Critical Analysis of three poem Refugee mother and child, New York, and Once upon a time.

Name: - Thakar Aneri R

Roll no: - 01

PG registration number: - 12101001

Paper no: - 14 African Literature

Topic: - Critical Analysis of three poem Refugee mother and child, New York, and Once upon a time.

Submitted to: - S.M.T S.B.Gardi Department of English

                             M.K. Bhavnagar University.

    Critical Analysis of Refugee mother by Chinua Achebe.

                                      

                

Introduction:-  Chinua Achebe  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), which is the most widely read book in modern African literature.

Raised by his parents in the Igbo town of Ogidi in south-eastern 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 forThings 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 (1987). Achebe wrote his novels in English and defended the use of English, a "language of colonisers", in African literature.

    Analysis of the poem:-

                                            The title of the poem gives off the initial impression that the poem may focus on refugees: one who flees to seek refuge, the lives of refugee children, their parents, their feelings, their emotions and their pain. 'For a son she soon would have to forget'. This foreshadows the idea that her son is dying, and she would have to forget him to adapt to her tragic loss. 2 The metaphor in the first stanza, 'No Madonna and Child could touch that picture...', relates to the idea of Mary and her child, Jesus. The picture perfect image - the ideal image of motherhood. The picture of a beautiful, serene mother with her holy new born child. Realistically the scene would have been far from that idea of bliss. The idea of the first stanza is that the tenderness that the character, the mother, expresses towards her child in the poem surpasses the ideal image of Mary and Jesus.

                                        

                                               The two situations do not even compare to the depth of love and tenderness of the Refugee Mother and Child. 3 The poet uses the repetition and the contrasting ideas of the word 'washed' in describing the emaciated state of the refugee children. 'Unwashed...' - the hygienic state, 'and 'washed-out...' the physical state of the children due to the lack of food. 4 'Blown empty bellies', the physical appearance of the children's stomachs because of the limited food supply of only carbohydrates. From this unhealthy diet the combination of acids and gases blow out the stomach of the children. This vivid description could also possibly be a pun to the blowflies in Africa. 5 'A ghost smile', this metaphor could possibly be two ideas: The mother is happy because she is with her son, you can tell she is happy but her smile is faint, hard to notice. Her happiness can't easily be seen, her smile is not shown in a physical appearance, it holds happiness that gives off its emotion in a feeling which can't quite be explained, but can be felt by others. This metaphor shows how the mother keeps a fake, or 'ghost' smile on her lips for her child's sake - so her son doesn't have any fears or worries because he feels content because his mother is content. 6 In her eyes you can see her pride in her son. It is inconspicuous and faded like the figure of a ghost. This line of the poem conveys the mother's pride towards her son, the poem describes this by being able to faintly see her pride towards her son in her eyes. 7 The use of the word 'skull' is a common symbol for death and foreshadows or represents the death of her son. 8 Singing is commonly known as a happy experience, 'singing in her eyes' could possibly be how the Mother expresses her pride, content and happiness in her son, and how this is passed. Somewhat like the idea of the ghost smile, you can't see or hear the Mother singing it is seen in her eyes. 9 This simile compares the two ideas of a normal over looked action in another life and a tender and cautious action in their world, the world of the Refugee Mother and Child. In this gentle action, due to her sons dying condition, she takes care while she carefully parts his hair - her way of gently expressing love to her son. This little act being one of the few things she can do for her son and one of the few ways she can express her love to him. This action is being compared to putting flowers on a tiny grave of a dead child because it is a gentle and careful action - something you would do very cautiously. And 'tiny grave' because of her sons little size due to his young age. If the child is already passed on when his Mother is parting his hair, this idea of death links to the distinct previous use of the word 'skull', by the poet. With this evidence, the poem could also be after the child has died and the mother is still holding and caressing her child, gently, carefully and cautiously yet - he is no longer alive. This action is explained in a simile and compares her parting his thinning hair to laying flowers on a tiny grave - another link to the possible idea that the son is already dead. The mother is gently parting her son's hair as a way to say goodbye, since he has passed on - just like another form of saying good bye, placing flowers on a grave starting closure and acceptance.

    Analysis of  New York:-

    Introduction:-  Léopold Sédar Senghor (9 October 1906 – 20 December 2001) was a Senegalese poet, politician, and cultural theorist who for two decades served as the first president of Senegal (1960–1980). Senghor was the first African elected as a member of the Academic française Before independence, he founded the political party called the Senegalese Democratic Bloc. He is regarded by many as one of the most important African intellectuals of the 20th century.

    Analysis of the poem New York:-

                                      Leopold Sédar Senghor believes that every African shares certain distinctive and innate characteristics, values and aesthetics. In the poem ‘New York’, Senghor argues that the black community of Harlem should ‘Listen to the far beating of your nocturnal heart, rhythm/ and blood of the drum’ and ‘let the black blood flow into/ your blood’. The word nocturnal is interesting because it refers to the image of night. By using the imagery of night, Senghor is asserting that one’s African heritage (one’s Blackness) is both inescapable and natural (like night-time). Negritude is the active rooting of a Black identity in this inescapable and natural African essence. The major premise of Negritude is therefore that one’s biological make-up (race) defines one’s outer (skin colour) as well as inner (spirit/essence) traits. Negritude is a concept which holds that there is a ‘shared culture and subjectivity and spiritual essence’ among members of the same racial group. As Irele explains, there is a ‘parallel between this conception and the racial doctrines propounded in Europe, presenting the Negro as an inherently inferior being to the white man, and which provided the ultimate ideological rationale for Western imperialism’. Instead of rejecting the (colonialist) theory that race defines one’s being; Negritude rejects the assumption that the African is inherently inferior to the “white man”. To Senghor, this makes Negritude a weapon against colonialism and an ‘instrument of liberation’.

To Senghor, the African essence is externalized in a distinctive culture and philosophy.( This claim is supported by Senghor’s assertion that Negritude – the rooting of identity in one’s natural essence – is ‘diametrically opposed to the traditional philosophy of Europe’ (the colonizer). To Senghor, European philosophy is ‘essentially static, objective… It is founded on separation and opposition: on analysis and conflict’. In contrast, African philosophy is based on ‘unity’, ‘balance’ negotiation and an appreciation of ‘movement and rhythm’. As Loomia notes, Senghor describes African culture ‘in terms of precisely those supposed markers of African life that had been for so long reviled in colonialist thought – sensuality, rhythm, earthiness and a primeval past’. The traditional stereotypes of African culture are not directly challenged by Negritude – Africans areessentially spiritual according to Senghor – they are modified. Negritude is a process of negotiation which proposes a counter-myth or counter-reading of those traditional stereotypes with the aim of valorizing and celebrating the African personality.

Senghor’s conception of Negritude holds that one’s inner and outer essence is informed, defined by one’s race. This position – that race is biological and informs one’s character – has encountered criticism because it relies on an incorrect conception of race. Senghor’s conception of race asserts that a person from Ghana, Senegal and Liberia are all biologically African – and therefore share the same African essence. However, as Michael Jones notes ‘there is no biological or genetic foundation for the grouping of individual humans into a racial group’. There is no such thing as a race biologically speaking; race is a social construction. If there is no biological foundation for Senghor’s assertion that the African race shares certain essential features then the concept of Negritude appears to be invalidated. It therefore appears that rooting Black identity in an inescapable and natural African essence becomes problematic.

A possible response to this criticism is to adopt a more sophisticated understanding of race. Although Senghor’s Negritude relies on a biologically constructed concept of race, the sophisticated-Negritude critic could cite racial constructivism. Racial constructivism is the position that holds that as society labels individuals as belonging to certain racial groups (regardless if they are justified to) and that belonging to racial groups entails ‘differences in resources, opportunities, and well-being, the concept of race must be conserved, in order to facilitate race-based social movements or policies, such as affirmative action, that compensate for socially constructed but socially relevant race differences’, There is no biological foundation for race but the concept can be used to enable a common identity. A shared history (of slavery, colonialism) and shared experiences (of being African, the interaction between white Europe and black Africa, institutional racism) allow for the rooting of identity in Africa. The sophisticated-Negritude critic is able to cite racial constructivism as the foundation for a shared African identity and escape the criticism against Senghor’s biological conception of race.

Negritude is a process of negotiation which attempts to alter the value of those labels attached to Africa. This negotiation with the coloniser has been criticised. Frantz Fanon explains ‘the efforts of the native to rehabilitate him and to escape from the claws of colonialism are logically inscribed from the same point of view as that of colonialism’. The attempt to produce an African personality ensures the “native” uses the same logic of the coloniser. As Ran Green stein notes ‘no pre-colonial discourses of Africa are known and it is highly doubtful those indigenous conceptualizations of African… ever existed’. “Africa” is a colonial concept that reduces a multitude of cultures, tribes, sects, religions and peoples into a simply defined and generic “essence” which is easily controlled and understood by the coloniser. Negritude doesn't appear to challenge colonisation.

A possible reply may be that it is permissible for the colonised to utilize the tools of the coloniser if used to the fight against marginalization and cultural domination. A strategic move can be made to accept the “essentialism” of the coloniser (as Negritude does in asserting that race defines one’s being) with the aim of liberation. However, the strategic-essentialist Negritude remains unsatisfactory because it mirrors identically the way colonialism works and therefore offers no meaningful opposition to the coloniser. The main problem arises because strategic essentialism is itself the logic of colonialism. Strategic essentialism holds that for political and practical purposes it is advantageous to adopt the position that all people of a certain grouping share the same “essence”. In the colonisation of Africa, this is exactly the process the coloniser took in regards to the inherent value of those peoples it encountered. Colonisation holds that all Africans are the same because it is advantageous politically as well as financially. Therefore strategic essentialism, being itself the logic of colonisation, will ultimately commit the same crimes of marginalization (between classes, sexes and religions) and cultural domination (from more powerful tribes over lesser ones). Naturalized and apparently organic in nature – because it proclaims being African as a positive thing – Negritude becomes a tool in furthering the process of colonisation in the minds of the colonised. Although Senghor saw Negritude as a way of combating colonialism, Negritude is implicit with the process of colonial domination. The counter-reading of racial stereotypes which Negritude proposes fails to challenge the cultural domination of colonialism at its root.

    Critical analysis of the poem once upon a time by Gabriel Okara:-

     Introduction: - 'Once Upon a Time', was written by Gabriel Okara, who is a Nigerian poet. He often explains what happens when a traditional African culture meets the forces of the Western way of life. I think the poem was written to outline the fake personalities of many people and to try and get them to return to a natural and innocent state

    Analysis of the poem:-

                                        The poem tells of the conversation between what seems to be a father and son, where the father wants to learn from his son how to go back to normality and no longer be fake. The poem 'Once Upon A Time' starts by the father telling his son how the people, or 'they', 'used to laugh with their hearts'. I think that the word 'they' refers to western people who are white. Also this description in the poem gives the impression of genuine emotion given off by the people. 

He then moves on to say that now they only, 'laugh with their teeth, while their ice-block cold eyes search behind his shadow'. This gives off very negative, fake and false feelings and it is a very cold description. This affects the tone of the poem that now becomes sinister and bitter.

Stanza two of the Gabriel Okara poem then reveals more of the past when it is said that, 'they used to shake hands with their hearts', again this image reveals true and genuine emotion. But just as in the first Stanza the present reality is then discussed when it is said that, 'that has gone, now they only shake hands without hearts while their left hands search his empty pockets'. This shows that, again the people are fake and seem to be using the man to see what they can get.

'Once Upon A Time' Poem, Stanza Four, Presents the Adaptations and Solutions.

Stanza three of poem 'Once Upon A Time' then goes to explain more about the changes he has noticed in these false people. Again the Stanza starts positive with the phrases, 'feel at home', 'come again', but then goes on to say that he will come again, 'once, twice' but there will 'be no more thrice' for then 'I find doors shut on me'. This shows that the people lie when they say the positive phrases and after a few visits they have all that they want from the man; their falseness is reflected in the language they use.

The first three Stanzas of the poem 'Once Upon A Time' have the same structure. They start by telling the past and explaining how things used to be, but then they tell the negative reality. I think this is used to compare the times and introduce the reader to the situation. 

Stanza four presents the adaptations and solutions that the man has found to counter the problems. It starts by saying that the man has, 'learned many things', already suggesting that he has changed to fit in.

He then explains the things he has learnt. He tells of the false personalities or of his 'many faces'. He tells that he has learnt to 'wear' these faces, suggesting that he wears faces for different situations. For example, he says he has an, 'office-face, street-face, and host-face, proving that he acts differently under different circumstances. He then adds that they have, 'conforming smiles, like a fixed portrait'. This suggests even more falseness and changes.

Poem Stanza Five: Learned to Laugh With Only His Teeth.

Stanza five of the poem tells of the fake attributes to go along with the fake looks. It also repeats some of the acts that were mentioned earlier in the poem. Repetition seems to be a key technique in this poem. He says that he has also, 'learned to laugh with only his teeth' and 'shakes hands without his heart'. This suggests that he has copied the western ways as this is what they did earlier in the poem. He then goes even further by saying he has learned to say, 'Goodbye' when he means, 'Good-riddance' and 'Glad to meet you, without being glad'. I think that the man is ashamed of him and is confessing to his son how far the fake attitudes have developed; he seems to hate what he has done. Stanza six and seven then show the man showing his regret as he says, "I want to be what I used to be when I was like you", showing that he wants to be honest and truthful again.

My Laugh in the Mirror Shows Only My Teeth, Like a Snake's Bare Fangs'.

He then calls his new personality muting which suggests he thinks they are boring and have no expression. It is as though he can no longer find his own voice to express what he really thinks and feels. He then says he wants to, 'relearn how to laugh, for my laugh in the mirror shows only my teeth, like a snake's bare fangs'. This gives off negative feelings as a snake is seen to be poisonous and not to be trusted; a symbol of deceitfulness and treachery from the bible. I think this is a very good description as it really makes the reader realise that the man loathes himself. The final Stanza, number seven, shows the man asking his son, 'how to laugh. Show me how I used to laugh and smile, once upon a time, when I was like you'. This shows the man's true regret and he realises his fakeness and problems. An ironic and hopeful ending as he wants to learn from his son how to be what he used to be.