites is given a superior role and one an inferior. One is considered positive and the other is the negative, positive and negative not being used in the "good" and "bad" sense, but more in the logical sense (i.e. positive being the presence of something and negative being the absence). I think the idea, when applied to colonialism deals with how forcing the language of the conqueror onto the conquered molds their perception of reality. So the English, who believe that they are the center of the world, that they the “subject” force their language (and their culture etc.) onto the Igbo The English remain the “subject” and the Igbo become the object. The Igbo become the OTHER (which I think is a Hegelian concept).* Their identity is now defined out of contrast to the British. In the British language, they are savages, uncivilized, that is what they become. Sort of. I’m kind of not getting these ideas out the way I want, but moving on. Historically, women have occupied this Other role for men, who dominated society. This all ties in with the big contrast between male and female in the book. When the British come, the Igbo become the female. So, having lost their culture and lost their language, they have no identity. They lose their roots. I think if this book was written for two purposes. ONE to give the Ibo descendents in Nigeria a language, a past, and an identity that is not defined by colonialism, and TWO to destroy the concept of Africa as Other in the Western mind. This blog was just to get some preliminary thoughts down. I’ll try to pull it all together for my final blog entry.
*Rereading my blog, I don’t think I explained this idea well enough. The main purpose of identifying an Other is to develop your own self-consciousness. Think about it this way, if the entire world was red, would you have any concept of what the color red actually is? No, you need another color, any color, to provide contrast. This is the only way to comprehend red. Now take the same example, but instead of red, think of yourself. To recognize your own consciousness, you have to realize the consciousness of another, someone different than you. That is what the Other refers to.
THINGS FALL APART
FINAL
I'll begin this blog where the other one left off.
I think the most important question when trying to understand this novel is what audience the book was intended for, African or Western. If he wrote the book for a Nigerian audience, I believe that the book was meant to give the descendents of the Igbo a new language rooted in their old cultural identity. This is because of the ideas mentioned in the previous blog, that by having to use English, the Igbo are forced into the Other role. Realizing that return to their original language was impractical, Achebe Africanized English. The story also gave them a background and an identity that was not built in reference to the British. More than anything else, I see the book as an effort to return to the "center" (thus the reference to the center in the books epigraph) that was lost when the Igbo's identity collapsed under colonial rule.
Now, if the book was written for Western audiences, I believe that it is still intended to have the same effect: the restructuring of cultural/linguistic paradigms. Basically, it was supposed to be a wake up slap to the Western world, saying that the colonized people were people with a culture and a heritage and not just silence. By the way, I just remembered that besides the "Dark Continent" Africa was previously known as the "Silent Continent."
Now, within this framework, who is Okonkwo? I think I can finally understand. Looking back at my blogs, I had many different theories while reading the book. I thought he might be an African everyman, a symbol of tradition, an example of what caused Africa's downfall and many other thigns. Now I can see that while close, none of those quite hit the nail on the head. The way I see it, Nwoye is supposed to be a stand in for colonial Nigeria, evidenced by how quickly he adopted colonialism. He is the "modern" Nigeria that completely turned its back on its old traditions "Okonkwo." Achebe wrote the book then to Nwoye ( the people of Nigeria) to help them come to terms with their dad (their heritage). It is an important part of identity formation to atone with your father. It involves the transition from seeing your father as a god to realizing that he is human and has faults. However, you still need to identify with him on some scale in order to mature. This book was written to allow the people of Nigeria to come to terms with their heritage, the good and the bad elements, good elements such as the rich culture and strong independence as well as the bad such as polygamy, domestic abuse, a pagan religion, and lack of modern technology, all of which are present in Okonkwo. This is why Okonkwo is such a complicated character, why you simultaneously loathe him and sympathize with him. It is why the last images of the book are of him hanging and his identity being simplified into a paragraph in the one minister’s book. Okonkwo was dead in modern Africa, and its up to Nwoye to become a man now and bringing some of Okonkwo with him.
Post a Comment