• No results found

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

maybe it is because ‘things started to fall apart at home …’ [PH: p.11] that have facilitated Kambili to adopt this description, but rather, it is a built up for more astute display of familial ties existing between the two characters which culminate into the strong desire for collective actions demonstrated in the subsequent use of ‘we’ in the succeeding structures. However, the various perspectives by members of the family show that there is a strong family affiliation; the sense of collectivity as demonstrated in the following extract:

Extract 2: …Jaja and I washed our school uniform…we always soaked tiny sections of fabric in the foaming water first to check if the colours would run…we knew they would not…we wanted to spend every minute of the half hour Papa allocated to uniform washing (PH: p.27).

The first person plural pronoun, ‘we’, which is reiterated severally from Kambili’s point of view, is a discursive means that demonstrates familial solidarity, how united the family is. This has again reiterated Durkheim’s social solidarity; of how people feel secured as they are engaged in pursuit of common goals and dealing with challenges, and the collective will to perform these tasks owing to the fact that they are members of the same social group as demonstrated by Kambili and her brother, Jaja.

Similarly, the religious aspect of social solidarity is also irrefutably expressed in PH, from the point of view of Papa (Brother Eugene), who segregates between his

‘perfect’ catholic church and other churches, especially as regards Papa Nnukwu’s traditional religious beliefs. In a conversation with his sister, Aunty Ifeoma, over the death of Papa Nnukwu, his point of view is a discourse strategy that displays religious solidarity as Brother Eugene’s sentiment with the Catholic Church becomes more obtrusive and his discrimination against traditionalism more open as illustrated in the following extract:

Extract 3: Eugene: ‘I cannot participate in a pagan funeral, but we can

discuss with the Priest and arrange a Catholic funeral.’

Aunty Ifeoma: ‘I will put my dead husband’s grave up for sale, Eugene, before I give our father a catholic funeral …was our father a Catholic?’ (PH: p.195).

With perspectivation discourse strategy, Papa, Brother Eugene Achike, a firm catholic believer, is presented to be of the opinion that, since Papa Nnukwu is not a member of the Catholic Church, he is, therefore, an unbeliever and has to undergo the rites of Christian

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

cleansing before burial. To demonstrate his religious solidarity, Papa, ‘Bother Eugene Achike’, refuses to ‘… participate in a pagan funeral …’ opting instead to ‘…arrange for a catholic funeral’ (PH: p.195). The suggestion does not go down well with Aunty Ifeoma, who is presented as having a moderate Christian faith. She therefore fervently rejects Brother Eugene’s suggestion that Papa Nnukwu should undergo Christian spiritual cleansing. Papa ‘Brother Eugene Achike’, as a Catholic faithful stands in a position in which he describes Papa Nnukwu’s faith as irreligious and considers funerals which are not performed by Catholic priests as pagan funerals. To allot characters with different views about religion and its affiliations is definitely a discourse strategy to play up religious sentiments.

Similarly, in HOAYS, perspectivation discourse strategy is used to mop up social solidarity from the various positive self-descriptions and negative other-presentations by characters in the novel. This scenario is discernible from the use of conversation between Master and his friends in which their views about social events evidently align and pitch them against some of these issues as illustrated in extract 4:

Extract 4: Professor Ezeka: ‘We should have a bigger Pan-African response to what is happening in the American south…’

Master: ‘Pan-Africanism is fundamentally a European notion…’’

Miss Adeboye: ‘Maybe it is a European notion …but in the bigger picture, we are all alike, we all have white oppression in common…

Pan- Afrcianism is simply the most sensible response …’

Master: ‘…the only authentic identity for the African is the tribe.

I am Nigerian because a Whiteman created Nigeria and

gave me that identity. I am black because the Whiteman constructed black to be as different as possible from his White. But I was Igbo before the Whiteman came.’

Professor Ezeka: ‘But you became aware that you were Igbo because of the Whiteman. The Pan-Igbo idea itself came only in the face of White domination. You must see that tribe as it is today is as colonial a product as nation and race.’

Miss Adeboye: ‘The problem is that Odenigbo is a hopeless tribalist…’

(HOAYS: p.20-21)

There are about two dimensions of social solidarity that are evoked from the perspectivation strategy in the above conversation. The first is the cross-national solidarity and then tribal solidarity. Professor Ezeka and Adeboye’s points of view about Pan-Africanism, signify concern for a cross-national solidarity while Odenigbo’s perspective, on the other hand, demonstrates tribal solidarity. The point of view expressed by Professor Ezeka that: ‘we should have a bigger Pan-Africanism response to

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

what is happening in the American south…’ (HOAYS: p.20), is a discourse strategy to express perspectives about the need for African states to unite and defend their sovereign rights against White domination and discriminatory policies. Meanwhile, Odenigbo is of the opinion that ‘Pan-Africanism is fundamentally a European notion…’, a perspective which has made Miss Adeboye to call him ‘…a hopeless tribalist’, who believes strongly that ‘…the only authentic identity for African is the tribe’ (HOAYS: p.20). This is a discursive means to firmly positioned Odenigbo, an Igbo man who believes so much in his tribe and is so happy to champion the course, the birth of the Biafra nation out of Nigeria. With this at the background, Master demonstrates his allegiance to his tribe, as he declares: ‘Biafra is born! We will lead Black Africa! We will live in security! Nobody will ever again attack us! Never again!’ (HOAYS: p.163). In a similar narrative mood, Kainene Ozobia, who, with nomination and predicational strategies, is identified as a character of Igbo extraction, like Odenigbo, believes strongly that ‘socialism would never work for Igbo…’ (HOAYS: p.69). This is a demonstration of loyalty and belief in one’s group; an index for group solidarity. It is interesting again to note the use of the first person plural pronoun, ‘we’, to specify collectivity of actions to defend the group.

Apparently, the call is that: ‘we should have a bigger Pan-African response to what is happening in the American south…’, because ‘we are all alike, we all have white oppression in common…’ [HOAYS: p. 20], the call for action is therefore for all Africans to unite and fight their common enemy.

As discourse strategy to display the scenery of solidarity in the novel, Susan Grenvillepitts, a character described as a British woman, holds and expresses these perspectives about Nigerian tribes:

Extract 5: ‘They have a marvellous energy, really, but very little sense of hygiene…the Hausa in the North were dignified lot, the Igbo were surly and money-loving, and the Yoruba were rather jolly, even if they were first-rate lickspittles….The Yoruba get into huge debts just to throw these parties.’(HOAYS: p.55)

As a foreigner and therefore a member of a different social group, the above remarks by Susan show her views about the various tribes in Nigeria, culminating into her prove of solidarity with her European roots and ways of life which explain the reason as to why she is presenting the Nigerian ways of life with a picture of disgust and mockery. The concept of ‘we-ness’: ‘us’ versus ‘them’ become so glaring. The pronoun referent, ‘they’,

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

is now used as a signal in reference to Nigerian tribes and, therefore, distances ‘self’ from the ‘other’ is used by the Susan to project her identity and confirm her stands and identification with each group; a situation which flaunt her solidarity with her ‘White’

group. This reference to the positive ‘us’ and negative ‘them’ in reference to other groups is one of the reasons why Susan discourages Richard, her white lover, from having anything to do with Nigerian women whom, according to her, have ‘…very little sense of hygiene …’ (HOAYS: p.55).

Perspectivation discourse strategy is also deployed to evoke aspects of social solidarity in AH. Just like in PH and HOAYS, where the characters’ allegiance is revealed from the point of view they hold, in AH the referential system also facilitates sieving of sentiments since each character tends to identify with members of a particular social group with which they share common beliefs, goals and aspirations. The issue of positive ‘us’, is used, especially by African Americans to refer to themselves, and ‘they’, (the negative others) in reference to White Americans. An instance of such communication of intentions that flashes positive self and negative others is illustrated in the conversation between Ifemelu, Mariama, Aisha and Halima, who are migrants from Africa.

Extract 6: Aisha: ‘You Igbo?’ I think you Yoruba because you dark and Igbo fair. I have two Igbo men. Very good. Igbo men take care of women real good.’…I want marry. They love me but they say the family want Igbo woman. Because Igbo marry Igbo always.’

Ifemelu: ‘Igbo people marry all kinds of people. My cousin’s husband is Yoruba. My Uncle’s wife is from Scotland.’ (AH: p.15)

Aisha’s point of view is that ‘Igbo men take care of women real good…’ and ‘Igbo marry Igbo always.’ This assertion is a discursive means to demonstrate reference to the group one belongs to in positive terms, a situation Aisha uses to describe her fellow migrants though she alleges that the family only wants Igbo woman as a wife; a discrimatory decision. Ifemelu defended this allegation by insisting that, ‘Igbo people marry all kinds of people’. This argument put up by Ifemelu demonstrates the duty each individual member owes her group. Though Aisha’s point of view cast her fellow migrants as a set of good people, Ifemelu’s point of view however shows a much stronger camaraderie to her Igbo people, since she comes from this tribe. This also indicates that the degree of social solidarity also depends on how intimate individual members of the group are.

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

Apparently, Aisha’s positive self is based on migrants’ relationship, and Ifemelu’s description of his group displays an even more intimate tie existing between members of her social group which facilitates the presentation of ‘positive self’ to show group solidarity.