Apartheid through the eyes of Nadine Gordimer

As ignorant as it may sound as a white American man, I was totally unaware of the fact that in South Africa there are both white Africans and black Africans.  Furthermore, I had heard about apartheid in my AP European History class in high school, but I never really understood the full extent of apartheid until my recent study of apartheid in my World Literature course.  The racial tensions between many South African races led to a very unequal division among themselves, fully dominated by the white South Africans.

Apartheid is, well, evil.  Apartheid is unfair on so many levels because of the inequality it brings to citizens within the same nation.  The division of races in South Africa was nothing more than whites, especially those of European decent, feelings superior over those of another race or color.  As crazy as it may sound, those living in South Africa were required to carry an ID card that determined their race, whether it was "white", "black", "Indian", or "colored".  The country of South Africa was fully segregated among the races from education and medical care to beaches and other public areas.  Apartheid is very comparable to the Jim Crow laws of "equal but separate" in the United States for black Americans which thrived until about 1965.

Nadine Gordimer, arguably the most legendary female author of South Africa, wrote many stories in response to apartheid.  Gordimer was one of the biggest advocates for ending or putting a stop to apartheid and discussed how unfair it is for there to be segregation.  As a Nobel Peace Prize winner, Gordimer is truly able to reach a larger audience metaphorically within her writing.  Two of her stories that greatly influenced me were "Good Climate, Friendly Inhabitants", and "Amnesty".  These two stories left a lasting impact on my view of the cruelty and ignorance of apartheid.

First, in "Good Climate, Friendly Inhabitants", the story revolves around one white woman living in South Africa during apartheid.  The woman works at a mechanic shop as an account.  Throughout the story, the woman is very stereotypical for a white woman living in South Africa at the time.  She is very gullible, ditzy, and extremely racist.  She feels that the black men working in the mechanic shop are nothing but below her and that "on the whole they're not a lot of natives."  She is very naive in her perception of the black men working the mechanic shop; they're actually not natives, they're human beings who have the ability to think.  In particular, she talks about one black man working in the shop who she calls "boss man".  Boss man expresses to the woman, "Here I'm Jack because Mpanza Makiwane is not a name, and there I'm Mpanza Makiwane because Jack is not a name..."  Jack/Mpanza Makiwane is explaining to the woman that because of apartheid, depending on where he is, he has to go by different identities.   As a black African living South Africa during apartheid, your heritage was not honored, only your English name in town.

I could not imagine, as a fortunate white American male, experiencing something like apartheid.  In order to be recognized, you had to go by a foreign identity that had no personal connection to you is mind-boggling to me.  I can't imagine if the Japanese came and took over America and forced every American to speak Japanese, receive a Japanese name, and forget their heritage and their history.  As ridiculous as it sounds, that's exactly what the white Africans did to the black Africans during apartheid.

Secondly, Gordimer's short story entitled "Amnesty", discusses one black African woman's struggle to hold down a family during the fight against apartheid.  Her husband, a member of the ANC, fought against the evils of apartheid but was never home or there to support her or the family.  Even though she supported her husband, the woman never received the credit that she deserved and her husband always made it seem as if it were never enough.  In this story, not one character received a name, meaning the the characters within this story represent all men and all women during apartheid.  The overall theme of this story was that women were doing the best that they could with the resources they had but were always pushed into the background.  Moreover, the women who farmed the lands and took care of the children while their men involved themselves in the ANC, where actually the backbone of help.  They were the reason why their men could leave and participate in the ANC and fight against apartheid.  Also, the women were raising the children who would help shape the future of the nation if apartheid were to continue or end.  Gordimer argues that women deserve more credit than they were accounted for.

The issue of women supporting the fight for a cause reminds me of World War II and the involvement of women in the U.S.  The women of the U.S. were arguably one the reasons why WWII ended because of their war efforts.  They helped build victory gardens, went and worked in the factories, and even produced bombs, missiles, and ammunition used by the American forces.  Thanks to women, men were able to go off an fight in war.  An image of Rosie the Riveter saying "We Can Do It" reminds me of the faith that the woman in "Amnesty" proved.

A Very Bold Man

One of the most outspoken and controversial African writers of all time would definitely be Chinua Achebe.  After reading many of his literary works, I am in love with his writing style and love the passion he has for what he believes in. Many of Achebe's most popular works discuss the idea of colonization of Africa by the Europeans and the destruction it has caused.  Furthermore, he evaluates how colonization not only effects Africa physically, and emotionally, but also mentally.  Achebe criticizes colonialism in two of his most powerful works "An Image of Africa", and "Girls at War".

First, "An Image of Africa" discusses Achebe's personal feelings about Joseph Conrad's novel Heart of Darkness and he challenges the fact that it is considered great Western literature.  Conrad's Heart of Darkness inadequately represents Africa in the time that it was written.  Conrad refers to Africa and the African people as pre-historic and that Europeans are far more superior.  Achebe argues that this novel is very misleading and it is not an inaccurate portrayal of Africa because he makes it seem as if Africans are so unintelligent when Africans are actually very rich in culture, very efficient, and are even great artists, sculptors, writers, etc.  The novel questions the humanity of black people and Achebe states, "a novel which celebrates this dehumanization, which depersonalizes a portion of the human race, can be called a great work of art." Achebe goes on to call Conrad a "bloody racist".  How can a novel that is so racist and not even recognize an entire human race be considered a great work of art?  Personally, I find myself absolutely agreeing with Achebe.  Conrad's novel cannot be considered a great work of art when it dehumanizes an entire race.  Just because it's not European doesn't make it to not right, real, or legitimate.

Secondly, Achebe's "Girls at War" discusses the issues of war and violence caused by colonization.  The  short story evaluates one women named Gladys.  Gladys appears in the story as three versions:  an idealist, a business woman, and a revolutionary.  Each "version" of Gladys is the presence of the Ministry of Justice of the country, who she befriends.  First, as an idealist, Gladys runs into the Nwankwo, the Ministry of Justice, at a checkpoint where she requires him to stop in order to check his car for any types of weapons.  Nwankwo appears to be very irritated because why should he have to be stopped if he is in the Ministry of Justice?  However, Gladys, as an idealist, still requires him to stop.  Secondly, Gladys appears in the story as a business woman because she sells things under the table in order to make money in her war-torn country.  She also receives help from Nwankwo and a place to stay, but she repays him with sexual favors.  The sole purpose of Nwankwo and Gladys's relationship is because Nwankwo had access to resources since he was apart of the government that Gladys didn't have.  Lastly, Gladys is revolutionary because she tries to help a wounded solider, however she ends up dying because of a bomb. 

This short story is ironic because sometimes bad things happen for good reasons and good things happen for bad reasons.  For example, the death of Gladys is tragic, but maybe the author chose for her to die in order for her pain and suffering to end since she was doing all she could in order to survive.  Gladys, however, also poorly represented women since she was sleeping around with Nwankwo only because she wanted access to resources not because of pleasure or desire.  With that being said, the theme of this short story is that one will do whatever they can in a time of crisis.  When thing are going bad, you have to look out for yourself, and yourself only.  You can't be generous.  I tend to think of the "every man for himself" idea.  Morally, you want to be able to help every one out and if you can't then you should suffer with every one, but rationally, that's not the case when you're trying to just survive.

If I was put in Gladys's position, I would have acted and behaved in the same manner that she did.  I can't imagine putting myself in the middle of a war-torn country and trying to survive on my own.  Honestly, when times are rough, you have to do what you have to do in order to survive, and that's exactly what she did.  I feel for Gladys and support her decisions within the story.

A Tragic Disadvantage of Colonization

When first hearing my World Literature professor read the poem "Stranglehold of English Lit" in the same manner as she once heard the author, Felix Mnthali, read it, I was somewhat taken aback.  I was wondering to myself why the author would read a poem with such anger, loudness, and power.  I am used to poetry that uses beautiful language and that is easily heard by an audience.  But after thoroughly analyzing the author's message along with reading the article "Creating Space for a Hundred Flowers to Bloom" by Ngugi, I understand exactly why the author read his work in that manner.

Africa is one of the largest grounds for crisis in today's world.  From civil wars to wars between cultures, Africa's rich continent full of resources has been a forefront for complications.  The main reason for this is colonization by Europeans, especially the British.  Colonization, mainly in the early 20th century, has ripped Africa apart.  Due to colonization, African literature has been unable to thrive in the way that it should.  African literature is rich in nature; full of history and tradition.  However, colonization has forced European traditions onto already existing African traditions.  The largest impact would be language.

Literature in Africa can be broken down in three ways:  By "English" in the English, by Africans in English, and by Africans in African language. African literature in African language is scarce due to the fact it is not widely accepted and it hard to understand because there are so many different African languages.  It also hard to put all of the different African languages down on paper.  Furthermore, African literature is only expressed in English, the argument Mnthali is posing in his poem.

Mnthali's poem argues the fact that in order to attempt to read African literature in African languages, one must go to England or Europe in order to study.  Many Africans are educated in Europe.  However, when studying literature at an English university, you learn about the major English authors.  Mnthali mentions in his poem the great author Jane Austen.  He criticizes that an author like Jane Austen who only discusses the issues of class drama in England doesn't correlate to the issues he faces as in African, or the issues that Africa faces.  Mnthali argues, "what about African people?"  Jane Austen means nothing to him, or Africans.  Africans have no connection with her writing and it means nothing to them.  This brings up the larger idea of the colonization of the mind.  Africans were once forced with living under European rule and are now forced to study their literature.  Mnthali states, "Eng. Lit. my sister, was more than a cruel joke---it was the heart of an alien conquest." He is expressing the fact that the British are still trying to conquer Africans by trying to control the literature that they learn.  Once again, this is a sense of mind control.

The whole reason for Africans to travel to Europe in order to study is to learn about THEIR literature, not about English literature.  This is the problem and flaw that Mnthali points out.  I feel that this is very relatable to American colonization.  The United States, in one way or another, has an impact on every nation in the world.  From outsourcing jobs to making sure there is a McDonald's and Pizza Hut in every nation shows the American colonization of the world.  Also, the United States feels that we are the "world protector", or in other worlds, like a world military.  Personally, I feel it isn't America's job to police the world and worry about or try and fix every one's problems.  I feel it is United States's time to step back, re-evaluate our involvement in the world, and try and worry about our own problems that we are faced with in the home front.