Colonialist Criticism by Chinua Achebe

Chinua Achebe: "Colonialist Criticism :

Chinua Achebe is born Albert Chinualumogu Achebe- (16 November 1930 - 21 March 2013) was a Nigerian novelist, poet, professor and critic. He was best known for his first novel and magnum opus, Things Fall Apart (1958), whichi s the most widely read book in modern African literature. Raised by his parents in the Igbo town of Ogidi in southeastern Nigeria, Achebe excelled at school and won a scholarship for undergraduate studies. He became fascinated with world religions and traditional African cultures and began writing stories as a university student. After graduation, he worked for the Nigerian Broadcasting Service (NBS) and soon moved to the metropolis of Lagos. He gained worldwide attention for Things Fall Apart in the late 1950s. His later novels include No Longer at Ease (1960), Arrow of God (1964), A Man of the People (1966), and Anthills of the Savannah (1987). Achebe wrote his novels in English and defended the use of English, as "language of colonisers", in African literature. In 1975, his lecture An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" featured a famous criticism of Joseph Conrad as "a thoroughgoing racist". It was later published in The Massachusetts Review despite some controversy. When the region of Biafra broke away from Nigeria in 1967, Achebe became a supporter of Biafran independence and acted as ambassador for the people of the new nation. The war-ravaged the populace and as starvation and violence took its toll, he appealed to the people of Europe and the Americas for aid. When the Nigerian government retook the region in 1970, he involved himself in political parties but soon resigned due to frustration over the corruption and elitism he witnessed. He lived in the United States for several years in the 1970s and returned to the U.S. in 1990 after a car accident left him partially disabled.

Commentary:

Achebe's novels focus on the traditions of Igbo society, the effect of Christian influencés and the clash of Western and traditional African values during and after the colonial era. His style relies heavily on the Igbo oral tradition and combines straightforward narration with representations of folk stories, proverbs and oratory. He also published a number of short stories, children's books and essay collections. From 2009 until his death, he served as a professor at Brown University in the United States.

A prevalent theme in Achebe's novels is the intersection of African tradition and modernity, especially by European colonialism. The village of Umuofia in Things Fall Apart, for example, is violently shaken with internal divisions when the white Christian missionaries arrive. 

Nigerian English professor Ernest N.Emenyonu describes the colonial experience in the novel as "the systematic emasculation of the entire culture".Achebe later embodied this tension between African tradition and Western influence in the figure of Sam Okoli, the president of Kangan in Anthills of the Savannah. Distanced from the myths and tales of the community by his Westernised education, he does not have the capacity for reconnection shown by the character Beatrice.

The colonial impact on the Igbo in Achebe's novels is often effected by individuals from Europe, but institutions and urban offices frequently serve a similar purpose. The character of Obi in No Longer at Fase succumbs to colonial-era corruption in the city, the temptations of his position overwhelm his identity and fortitude. The courts and the position of District Commissioner in Things Fall Apart likewise clash with the traditions of the Igbo and remove their ability to participate in structures of decision-making.

The standard Achebean ending results in the destruction of an individual and by synecdoche, the downfall of the community. Odili's descent into the luxury of corruption and hedonism in A Man of the People, for example, is symbolic of the post-colonial crisis in Nigeria and elsewhere. Even with the emphasis on colonialism, however.

Achebe's tragic endings embody the traditional confluence of fate, individual and society, as represented by Sophocles and Shakespeare.

Still, Achebe seeks to portray neither moral absolutes nor a fatalistic inevitability. In 1972, he said: "I never will take the stand that the Old must win or that the New must win. The point is that no single truth satisfied me and this is well-founded in the Ibo world view. No single man can be correct all the time, no single idea can be totally correct. Achebe said: "Belief in either radicalism or orthodoxy has too simplified a way of viewing things. Evil is never all evil goodness, on the other hand, is often tainted with selfishness."

Definition:

The essay 'Colonialist Criticism' is an attack on a lingering colonialism in the criticism of African literature by non-Africans. The African writer writes the text or 'they produce literature, their literature goes to Europeans for analysis. Every African literature has to get thought of the grids of European writers.

They have to meet the criteria said by the European writer, African writer wrote the text for the African people but European people analyzed it. It means they are the jury's bench, or they judge the text.

Overview:

Without colonialism there would be no post-colonialism, colonialism is about the dominance of a strong nation over another weaker one. Colonialism happens when a strong nation sees that its material interest and affluence require that it expand outside its borders. Colonialism is the acquisition of the colonialist, by brute force, of extra markets. extra resources of raw material and manpower from the colonies.

The colonialist. while committing these atrocities against the natives and territories of the colonies convinces himself that he stands on high moral grounds. His basic assumptions in defence of his actions are:

The colonized are savages in need of education and rehabilitation. The culture of the colonized is not up to the standard of the colonizer and it is the moral duty of the colonizer to do something about polishing it. The colonized nation is unable to manage and run itself properly and thus it needs the wisdom and expertise of the colonizer The colonized nation embraces a set of religious beliefs incongruent and incompatible with those of the colonizer and consequently, it is God's given duty of the colonizer to bring those stray people to the right path. The colonized people pose a dangerous threat to themselves and to the civilized world if left alone and thus it is in the interest of the Civilized world to bring those people under control. As such, the white Europeans ventured adventurously into the so-called underdeveloped countries in Africa and Asia and dominated a lot of geographical spaces there. They subjugated the natives, imposed their will at large on them. They eroded the natives' cultures and languages, plundered the natives' wealth and established their orders based on settlers' supremacy.

Themes:

[One question raised that How do they judge] while judging, they always keep on the concept that is big brother consciousness. They always make the binaries. These binaries are like white and black or the European or African. They think that Europeans are superior and big brothers, whereas Africans are inferior and small brothers. Europeans are teacher and Africans are learners. Therefore, Europeans are at the centre and Africans are at the margin. Therefore Africans have to learn many more things from the Europeans. They tend to feel that burden of teaching to the Africans. Therefore, Europeans feel that they know more about African literature, art and culture than African themselves. Achebe sees the faults of colonialist criticism in the assumption that the African writer is "Somewhat unfinished European and that somehow outsiders can know Africa better than the native writers. Achebe opposes the European colonial prejudice, habit of ruling and discriminating other and comparing African people their literature, art and culture etc. He argues that African literature should not be judged with the canonical literature since it has its own particularity and peculiarity. The mask of European civilization does not know the history of African people. So Achebe's claim is that blacks (colonized) should write their own history neglecting what has been already universalized. He argues that "If the text is judged from a European perspective a text doesn't get a right evaluation and the essence of the text is killed."

Attacks on Universalism

The term 'Universalism' is exclusive, it includes the whole world. The term Universalism refers to European parochialism, European writers always emphasized universality in the writing. They believe that the writer has to cover all the issues in general or the writer has to speak for all. They judge African text form this angle; they argued that the African text is not universal because it does not speak about the universal issue. It speaks only African voice, therefore their text is invalid. They are not able to write about the whole universe. The two problems with Universalism, according to Achebe are, first that the presumed universality that critics find, is merely a synonym for the "narrow self-serving parochialism of Europe" and second, that every literature must "speak of a particular place; evolve out of the necessities of its history, past and current and the aspirations and destiny of its people." It means that every text comes out of specific time-space and the people. Therefore, every text is related to space-specific and people-specific. African people have experience of racism. Therefore, they can write about racism deliberately. African might have made many mistakes, but they didn't bring racism in the world. Therefore, they would write about it, which is an African-specific situation which is pervaded in African. Achebe sustained the idea that "the term universalism must vanish."

Attacks on Language

African writers writing in English don't mean that they are following the European model. Language is not the property or possession of any group country or continent. Language is a common property as well as de-ethicized. The English language is not the property of British or American. It doesn't belong to anyone. African writers are writing in English to make themselves heard. If they write in African language nobody will come to know about them. They have the problem of communication. African writers writing in English wanted to win the attention of the world. Language is the common heritage for all the people.

Criticism:

Towards the end of the essay, he criticizes the native writers. All the time European writers cannot be slammed deplorable. He says the even native writers have not done anything to uplift the condition of African literature. They are not responsible for their own people. He embodies the idea and says that only through the earnestness of "Eager-enough" is most important to uplift the condition of African literature. Only then African literature will get the prestigious status otherwise they will be dominated. For the domination of Europeans Achebe calls 'seduction'. The native poets and critics are equally responsible for this seduction because they never attempt to break this barricade of this European canon rather they enjoy being in the appendage of it.

The Effect of Colonialism

Oppression is a basic ingredient of colonialism. There is no denying to it that oppression dehumanizes both the oppressor and the oppressed.

Thus in the thickness of colonialism, national movements and most of them were radical and violent in their approaches, emerged to encounter the aggression of colonialism. The natives after some period of submission and due to the changes in world ideologies and political climate realized that the settlers are mere drones living off the blood and labour of the native without awarding him his dues. The native realized that his hopes and aspirations would remain stifled under the rule of the colonizer. Thus the native resorted to violence to shake the colonizer off his shoulder and eventually, he did.

Views:

There are so many views on the effects of colonialism. These views depend on the political and ideological position of those who disseminate them. Some claim that in spite of the ugly face of colonialism, it did a lot of good to the colonized. It brought to the colonized new vision of life, mainly western and advanced. It fostered a strong sense of national unity. It brought industrialization and modern economy to the colonies and above all, it advanced cultural life where it occurred. Implicit in these claims is the colonizer's high moral grounds mentioned above. On the other hand, there is the view that colonialism is pure oppression, immoral, evil and nothing more than a form of a Neo-slavery. As a result, no possible good can come out of such evil and it should be combated with sheer force. This radical view not only denies any positive effect of colonialism but also incriminates those so-called apologists for colonialism.

Post-colonialism

In essence, what post-colonialism, as a movement, does is to expose to both the colonizer and ex-colonized the falsity or validity of their assumptions. The pioneers of Post-colonialism like Edward Said, Franz Fanon, Homi Bhabha among others, concerned themselves with the social and cultural effect of colonization. They regarded the way in which the west paved its passage to the orient and the rest of the world as based on unconfounded truths. They asserted in their discourses that no culture is better or worse than other culture and consequently they nullified the logic of the colonialists. In their readings of colonial and post-colonial literature and other forms of art, post-colonial critics relied heavily on other available literary theories. They manipulated Marxism, new historicism, psychoanalysis,and deconstruction to serve their purposes.

Conclusion

There is much to post-colonial literature than reading colonialist narratives only. Generations of writers and intellectuals who are born under and after colonialism write inspiringly about the struggle for independence. They write about the conflicting interests of the natives under and after colonialism. Other writers direct their attention to the conflict between the natives and the newly appointed regimes that supplanted the colonialists. Many others write about fossilized social habits and customs in need of rehabilitation or replacement. Some writers exhibit a high level of animosity to the colonialist and their agents, others are less aggressive in their representation of the colonial past and the postcolonial present.

Chinua Achebe in "Colonialist Criticism" vehemently criticizes the failure of European criticism to understand the African literature on its own terms. He powerfully attacks the sense of superiority found in colonialist criticism and analyses the African literature on its own terms. The latter-day colonist critic sees the African writer as a "somewhat unfinished European" who will grow up one day and write like every other European.

The arrogant European says that they civilize the savage Africans. Being so-called superior they get an abundance of knowledge with which they control African literature in English. Achebe writes: "To the colonist mind it was always of the utmost importance to be able to say: 'I know my natives,' a claim which implied two things at once:

a) The native was really quite simple

b) Understanding him and controlling him went hand in hand.

"So, he urges the colonist critic to be purged of the superiority and arrogance".

He rejects any idea of writing like a western author i.e. he rejects the myth of universalism. As an African war, the writer will always remain true to African historicity. He is of the opinion that every literature must seek things that belong unto its people and must speak of a particular place. Rejecting the myth of universalism, Achebe stands in favour of localization. He is of the opinion that colonized should begin to write their own history ignoring what has already been mythologized. He demands earnestness of the writer to his time, circumstances, locality and historicity.

Chinua Achebe criticizes African and British critics of contemporary African literature for ignoring the particularity of the African experience and for praising universality. Those culturally colonized African intellectuals think that western culture, art and literature are superior to their African native culture. He views that westerners write the text based on African writers and African subject matter with the intention of colonization. Through the text, they circulate power and create certain truths for African. As a result. westerners control over them, but African writers are not aware of the fact of being colonized.

Summing up, literature for Achebe is a function of society. He puts literature in service for the need to alter specific things in specific places especially attitudes. It is in this context that he attacks universalism and pitches in for sócial earnestness on the part of African writers.