Soyinka's Aesthetics and Its Significance for Osofisan's
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
“KILL THE FATHER”: SOYINKA’S AESTHETICS AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE FOR OSOFISAN’S DRAMATURGY. By Bosede Afolayan, Department of English, University of Lagos Nigeria Abstract The influence of Wole Soyinka on the “second generation” writers in Nigeria, of which Osofisan is its most prolific, is immense. Osofisan developed under the tutelage of Soyinka but has reached maturation by sharply deviating and departing from the philosophy and dramaturgy of Wole Soyinka whom he considers “the master.” To come to his own, he has to literally “kill the father” in order to achieve his prime. Sigmund Freud’s theory of the oedipal Complex becomes relevant especially in the view it lends to our study. Freud believes that the young man achieves adulthood only when he is able to exorcise the spirit of the father. Osofisan has been an ardent follower and critic of Soyinka’s art. Where Soyinka’s predilection has been in the area of exposing the culture of the people and in metaphysical profundity, Osofisan has been Marxian, materialist and revolutionary. However, Soyinka's aesthetics remains the point of departure for his art. This paper examines the nature of the influence Soyinka represents for Osofisan. It explores the point of departure from Soyinka’s aesthetics and concludes with Osofisan’s ability to carve a niche for himself as the most strident, most revolutionary, most “angry” and the most inter-textual of the generation after Soyinka. References would be made to a number of their plays in the course of our discussion to illustrate our argument. Introduction If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants. (Sir Isaac Newton in a letter to his rival, Robert Hooke, dated February 5, 1976) Wole Soyinka is a foremost Nigerian playwright. This is attested to by his winning the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1986. He is prolific and profoundly creative. He is also eclectic, exelling in virtually all genres. His works have attracted the attention of many critical commentators and his prodigy has fetched him many followers. Responses to Soyinka’s work have been either of admiration and reverence or of fierce criticism and attack. Many of his followers are not content with just admiring or enjoying his work; rather, it has become the point of departure for their own aesthetics. In other words, Soyinka’s work remains a critical standpoint on which their works are based. In Nigeria, Femi Osofisan has been described as “the leading playwright of the rebellious generation after Soyinka” (Osofisan 14). Both Soyinka and Osofisan are of the Yoruba stock (a major ethnic group in of South west Nigeria). They are exposed to the images, tropes, myths, folktales of the common pool of the Yoruba people and as expected, they have drawn from these and recreated them in their works. However, their reconstructions have been coloured by their ideologies. Soyinka can be seen as a liberal humanist who is interested in the welfare and concerns of the people. He recreates the plight of these people especially their contact with bad leaders but he does not proffer a way out of the quagmire. Osofisan, on the other hand, portrays issues of social concerns like bad leadership and corruption while at the same time proffering solutions to the problems. Where Soyinka’s predilection has been in the area of exposing the culture of the people and in metaphysical profundity, Osofisan has been Marxian, Materialist and revolutionary. To Osofisan, there is no reason why a writer should be involved with metaphysical complexities while people are hungry. He asserts in an interview with Olu Obafemi in 1978 that: If somebody is hungry at the moment, it is no use preaching to him about the eternal laws of starvation, because he wants an immediate solution to his hunger, and you won’t help him by going into a whole range or philosophical explanations about hunger and the like (Excursions 27). This paper examines the influence Soyinka has on Osofisan and the impact of such influence in both philosophical and dramaturgic essences. Historical Background Nigerian drama is a harvest of traditions. It has evolved from the communal pool of myths, folktales and legends of the people and, on the other hand, the western tradition of playwriting imbibed from western culture and civilisation. These two traditions have been met with the imaginative tradition of our modern playwrights. This statement can be explored in the works of any of our modern writers of which Soyinka is a leading light. Nigerian drama can be divided into three groups; the first being the age of Soyinka, J.P. Clark- Bekederemo, Ola Rotimi and Zulu Sofola. This age has been referred to by Osofisan as the “age of innocence” (Insidious Treasons 114). These first generation writers were confronted with the great task of explaining the African culture to the outside world. They were preoccupied with proving that our drama was as good as any in the West. Therefore, they strove to publish abroad. However, the second generation dramatists like Femi Osofisan, Kole Omotosho and Bode Sowande are faced with a different situation. Nigerian drama has already established itself with the first generation writers. Osofisan’s group therefore grappled with what can be termed post-colonial experiences. These writers attained their maturation with the inadequacies of Nigerian leaders who have stepped into the shoes of the colonial masters. The leaders’ inefficiency, ineptitude and corrupt activities became prime themes to be explored. Of course, Osofisan became the most trident and the most prolific of this generation. The works of Soyinka and Clark are guidelines for the writings of this second generation. Such works became models on which Osofisan practiced his own art. Rather than a blind admiration of the elders’ work, the second generation writers revolted against them. Osofisan for example has taken images, texts and ideas from them to create his plays. Common examples are Soyinka’s The Strong Breed which Osofisan has responded to in No More the Wasted Breed while Clark-Bekederemo’s The Raft has become Osofisan’s Another Raft. Our concern is what Soyinka’s aesthetics represents for the dramaturgy of Osofisan. Soyinka’s Aesthetics Soyinka’s aesthetics cannot be easily compartmentalised because he has evolved over the years a variety of dramatic styles. Despite this seeming obstacle, one can read some meaning into the variety. According to Osofisan in an article entitled, “Wole Soyinka and a Living Dramatist” plays like The Trials of Brother Jero, The Strong Breed, The Swamp Dwellers and The Lion and the Jewel can be regarded as Soyinka’s “easy” plays. Soyinka’s meaning and style are quite clear and simple in these plays. However, with his more “serious” plays, Soyinka’s themes become weighty (Insidious Treasons 38). It is in both the “easy” and “serious” plays that Soyinka’s aesthetics can be deduced. In both The Strong Breed and in Death and the King’s Horseman, Soyinka’s mythic imagination is explored. He dwells on the Yoruba myth of sacrificial agents or what can also be called “scapegoatism” to convey his message. The use of myth is one aspect of Soyinka’s art that is prominent. Biodun Jeyifo in the introduction to Art, Dialogue and Outrage, asserts that “Soyinka’s mythopoeic aesthetics is deeply rooted in Yoruba mythology and ritual archetypes” (Jeyifo ed XIII). In his use of this myth, he has been able to “humanise” the idea of sacrificial agents as a common fact of life and not the barbarity and mere show of crudity with which the western world have viewed it. The central action in most of Soyinka’s plays is the festival. It is there is A Dance of the Forests and Death and the King’s Horseman. His plays bring the whole of the community on stage in celebration. The plays celebrate the traditional ethos of the people. The spectacle, richness of dialogue, the drum, dance and songs portray the rich culture of the people and ultimately show his plays as Total Theatre. History has been shown in Soyinka’s art as never-changing. To Soyinka, history is a story of pessimism. The past is revered and history becomes one of recurrence; a story of as it was, so it is and ever shall it be. An illustration can be drawn from The Lion and the Jewel where modernity and tradition are in combat and Soyinka resolves this struggle in favour of the old order. It can also be seen in Olunde dying in place of his father in order to keep the old tradition going. This tragic vision or resolution is one area of revolt from which the second generation writers depart. Soyinka’s view of the history of Nigeria is one of despair: ... it should come as no surprise at all that Soyinka’s writings invariably conclude in a grim and sombre epistemology, offering a bleak picture which is only the mirror of history as he and his contemporary have lived and experienced it (Insidious Treasons 10) Soyinka’s characters of note bear the “Ogunian” characteristics. They are like Ogun with their creative and destructive essences. It is in these characters that Soyinka looks for the saviour of the society. In “And After the Wasted Breed?” Osofisan states this succinctly: In all of Soyinka’s writings you will always find the tribute to a man of vision, who is endowed with extraordinary energy and talent, but who ends up being defeated by negative antagonist forces. (7) These are men like Ogun who are in the end consumed by their daring acts. Poor people in Soyinka plays are just there as a group and do not form the focus of attention.