African Writers of Today; 5; William Abraham

National education television presents African writers of today, a series of programs surveying the literary scene in contemporary Africa. In this program, recorded in the library building of the University of Ghana, we will meet with Professor William Abraham, associate professor of philosophy, author of a recent book, The Mind of Africa. Professor Abraham will be interviewed by the host of this series of programs, Lewis and Coacy, South African author, journalist, and broadcaster. And Mr. Wolle Shoyinka, Nigerian poet, playwright, and lecturer in English at the University of Efe in Nigeria. Mr. and Coacy. The reason why we are here in the University of Ghana is to meet and talk with Dr. Abrahams

on the general problems of African culture and literature. Dr. Abrahams trained as a philosopher at the University of Ghana before proceeding to Oxford, where he later gained recognition as the first black African to become fellow of all souls. Dr. Abrahams last year published a book which has become one of the most controversial book on Africa, The Mind of Africa. Dr. Abrahams in your book, which I've just mentioned, in dealing with African literature, used him to have had definite ideas as to what the artistic obligations of African authors should be, one day if you could develop that thought a bit and tell us exactly what artistic obligations you had in mind. Yes, I wasn't thinking merely of artistic

obligations. What I had in mind was this. And if some writers, which to be called African writers, and by this do not merely wish to refer to the color of their skin, then there must be something connected with literature that they have in mind. A person like Chinoa Chibi, for example, has been known to say that he is writing catering specifically for an African educated audience. Now, when he says this, the presumption is that he believes that there is something in the way of literature that an African educated audience needs, which other producers of literature cannot provide. Now, it occurs to one that there might be a number of things that might distinguish what one might call as African literature from other kinds of literature. First, I wish to say that by African literature, I do not necessarily

understand literature written in some African language, nor indeed literature written necessarily by an African, though what I have in mind is such that only Africans can perhaps do it with justice and success. I think that African literature must be based within the living heritage of the African peoples. Now, this can be done in a number of ways. First, in idiom and style. As African writers in English and French, for example, can make certain distinctive literary features of their own languages, culture and thought, stand behind their expression in English and French. To some extent, it is said that Sangho achieves this. It is said that in his poetry, he creates a certain kind of music that is highly

reminiscent of the music of drums and a reminiscent of Africa. But the first thing that I have in mind when I talk of African literature is that African writers in English and French can make to stand behind their language certain literary aspects of their own African languages. Second, they can also write for and from their African society. I myself see literary persons as persons who produce a certain type of critique of society. When you talk about living heritage, I am glad to use this expression, a living heritage. If this implies that you admit that what exists at present is the legacy, is the framework within which the writer has to work. In other words, there can, I believe, be a hankering

backwards. In other words, a recreation of a past existence for its own sake, rather than an examination of the past in view of present social needs. Could you just clarify? Could you say whether I am with you in this particular? You see a writer's social situation as one which exists now rather than a recreation. Because I think there is a kind of contradiction in the fact that you sort of mentioned some more, almost in the same breath. For me, this represents a kind of contradiction. Contradiction between what and what? To take your question rather than your remark. I shall say that I qualified heritage by living liberately. I know that there are African writers who think of what they imagined must have been the past of Africa. And because you are not competent to dish this out as historians or anthropologists,

think that they will get away by putting these things in the form of novels or plays or poems. Now, I didn't have in mind the things that they fancied represented the past of Africa. That was my intention in describing our heritage as a living heritage. Present African writers must write as being present African writers. And they must realize that they live in Africa today. And now that they should produce critics of African society, they must take African societies as things which exist now. Now African societies as they exist now include a number of facets. First, the old traditional Africa which is still living by the way, because I myself believe that up to 80% of Africa today is still traditional. And of course, there are influences in Africa, mainly Muslim influences and Euro-Christian influences. Now these are

here as part and parcel of modern Africa intermixed. And a writer that wishes to analyze African society in his work so that he brings out significant social factors and can on the strength of his analysis, this prophecy. And that is, be able to write in such a way that don't recognize his work as mirror in African society, not as some dead historical thing, but as a living presence out of which something is growing. Now you know that an African writer should be able to do this. You must take cognizance of all these three facets. In trying to mirror traditional African societies, doesn't this in some way limit, say, an African poet, by so confining him to certain themes which would be much more appropriate to traditional

societies, the imagery that occurs in lots of poetry by Sangho, for instance, would emphasize certain aspects that are traditional. In other words, if an African poet was to take his themes and say present day labor's life, might he not move away from this kind of tradition? Well, if I may, just try to pinpoint that a bit further by reminding you that in your book, the example of poetry which you chose to quote were, in fact, translations of poetry in a can, one of the a can languages, I believe, and was in every sense, what you might call a traditional piece of work. Well, I have an embarrassment of questions here, I don't know what to do, but if I take them in the order in which they came, you wish to know

what a literary person, writing a poem on Legos, might wish to take into account. Of course, it depends on the kind of poem that you wish is to write. But if what you have in mind is this, whether it is possible to write an authentic poem about Legos and introduce traditional, say, Yoruba concepts and ways of life, yes, I dare say that there are lots and lots, thousands of persons living in Legos who are traditional Yoruba, especially in Africa, merely living in a capital city and doesn't change one, doesn't operate one. But the experiences of the modern, you see, you have in your book one thing, I think, it stands out very clearly. You have a very, very clear idea of what you want African society to be, and you have a very clear idea of what the various builders of society,

the artists, the writers, the economists, what places and what functions they should serve within that society. And the point which Luis raised, I think, is that there is, it is possible that one can develop a kind of artificial culture in this respect, because I think that Sango does that. This was the contradiction. But I mentioned earlier. No, not the contradiction in me. The contradiction is in Sango. And remember that when I mentioned in myself that I would have a few words to say about it, yes, that's true. Sango does not, in my opinion, write as an African poet. But what it does is to write French poetry, which is interlated, which odd African allusions. Any Frenchman can do that. I think that it is significant that always he talks of forgiveness and bridges. That he sees himself not as an African writer writing in Africa and for Africa, motivated, pushed, inspired by the complex

present African situation, which in his country, I'd say, would include French influences. It was not right like that. It's not content with the French influences in his own country. But rather, he writes in my opinion as an apologist of France speaking to Africa who understands an African language and an African idiom and can use African mannerisms in his rhythm and cadences. That is what I think Sango does. There's nothing particularly African about his poetry. I'm also interested in this question, but indirectly. I remember in the Cameroons that we played back from the table quarter, a poem by Sango to some Africans who perfectly understand French. They worked as waiters and immediately we started playing this poem back to them. They all left, they walked away, they simply went to interstep. Now what I

have in mind is what role has an African author to play in the national building, national building in the young countries of Africa or elsewhere. Do you have any ideas what his social obligations might be? Yes, I have a few opinions. I have said that the poet, the novelist and the dramatist are all, in my opinion, people who produce critics of society. If they live in African society, then I expect them to produce critics of African society. These literary men and women cannot have their access line outside Africa and claim to be African writers. No, can they even have their access completely buried and immersed in a romantic African past that has no historical basis or more important has no

contemporary significance. As critics of society, they can legitimately be concerned with the past, to the extent that this past conditions the present and affects the future. This kind of point of view can legitimize preoccupation with the past, but the preoccupation should never be allowed to degenerate into sheer archeology. Now I think that these writers in Africa must as it were, contain the revolutionary changes in Africa in their tummy. Their poetry, their plays, their novels should be results of their experience, their digestion of contemporary African situations, together with the revolutionary elements. The tremendous pace of change and

the ideas for the future, ideas of regeneration and salvation, all these are things that writers can profitably put in their wake. Professor Abrams, why do you think it is significant or important? Four African writers writing in English or French to address themselves to a particular audience that is African, why could they address themselves to Frenchmen or to Americans or to the English audience? Of course, it is legitimate for them to do that. I don't think that the French public or the English public feels a particular lack in which can be filled by African writers in English or French. They themselves recognize that literature has a function to play in society. But English writers of English literature, French writers of French literature are not going to fulfill these functions and needs for African society. What reason would they have for doing that? It is natural if anyone

should do this. But African literary creators should undertake this. Just as African scientists undertake to solve some of the scientific problems of Africa, African historians undertake to go into the history of Africa. African politicians consent themselves in politics of Africa. Why should African literary creators be exempted from services that they themselves recognize as genuine? Well, at least we find evidence all the time that one of the greatest preoccupations of those who consciously think of a new African society is the preservation of the philosophies, the ethics of traditional society. Now, again, there seems to be an onus always placed on the writer. The creative writer is a feeling always that it is his duty to preserve these elements. But the pace at which African nations are going right now, the new, the pace is

such that lots of writers feel themselves out of sympathy with these sort of essential to use and expression this essential culture of Africans. They have a feeling and I think with some justification that there really is no place for this in the contemporary thinking, the contemporary experience of the African. Now, it seems to me there is a danger in sort of legislating. It seems to me that there is a kind of constriction of the artist within society, but there is a sort of political expectation in his work. It is true that the philosophies must in some way be preserved, but is it really the best way to make the artist conscious of sort of to use your own word against this interlady of traditional philosophies in a work which you know, which really has no place for that? No, I don't think that writers should interlade their work with anything. I myself don't think that they should restrict

themselves to what is past. I think that they should be creative, that they should feel urgency in their work and they should be contemporary. I'm sorry, please interrupt. I do not suggest confinement now. No, no, no. I'm talking even just about the attempt to make the artist conscious of the embodiment. Yes, I'll come to that in a moderate way. If the concern is to preserve philosophies in Africa as philosophies, then there are others who might perhaps more successfully do this than artists. I myself do not think that an artist-que artist is called upon to preserve a philosophy as a philosophy or a history but if an artist is going to reflect the soul, the human condition of a people, then he has to live through the experience of the people and this experience of the people is not antiquated

archeological buried in the past. I said I thought that 80% of Africa was still traditional. It is here today and if the artist is going to have a complete picture, a complete critique of the African society, then even if he does not produce a bad idea of the society, he must at least be aware of the underlying forces, the social and human forces in the society of which he undertakes to become critique. May I ask, from which segment of this percentage would you say that the present expressive creative artist at the moment and the novelist at the point, from which segment would you say, which is at 80% or at 20%. It depends on what the audience is and the method of publication of course, if you mean published poems, plays and novels put down on paper and ink, then

naturally it is going to be done by people who can read and write. But if Africa has had a literary tradition, then surely literature in Africa cannot have started with letters. Now, Africa has in fact had a traditional literary tradition. You will see that I am not a poet and a writer artist and if you will ignore these horrible expressions. And there are people among these 80% who continue to produce that kind of thing and of those who can write, there are some who deliberately wish to reaffirm their connection with that kind of pristine and elemental literary productivity. Now, you say that in my book, I translated a poem written in Akam by Professor Ankechiha. Now, this was my reason for doing that. To underline the fact that literature in Africa today is not only word one can read in English

or French or in vernacular newspapers, but that there is a literary method and literary production still going on among the 80% and there are people who are taking the trouble to look into this. And I quoted in translation, Ankechiha's poem as an example of the style and feeling of that kind of literary production. Professor Abrams, in this book, he also dealt with purely cultural matters and I think that you use the Akam society as a paradigm of the African society. I want to say, if you could say whether you see any underlying unifying factor for all African cultures, I love the Sahara.

Yes, I did indicate that in the book. Of course, I pointed out that it is deliberately that one talks of a paradigm. When you call something a paradigm, you mean that other comparable things differ from this paradigm in important respects. There are differences in Africa. Of course, everyone knows the differences. That is why it is high time to emphasize the similarities to one point where there is a contradiction in the present creation of society is that I have a feeling that the present, those who actually shape, those who have an influence in the shaping of society today, constitute very much these modern literate theorists. Who, although they are able to say in a kind of idealistic way to point out the necessity or rather to build up a past and important history, I do not feel that at the moment, the more expressive people in society come from this 80 percent.

How do you know what evidence? You know, wait a minute. Although, for instance, there is plenty of writing, there is plenty of, as for instance, a song or there is enough to indicate an awareness of this rich traditional past. Somebody doesn't belong to the 80 percent. No, no, no, that is what I am saying. I am only 20 percent. Although there is enough of that, but I do not see the present. I would like you to give me examples, for instance, here in Ghana, where you think that this, you know, statement, which examples in Ghana, which sort of falsifies this statement of mine. I would like to know what has been done in Ghana today or in any other parts of Africa to ensure that there is very vital part of the traditional society, which, as you say, is believed by the majority of Africans. The whole, the whole of Ghanaian literary production is like that. If you take the poetry of Michael De Anand and a play which he wrote, the play especially was about Comforanocchi,

one of the Magica founders of Ashanti. If you take the efforts of Ifua Sutherland, they are joined in the same way, and they take their roots firmly and deeply from the society. They recognize the society, the present society, just as in normal African thought, as a society to which the past belongs and the present and the future. You know very well that in African thinking, society means society of the dead, the living and the Ombon. Now, the parallel of this in literature here is that people who produce literature go into their roots. That is to say, they allow themselves to be transported into the past, but not just the past that is dead and gone, but the past that affects the present, just as in traditional Africa, and people who say that the dead, the living and the Ombon belong to the same society also say that the dead continue to influence the present society. So, do the Ombon in a way, and so

produces of literature become kinds of prophets, because they, I know they will have two feet, but all they say, they have one in the past, one in the present and another, family in the future. You did not agree then with the rather common contention that Ghana is rather behind some of the other West African countries in the output of contemporary literature. What is contemporary literature? If you take volume, yes, certainly, as in the volume of literature, even considering things proportionally, I believe that Ghana lacks behind Nigeria, but you will find a certain type of literature in Nigeria. If you take Chinoa Chibi, for example, who is a highly respected Nigerian novelist, you will find that he has been preoccupied with traditional Nigeria in a certain way, as necessarily problematic, as something that has often to be overcome, sometimes even to be rejected.

Now, Chinoa Chibi is in fact a very good novelist. He is one of those novelists who, in my opinion, come nearer to being African novelists. But, living Chinoa Chibi aside, if you take others, especially French African writers, you will find that the whole impact reject traditional Africa. When they don't say so, they make apologies for it, they try to explain, and they talk in what must be regarded as sheer nonsense. For example, when Sango says that the African is not intellectual, that reason is Greek, and feeling is Africa, that the Africa knows things with his nose. I mean, that's sheer nonsense. What does he think I have above my nose? A pair of eyes. Reason is not Greek, or African, or European, or American, or Russian, or what you will. Reason is universal. Africans think, just as Greeks did, and thus the Frenchmen do today. All right, I'm sorry gentlemen. At the stage, I have to cut in, we have run short of time.

Thank you very much, Dr. Abrams. We have been talking here with Dr. Abrams, associate professor of philosophy at Ghana University, and author of the Mind of Africa. This program in the series African Writers of Today was recorded at the University of Ghana near Akra. Featured was an interview with the Ghanaian philosopher William Abraham, author of a recent book, The Mind of Africa. Mr. Abraham was interviewed by the Nigerian poet and dramatist Walay Shoyinka, and by the program series host Louis and Corsi, South African author, journalist, and broadcaster. African Writers of Today is produced by National Educational Television in collaboration with the transcription center London. This is MET, National Educational Television.