Character Questions: Okonkwo #TFA

1. What is the significance of Okonkwo’s character? What does he represent or what is he symbolic of? 

Okonkwo's character, as the protagonist of the riveting piece of literature, is significant in the primary essence that the plot of the novel revolves around the character and develops accordingly, as well. Okonkwo, depicted as an extreme product of the Igbo world, illuminates an exemplary archetype of a tragic hero as his incipient success and recognition is eventually tainted and demolished by his self-destructive hamartia: the unwillingness to accept change in societal conventions and adapt to the life entailed by the European infiltration into Igboland. Nevertheless, Okonkwo stands out in stark contrast to the remainder of his clan as he is not portrayed as the ideal Igbo man, but instead an extremity in his very own world. His hyper-masculinity and excessive hubris are not characteristics so intrinsic to the Igbo clan that they trump all other values and dominate one's character. However for Okonkwo this seems to be a given as his actions repeatedly seem to be centred around not deviating from his central ideals of masculinity and pride.

Moreover, Okonkwo's character is symbolic of the paragon of a flawed fanatic in a world that is undergoing revolution; it symbolizes the downfall of inflexibility in a dynamic realm undergoing transformation that demands just the same. In fact, Okonkwo seems to personify a conflict within the novel as his internal beliefs and personal thoughts contradict his mannerisms and hence provoke the reader to discern the drift in whom Okonkwo truly is and what he symbolizes as a protagonist in the novel.


2. What is the purpose of Okonkwo’s character within the text? 

As the central figure of the text, Okonkwo's character indubitably serves the purpose of propelling the progression of the novel. The events that materialize in the novel are all centred around Okonkwo and develop the audience's perception of Okonkwo in conjunction with the Igbo culture and customs. At the onset of the novel, and perhaps for the large part, the audience may be under the illusion that Okonkwo exemplified the ideal Igbo man. Nevertheless, as the novel's scope widens, the audience gets a gist of how Okonkwo perhaps was symbolic of anything but the ideal Igbo man. Okonkwo and his intrinsic flaws coalesced in a grave display of misfortune as his ultimate downfall was an incredibly unexpected one and rendered the audience utterly flabbergasted.

The element regarding Okonwko's character that seems even more perplexing would be the contradicting nature that laces his actions in contrast to his internal thoughts. We can take for instance, Okonkwo's worrisome pursuit of Ekwefi as his daughter Ezinma was being carried away into the darkness, or perhaps his agonizingly anguished state once he had killed Ikemefuna. The sentiments and gist of humanity reflected in these contradictions of Okonkwo's character moulds him to be a relatively complex character that is entrapped in and subjugated by his own fatal flaws.


3. How does Okonkwo’s character contribute to themes or meaning?

Okonkwo's character plays a critical role in moulding the audience's perception of Igboland as the only glimpse that the audience has into the enigmatic realm is from the perspective of events encountered by or significant to Okonkwo. At the same time, his character is a great contributing factor to the theme of duality that manifests in the novel and is the driving force on the central conflict of the plot. The duality in this sense is connotative of the ability of members of the Igbo clan to succumb to the European essentializing of Umuofia, whilst Okonkwo on the contrary seemed to be rigidly bent on holding on to the fabric of the traditional Igbo era, which accents how his inflexibility ultimately brought up about the denouement of "Things Fall Apart" as Okonkwo's ruination parallels the demise of authentic Igbo lives in Lower Niger in the 19th century as European colonization had taken the country by storm.

The Tragic Hero #TFA

"There is no one way to anything"

"Where one thing stands, another stands beside it"

— Chinua Achebe

Primarily comprehending Achebe's choice of crafting Okonkwo as a tragic hero would necessitate a rudimentary grasp on the requisites of the archetype: according to Aristotle, a tragic hero can be defined as "a main character, who confronts his downfall due to fate, his mistake, or any other social reason."

Now, taking into consideration Achebe's construction of Okonkwo's character, the protagonist has been projected as a mighty man of a superior socio-political status amongst his clan members in the village of Umuofia, and ultimately experiences his downfall in the form of hanging himself in despair of the situation begotten by the intrusion of European essentializing in his village. While it is unequivocally cemented, through an amalgamation of indicative factors, that Okonkwo reflects a tragic hero archetype, the central intrigue lies in the reason Achebe chose to cast the character under such a light.

The most compelling reason would be Achebe's desire to create a distinct dichotomy between the authentic Igbo culture and the misconceptions that permeated the same. For instance, the Igbo people are portrayed as a group that understands the duality in the nature of life and appreciates that every facet of life has multiple surfaces. The Igbo people refrain from a stringent orthodox perspective or fanaticism of any kind, which mirrors how the notion of a balance of ideas is well ingrained in the Igbo realm.

Okonkwo, however, does not parallel with the quintessential Igbo man's archetype; Achebe purposefully scaffolded Okonkwo's fatally flawed depiction in order to draw a distinction between Okonkwo's characteristics and how he was not reflective of true Igbo values and intricacies. Although incipiently materialized as a revered figure in the Igbo realm, Okonkwo progressively evolves as a character that seems ostracized from both the worlds of the Igbo and the Missionaries as his hamartia, comprising of elements of hypermasculinity, hubris and his insatiable lust for authority, lead him to being a misfit for either of the realms that he was forcefully immersed in.

Moreover, Okonkwo's tragic demise was metaphorically reflective of the downfall of the Igbo world in Lower Niger as the force of the White missionaries had overrun the clan and imposed on them brutalities that commenced the fragmentation of the culture.

Thus, all in all, Achebe's characterization of Okonkwo in pertinence to the archetype of a tragic hero served purposes manifold and elevated the central progression of the novel in the entirety. 

The Igbo Emancipation Proposal #TFA

The speech of Mr. Harry Brown,

The Christian Missionary to Umuofia, 

At the annual dinner of the Royal Colonial Institute on March 31st, 1895

Good evening Ladies and Gentlemen. It is with much honour and felicity that I stand before you today, marking the occasion of having served my dutiful term as a Missionary in the enigmatic, yet charismatic, Lower Niger village of Umuofia. 

On this ostensibly celebratory evening, I stand before you with great vacillation, and I know not how to manoeuver nor articulate the conflicted sentiments surging through me. On one hand I wish to congratulate the collective British efforts of triumphing in the 'Scramble for Africa' and institutionalizing in the native populaces the bounties of British living and civilization. But, on the other hand a tinge of resentment and guilt infuses and taints the congratulations, for in our victory lies the noticeable demise of hundreds of intrinsic Nigerian tribes.

When we first commenced our expansionism into Africa, our fundamental aspirations rested on the unified subjugation of the native people under British authority, for, of course, their own well-being.  However, what we had not anticipated was the enormity of the internal fragmentation of societies within the nation and the accompanying tumults. Let me provide you with a more concrete exemplification of the obscure ideas I have been assembling:

The people of Umuofia for instance are constituent of what is called the Igboland—a congregation of self-contained towns and villages separated by tacit boundaries. The Igbo people form one of the largest ethnic groups in Africa with nearly fifteen million of the natives residing in Nigeria and nearly an additional million dispersed in and around the remainder of Africa.

Despite sharing the same basic culture and sociopolitical organization, the Igbo people are composed of up to an astounding two hundred distinct groups! Two hundred distinct groups that we cannot begin to fathom how to comprehend. The Igbo have their own complex sets of transcendent beliefs and ideologies that from the British lens appear absolutely preposterous: the prevailing notions of a preternatural force Chukwu, lack of a centralized political structure, transparency in communal living, and a patrilineal emphasis. And what do we do to compensate for our lack of understanding of the pre prevalent norms of Igboland? We make it our mission to assault the Igbo people and eradicate the customs at the heart of their living, to simply impose on them our supreme ideologies.

In the past we have discharged our ideals of conquest and imperialism with the bestowal of a finer life for those fortunate enough to be on the receiving end; however, what were to happen if an alien species were to emerge and declare their mannerisms as superior to those of the British. Would we succumb to a potent agent of change “for the better”? Would we abandon our inherent dogmas and willingly adopt those of an alien race? Would we revere those who establish authority in our nation and annex it as their own?

No, we would not.

The same goes for the Igbos of Nigeria. The social and political stratification of Nigerian lives should not be in our hands but in their own and thus I appeal to you that an aggressive expansionist policy at the cost of annihilating a nation’s individuality should be a tenet we reconsider before proceeding with our initiatives in not only Nigeria, but all of our African colonies.

Contextual Comprehension #TFA

1) What was the most meaningful takeaway from today’s discussion relating to the cultural or literary context of Achebe’s work? 

Today's discussion certainty shed light on elements of the text that I had not considered as much in depth, as I now understand, that I should have. The most meaningful takeaway per se would be the acquisition of the concept of context of composition, which stands in stark contrast with the context that Achebe's tale prevails in. Accordingly, to primarily cement what the context of composition refers to:

The context of composition is when writers are influenced by their context (time in which they live, place in which their write or families from which they come), which ultimately contributes to the construction of their literary works. 

Subsequently, learning about the fact that Achebe penned his novel, Things Fall Apart, during the period of political turmoil in Nigeria (due to English imperialism), provoked me to conjure the link between why Achebe may have chosen to set his novel in a period earlier than the times he was writing it in. Perhaps Achebe was trying to revisit the incipient intervention of the British in Nigeria and thus was attempting to highlight the complexities of Nigerian life that were irreparably disrupted. In doing so, he attained the aim of showcasing the transition of clustered villages into one colonized nation under the British. Moreover the fact that Things Fall Apart was penned in 1958, which was two years prior to Nigerian independence, delineates the fact that nationalism was already heightened amongst the people and literary works as such only further propelled people to exhibit resilience and thus challenge the forced Eurocentric hegemony and assimilation. 

2) Select a specific quote from the interview or a general idea from the discussion and write a brief reflection.

One quote from Achebe’s interview that genuinely resonated with me was, “Storytelling has to do with power. Those who win tell the story; those who are defeated are not heard.” I am in complete agreement with Achebe’s perspective in this case as Achebe specifically alludes to how Europeans had initially constructed, through their literary works, a relatively skewed image of Africa in the minds of the Western populace and this was only possible because they were the domineering influence in the world during the mid 1900s. That being said, I also believe that this quote may not be as applicable today as people of all groups today have access to a platform that allows expression in the form of literature. Subversive literature such as Achebe’s works were a rarity in his time, nevertheless today the horizons have widened and the scope of such literature has expanded only due to revolutionary writers who took the risk and decided to tell their side of the story. It is crucial that perspectives are balance; simply viewing one side of a story can never capture the authenticity of a situation. As Chimamanda Adichie mentioned in her TedTalk— Single stories create stereotypes that are not untrue, but are incomplete. Hence, while the perspective of the “winners” is incontrovertibly crucial, hearing the voice of the “defeated” is equally as important to gain a holistic understanding. 

Paper 1: We Shall Fight on the Beaches

The given text is an extract from former Great Britain Prime Minister Winston Churchill’s speech, “We Shall Fight on the Beaches,” delivered to the House of Commons on June 4^th, 1940. Through the contextual appreciation of the speech in conjunction with the distinct conventions of the text, it can be inferred that the text type is that of a political speech targeted at primarily revealing to the British people the notion of a possible German invasion whilst simultaneously pacifying rising qualms. Accordingly, Churchill employs numerous rhetorical devices and structural conventions to ultimately augment the progression of his central argument and coax his audience, utilizing charismatic oratory abilities, into believing that United Kingdom was equipped to confront the Germans and would not relinquish its dignity at any cost.

The target audience of this speech comprises predominantly of members of the House of Commons, who are representative of the people of Britain and play a critical role in the passing of laws. It can thus be assumed that the premise of Churchill’s speech was to convince the members of the validity of the choices made by the British government in regards to the prevalent conflict with the Germans and essentially gain their approval to proceed with the outlined intentions. For instance, Churchill states that taking “measures of increasing stringency” were deemed as a necessity against “enemy aliens,” “suspicious characters of other nationalities,” and “dangerous British subjects.” In saying so, Churchill facilitates an understanding of the urgency of the situation at hand and embeds the same in the audience as the negative connotations accompanied by the specific diction in reference to the Germans provokes the audience to construct a dehumanized image of the ultimate enemy and hence enhances the sentiment of animosity directed at the Germans during World War II. Moreover, in the concluding paragraph of the speech, Churchill repeats the idea that the British people could only triumph over the Germans by collectively persisting as he states, “We shall go on to the end,” and continues each successive clause with “we shall.” Hence, it can be deduced that the speech also attains the purpose of acting as a call to action for the target audience—the British people—in the conflict against the Germans.

The specific content incorporated in the speech is crucial in pertinence to the fact that the carefully chosen content aids Churchill in deftly building up the efficacy of the principal ideas conveyed.  In the excerpt presented, Churchill first establishes an impression that Great Britain is fairly under control of the situation as he cements the implementation of “stringent measures” and the bestowal of “power” by the Parliament to oust “Fifth Column activities”. The audience subsequently is made to feel somewhat at ease as Churchill asserts his credibility as a leader and thus solidifies ethos in appearing to be a trustworthy figure. Furthermore, the technique of eponym used in referring to “Fifth Column activities” is indicative of the clans within Great Britain that were supportive of the Germans. Churchill then advances to address the issue of a potential invasion and in a sense consoles his audience using the promises of “sea power” and “air power,” which were Britain’s most noteworthy military outlets at the time. Following the brief mention of the invasion, Churchill reverts to iterating the government’s efforts and the resolve that they had to be victorious, thus inspiring the audience to lay their faith in the government, while taking on a more nationalistic outlook. Finally Churchill concludes the speech by affirming the point that surrendering was not an option and the nation would go to whatever lengths necessary to protect its stance and not succumb to Nazi Germany. It can be noted that Churchill does not necessarily maneuver around the conflict diplomatically as a politician would normally do, but instead is relatively explicit in terms of name-calling Germany as the enemy and thus grounding his argument in a very direct political discourse which intends to precisely acquaint the audience with the issue and emphasize the necessity for solidarity through the rhetoric of logos. In totality, the specific content incorporated in the speech collectively serves the purpose of successfully conveying a logical argument to the audience. On the other hand, the theme of this text is centralized on the prominence of the British people’s support to the government and the call to unify the nation to jointly endure and overcome the ordeal of involvement in a conflict with Germany.  The elemental ideas that suggest the theme is evident in diction like “novel stratagem,” “resolve,” and in phrases like “we shall not flag or fail.” Moreover, an undercurrent of patriotism further elevates the central essence of the ubiquitous theme.  Thus, the content and theme of the speech act as inextricable elements that contribute to enhancing the value of the speech. 

The underlying tone that Churchill delivers his speech with can be deemed as a melange of assurance, patriotism, and urgency. The aforementioned tones manifest sequentially as Churchill effectually juxtaposes his ideas in a manner that allow for the three tones to emerge progressively. Churchill mentions the implementation of stringent measures and the adoption of “novel methods” to combat the German forces, which contribute to accenting the assuring tone. The tone of patriotism runs throughout the speech as ultimately every idea mentioned in the speech is in association with advantageous results for the people of the nation. The urgency is evident in Churchill’s concluding paragraph as he ends on a note of a call to action through the unification of the nation against a common arch nemesis: “we shall not flag or fail.” The mood established as a result of the speech is substantially tense as the British people digest the possibility of an imminent threat to the nation. Additionally, a sense of trepidation is also instilled in the audience in response to the anticipated invasion as Churchill makes note of the deleterious consequences faced by “great many people” who were “passionate enemies of the Nazis.” Towards the end however, a considerably stimulating atmosphere is cemented as Churchill uses repetition in the phrase “we shall” to heighten the significance of the points being articulated. The speech, in the entirety, emphasizes the need for the people of the nation to coalesce and treats the matter with much passion and great deliberation as evident in the jargon-rife approach that Churchill adopts in his speech. Finally an underpinning of strength and hope can be deduced from the speech as Churchill mindfully tackles the manner in which he speaks in order to appeal to his audience and show them an aperture in the gloom of World War II. Therefore, the tone and mood of the poem align with the message being conveyed and thus propel Churchill in achieving his main intentions.

Churchill employs a wide range of rhetorical devices and intentional stylistic choices in his speech to essentially accentuate the impact of his words on his audience and thus persuade them of his chief intentions in the ongoing conflict with Germany. The first and foremost overarching observation is the repetitive use of the personal pronoun “we,” which has been used throughout the extract in two denotations; one being Churchill and the government and the second being the former in conjunction with the commonalty of Britain. The constant repetition of this pronoun establishes a more inclusive atmosphere for the audience, which consequently urges them to be more receptive of the ideas presented by Churchill. Moreover, the same also cements a sense of unity in the nation, as Churchill’s speech is indicative of success only being plausible if the people act as a union. Another focal element of Churchill’s linguistic panache is the ubiquitous use of dysphemism. For instance, in utilizing specific diction like “malignancy,” “stamped out,” “tyrants,” and “subjugated,” Churchill evokes an emotional response tinged by aggression and a corresponding desire for vengeance in the audience. The use of political jargon and glittering generalities is also rife in Churchill’s speech—parliament, Fifth Column activities, House, French Republic, comrades— which serves the purpose of re iterating his credibility as an intellectual politician, therefore provoking the audience to rely on him, as an element of ethos is present and appeals to the listener. In the quote “If all do their duty, if nothing is neglected, and if the best arrangements are made.” Churchill effectually utilizes the literary tool of tricolon to sequentially accent the necessary factors for Great Britain’s success and allow the audience an insight into the same while laying great emphasis on the contribution of the audience. The literary device of assonance can be identified in Churchill’s use of “odious apparatus of Nazi rule” as the subtle repetition of the ‘o’ and ‘a’ sounds enhances the euphony of the line whilst conveying the deep abhorrence that Churchill exhibits in regards to the Germans. A ‘transfer affect’ is apparent in this quote, as the audience is provoked to experience a mutual hatred for the enemy due to the strong negative connotations and associations with the choice of words. Furthermore, the rhetorical device of anaphora is heavily utilized in the concluding paragraph as Churchill begins each consecutive phrase with “we shall” to ultimately underline the premise of the speech and end the speech on a wistfully evocative note, invoking the audience to join him in his war efforts. Finally, the explicit allusion to the United States as the “New World” serves the purpose of posing as means of comfort for the people of Britain as the New World’s support suggested that Great Britain had two worthy allies (the French and the United States) to aid them in combatting the Germans. Thus, Churchill uses his literary flair to verbalize a speech rife with deliberate stylistic choices that act as pathos and thus galvanizes them into action.

The structure that Churchill follows in his speech is not very definite as he tends to highlight multiple ideas simultaneously, which is an appealing factor that enhances the effectiveness of his argument. In a more general sense however, Churchill logically outlines his main points as he first comforts his audience through the promises of eradicating the enemy and then divulges the possibility of an invasion, following which Churchill returns to accenting the collective duty of the people of the nation. Finally, Churchill concludes his speech with a powerful culmination of his call to action to the audience. Hence, the sequential structure that Churchill employs in his speech efficiently creates a dichotomy between the main ideas presented whilst concurrently linking each idea to the next and thus elevating the central persuasiveness of his speech. 

All in all, Churchill commendably puts into effect his oratory flair to formulate a heavily persuasive speech that serves the ultimate purpose of convincing the British people to be patient in regards to the prevailing political mayhem due to the possibility of a German invasion of the nation. Churchill’s effective integration of rhetorical devices further propels his eloquently articulated argument and the persuasiveness of his political speech.