The Critical Reception of Amos Tutuola, Chinua Achebe and Wole Soyinka, in England and America, 1952-1974
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 75-13,712 EKO, Ebele Ofoma, 1944- THE CRITICAL RECEPTION OF AMOS TUTUOLA, CHINUA ACHEBE AND WOLE SOYINKA, IN ENGLAND AND AMERICA, 1952-1974. The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Ph.D., 1974 Language and Literature, modern Xerox University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 0 1975 EBELE OFOMA EKO ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THE CRITICAL RECEPTION OF AMOS TUTUOLA. CHjNUA ACHE BE AND WOy=ggVjNKA_. l-_INGL-_i=====--i-l---i mizmh by EBELE OFOMA EKO A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School at The University of North Carolina at Greensboro in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy Greensboro 197^ Approved by Dr. "WiTl iam Lane Dissertation Adviser APPROVAL PAGE This dissertation has been approved by the following committee of the Faculty of the Graduate School at The University of North Caro lina at Greensboro. Dissertation Adviser Dr. Wi11iam Lane Committee Members Dr. Robert Stephens Dr. (jfendolph Bulc/pfri ~ ____ < k'.fl Dr. Robert Kellyj Dr. Claude /Cnauvigntf October 28, 197^ Date of Oral Examination ABSTRACT EKO, EBELE OFOMA. The Critical Reception of Amos Tutuola, Chinua Achebe and Wole Soyinka in England and America, 1952-197^. (197*0 Directed by: Dr. William Lane. Pp. 276. This study examined and compared the critical reception in England and America of three internationally known African writers, Amos Tutuola, Chinua Achebe and Wole Soyinka. It was hypothesized that because of England's world-wide colonial relationships and close ties with Nigeria, and because many English critics have taught in Nigerian universities, English reception of these writers would differ considerably from that in America: reflecting more tolerance for different cultural values and for background elements; a deeper insight into the significance of the works in their context; and generally more perceptive commentaries. It assumed that American distance from Nigeria would be reflected in Ameri can critics' relative lack of interest in the cultural backgrounds of the works, in colonial themes and in comparatively more parochial atti tudes . As background information, the study reviewed sample African and non-African views on critical standards for evaluating African works. Africans generally resent foreign critics who treat African literature in English as a mere extension of English literature. They insist that their literature be judged in context and purely on its own merits as works of art, while recognizing the deep influences of African cultures, forms, techniques, and world view. Most non-African critics agree with these views in principle, if not always in practice. Some argue that African literature in English must be judged by Western canons of criti cism. The study compared English and American reception of Tutuola, Achebe and Soyinka in popular reviews, scholarly articles, critical sur veys, and book-length studies. The course of their reputations was also charted. Tutuola's began high and started falling with the publication of his fourth book, but Achebe's and Soyinka's are still growing. English critics proved, as expected, to be generally more recep tive and sometimes more enthusiastic than Americans about Tutuola's non standard English, Achebe's re-creation of traditional way of life, and Soyinka's Nigerian background and allusions to Yoruba gods and beliefs. Also as expected, writers were better received in academic articles than in reviews. There were no remarkable differences otherwise in English and American praise for Tutuola's imaginative and graphic adaptation of Yoruba folklore; Achebe's objective and terse style, and his simple but forceful language; Soyinka's confidence and skillful integration of tra ditional and modern theatrical elements. Both sides equally complained about the loss of "primitive magic" in Tutuola's later books, about what some regard as Achebe's over-emphasis on background descriptions and over-use of proverbs, and about Soyinka's complex plots, metaphysical subtleties and a tendency towards grandiloquence. Contrary to expecta tions, American articles on these writers were more numerous and more diversified. These studies attest to a growing interest and augur well for Tutuola's re-assessment, as well as increased appreciation for Achebe and Soyinka. In conclusion, the study emphasized the need for greater cosmopol itan outlook among foreign reviewers and critics, and through them the readership, for a deepening and broadening of criticism through research, which in turn would give greater weight to critical opinions, to the mutual benefit of African writers and those who read or interpret them. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My most sincere thanks go to members of my dissertation com mittee, and especially to Dr. Robert Stephens for his thoughtfulness and guidance. My appreciation also goes to the reference librarians, particularly Mr. Thomas Minor and Mrs. Jackie Branch of the Jackson Library, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, for their willing cooperation and support. The financial assistance of the United Negro College Fund, Incorporated, is graciously acknowledged. Finally, my heartfelt gratitude for unflagging encouragement and kindness go to my husband, Dr. Ewa Eko, and to our friends, espe cially Dr. George Breathett. A special note of thanks is due to Mrs. Doris B. Rice for her beautiful typing and helpfulness. i 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Ii I PREFACE 1 CHAPTER I. TOWARDS A CRITICISM OF AFRICAN LITERATURE 5 II. AMO£ TUTUOLA 19 Tutuola's Reception in Critical Reviews 21 Tutuola's Refutation in the Critical Journals and Critical Introductions 42 Reception of Tutuo la in Critical Surveys 62 A Book-Length Study of Tutuola 78 III. CHI NUA ACHEBE , 84 The Immediate Reoeption of Chinua Achebe in Reviews 85 Reception of Ashebe in Articles. 110 Reception of Aehebe in Critical Surveys 129 Achebe's Reputation in Critical Studies 145 IV, WOLE SOYINKA 156 Immediate Reception of Soyinka in Popular Reviews 159 Reception of Soyinka in Articles 188 Reception of Soyinka in Critical Surveys 210 A Book-Length Study of Soyinka 226 V. CONCLUSION. 236 BIBLIOGRAPHY, 247 INDEX OF REVIEWS. 248 Criticism of A fin-son Literature,. ....... 262 CriticaZ Works an. Tutuola, Achebe and Soyinka • .^ < .• •»•••••• 266 Works hy tutuola, Achebe and Soyinka 274 iv 1 PREFACE A study of the literary reputations of the three Nigerian writers Tutuola, Achebe, and Soyinka might seem premature at this stage in their lives. At 54, 44 and 39 years of age respectively, they presumably have many productive years ahead, and might yet produce better works. Some would therefore wait till the end of their literary careers to evaluate them more fully. Critical evaluation is a continuous literary process, however, and therefore of great importance at any stage in a writer's career, both for present information and as invaluable record for future studies. What this study entails has been very clearly laid out by Profes sor Altick in his essay, "Tracing Reputation and Influence." According to him, "The study of reputation begins, obviously, with contemporary reception, whether of a single work or of an author's book-by-book pro duction from the beginning of his career to its end. If a poem was an immediate success, what did it contain that so delighted its first read ers? If it failed, what ideas or literary qualities either alienated the audience or, at best, left it indifferent? What specific features of style and content were most commented upon?"' This study attempts to document as fully as possible the con temporary reception of each of the three writers in England and America. ^Richard D. Altick, The Art of Literary Research (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., Inc., 1963), pp. 93~94. 2 Relevant documents include (a) immediate reviews that greeted the works of art as they first came off the press and remarks made on the spur of the moment, very often too short to be of much importance for a critical evaluation, but interesting for the attitudes behind the remarks; (b) essays by critics, who presumably had time to read, digest and judiciously evaluate these works; (c) closer examination of these works in books of critical survey; and (d) book-length interpretative studies on individ ual authors.