Saturday, March 24, 2018
Was Okonkwo right?
So, hear me out on this one. As we know, Okonkwo wanted to react violently against the British missionaries when he returned from his exile; however, the rest of his village decided that it was best to leave punishments to God. The village's reaction is extremely noble and shows great control and forethought. They were not rash or quick to act on anger, as Okonkwo often was. I deeply respect this action; however, after finishing the novel and considering the widespread influence of colonialism throughout the world, I understand Okonkwo's point as well. To be clear, I don't condone the violent aspect of his intentions, but I do think his initiative to unify his village against British missionaries is admirable. I can't help but wonder what would have happened differently if Okonkwo was able to consolidate his village and successfully separate them from the colonialists. Sometimes it's necessary to stand up for yourself and your community, and I wish Okonkwo could have channeled his rage and violence into efforts to lessen colonial influence. Regardless, I think he's given a somewhat bad rap for wanting to respond to the missionaries. Okonkwo's energy and passion for his culture is inspiring, and I respect that he wanted to preserve his village.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Interesting perspective, Maansi. I also feel like it's easy for us to want to berate Okonkwo for his "violent" demeanor, but at the same time, I feel that in some ways Okonkwo is a product of his culture. Although we ourselves live in a society that largely does not officially condone violence, there are certainly still individuals among us who have bad tempers; and there are definitely abusive people in our world, too. So imagine what those people would be like if we transferred them to a society that doesn't even really have laws against hitting one's own family members (child abuse, domestic abuse, and the like).
Okay, so my point here is that Okonkwo seems to be, by "nature," a very reactive person. And we might think his reaction of wanting to physically drive out the missionaries is extreme even for him. But his culture is one that values proficiency in warfare, so don't you think it would be natural for people in Umuofia to want to drive out the colonizers who are trying to radically change their society, corrupt their brothers, and use force against them?
So I agree with Maansi that Okonkwo was right in wanting to unify his village against the British missionaries. He was raised to think that being a man meant protecting and providing for his family, and I feel like he saw the situation with the missionaries largely as one in which he had to defend himself and his family.
Good question. Of course, the question of whether Okonkwo was "right" is very subjective and up to debate. I agree with Maansi in that I think chopping off the messenger's head was extreme and perhaps unnecessarily violent, but also that his intention to unify his village was admirable. I think his extreme violence ended up driving an even deeper wedge among the divided people of his village, but if I were in his shoes, I think I'd also want to try and bring my people back together. I would probably feel bitter towards the colonialists and missionaries who just came in and disrupted my lifestyle, eroding traditional customs and culture. I think all of us would feel that way, at least in part.
And Chloe, interesting point about defending/protecting his family. The missionaries were the outsiders, the threat. And in fact, they had already broken up Okonkwo's own immediate family because Nwoye joined up with them earlier. Okonkwo felt horror and shame at the fact of his own son betraying him for this "new religion," and at the idea that there would be no one to worship him at his ancestral shrine. He already felt this burning rage inside him, and the fact that his other clansmen wanted to just sit back and let the colonizers take over everything (in his eyes) was just dumping salt on the wound. They were "passive" in his opinion, and not brave/"manly" enough to fight back for what was theirs—ironically, this passiveness seemed to be their downfall from Okonkwo's perspective, when Europeans and Americans overseas were conditioned to think that the people of Africa were violently, brutally, and barbarically "active."
Post a Comment