Assignment due Wednesday

[Mr. N.]

Please read THE GENTLEMEN OF THE JUNGLE by Jomo Kenyatta.

Background: Kenyatta led a rebellion against British Colonial rule in
Kenya, a rebellion that eventually succeeded. He eventually became
the first president of an independent Kenya - and not an
uncontroversial one, either.

Please read his story:

http://www.africawithin.com/kenyatta/imperialism.htm

Then please blog a response. You could alternatively choose to blog
about Nervous Conditions instead.

Just remember, everyone needs 2 entries minimum.

Best,

Mr. N.

[Chad Stakutis]

I thought this was a great story that many of us can relate to.
Sometimes
people will try to take advantage of a situation to better themselves.
I
thought it was clever how the man was able to turn his enemies against
one another and literally burn to the ground. I also see this story as
a
strong analogy of how Kenyatta was able to defend his 'hut' and drive
away the intruding British.

[Sonja D]

I think this story relates to Nervous Conditions, and how doing what
you are "supposed" to do, or "following the rules", doesnt always
work. In the story the man building the hut is like Tambu trying to
go to school. At first, both the man and Tambu play fair, which they
discover doesn't always work. The man gets his hut stolen, and Tambu
doesn't earn the money for school. In the end the man tricks the
animals to get ahead, and Tambu's teacher "tricks" people to get her
into school.

[Sonja D]

Also, I think Kenyatta uses a lot of symbolism to describe his own
experiences. The man symbolizes the people of Kenya,the animals
symbolize the british, and the huts symbolize Kenya. I believe he is
saying he tricked the British into turning against eachother, as chad
said, and then defeated the them when they were weak.

[Adam Shoemaker]

Sonja, I agree that Kenyatta uses this story as an allegory for the
British control of Kenya. I don't know how Kenyatta managed to drive
off the British rulers, but it would seem that he played the Europeans
off each other and used the political chaos to rise up and overthrow
the government. From this story, Kenyatta seems like a rather violent
man who does not believe in the power of nonviolent paths to peace.
When the man in the story tries to use the legal system to resolve his
problems, he discovers that the government is corrupt and that he
cannot find justice that way. In the end, he must kill the animals to
find peace, and although this is a gruesome end, the man claims that
it is worth the cost. Thus, I imagine that Kenyatta is an aggressive
man who believes that the ends justify the means.

[Chad Stakutis]

I agree that symbolism plays a large role in this short
story. The elephant at first appears to be decent, but
we soon find out that he is only looking to further his
own agenda rather than being fair with the man. I think
this is a fair comparison to the British coming to Africa.
At first the British and other Europeans came to spread
religion and to help people. Not to long after that, they
realized they could control the people of Africa and
bring forth their own form of government to press upon
the natives.

[Adam Shoemaker]

I really like this story, because it has multiple levels of meaning.
If it were taken out of context, and the reader knew nothing about the
history of Kenyatta and his fight against the British, it could be a
children's fable that warns against avarice. The leaders of the
jungle see the man's hut and want one of their own, so their greed
leads them to steal his huts as soon as he makes them. When he makes
a giant hut, they all become filled with greed and jealousy and try to
claim the hut as their own. The animals begin to fight, and
eventually they all die as a result of their greed and their foolish
quarreling. This reminds me of stories I heard as a child; this
familiarity, in fact, probably made this story a very effective piece
of propaganda. When people read it, they felt that it made sense and
were thus more open to the revolutionary message that Kenyatta
presents.

[Merrill]

Adam I think that is a really good point- this story almost has the
tone of a fable or story with a moral. In fact, when I was first
reading the story I was reminded of the three little pigs as the
elephant took shelter in the man's hut- just like each of the pigs
take shelter in the other one's stronger house. Kenyatta is clearly
sending a message to the African people by writing this tale, and
although he may be saying that you must stand up for yourselves
against oppressive forces, there is another less heroic point being
made as well. The man in this jungle used violence in the end, and
completely kills off all the power forces that stood in his way. It
is frustrating to me that the man is completely fine with this as
well, simply remarking that "peace is costly, but it's worth the
expense." I know he tried to negotiate with the leaders before during
the meetings, but I feel like this story is ultimately sending a
message of violence is the answer to everything.

[Merrill]

Also, to relate this to Nervous Conditions, I was reminded of Nyasha
while reading about the Kenyan man in the story. As we discussed
today, Nyasha's anger and confusion build up inside her, caused by her
position in two different worlds, and because of these bottled up
emotions she has a screaming fit and a breakdown at the end of the
book. The man in the story is so frustrated by these animals and
feels taken advantage of, so he too has his own form of a "screaming
fit" and burns down the hut with animals. In both cases, it was the
outside forces of the main character's environment (like the English
influences on Nyasha and the oppressive animals on the man) that cause
the characters to resolve to violence or rage to express themselves.

> > presents.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Jacob]

I liked this story a lot. It draws a great parallel to what happened
with colonialism in Africa, with the big exception being that the
Africans did not realize what was happening until it was too late for
them to counteract it. Ethopia, I think, was the one exception to
this; just like in the story, it played off the greed of the
colonizers and got them to fight each other in order to trick them
into destroying themselves. While, at the end, this story does spread
a message of violence, I think it also is saying that peace is not
something that just happens, that you have to actively reach out for
it. But as Merrill said, the author does definatly take the stance
that not everyone can be peaceful, that sometimes violence is an
option.

[Jacob]

Going back to how violence plays a roll in this story, I'd be
interested as to whether or not Chinua Achebe or the author of Nervous
Conditions would agree with the author of the story's conclusion that
violence was necessary. Throughout the Things Fall Apart Okonkwo
leaned towards violence and it was a trait that was in many ways
valued to Umofia. The book is very nuanced however, so that may or
may not be a reflection of the author's beliefs. Also, in Nervous
Conditions, there are incidents of violence, such as when Kyasha and
her dad fight, which could be viewed as promoting violence as a method
of liberation.

[Mei-Yee]

I agree that there are underlying meanings in the story apart from its
being a parable.

The animals seem to represent the European countries that invade the
African continent, and the man is the African. Curiously, and quite
ironcially, the Europeans are depicted as animals. In the African
point of view, the Europeans are the "savages" who are impolite or
unruly, and take over other people's lands at their own will without
the consent of the first inhabitants.

The man also reminds me of Nelson Mandela, who used nonviolent
protestations to lead his country to freedom and get what he wanted.

On Oct 5, 8:27 pm, Merrill <merrillbr...@yahoo.com> wrote:

[nikita]

I agree with what Sonja. As I was reading the book I saw many
similarities between Tambu and then man. Tambu just let things happen
because she always thought she had to work hard and obey. So she kept
working and working, and obeying and obeying, but she soon realized
that her hard work didn't pay off. At the same time the man kept
building huts, and when the jungle "government" told him that it was
no longer his hut, he was too afraid to disobey because he didn't want
to anger the animals of the forest (in fear of getting harmed). So, he
kept building more huts for himself, and working hard in order to get
what he wanted. But in the end he realized that he can't always just
work and obey to get what he wants. He realized he needed to stand up
and show the unfairness of the situation by disobeying. And this is
the same lesson that Tambu learned at the end of the story: sometimes
it's okay to not obey.

[Ali Smith]

I also agree with Sonja about the symbolism in this story. I think it
is intertesting how the animals, who represent the Europeans, claim to
be "gentlemen chosen by God" because this is very similar to how the
missionaries felt. They believed that they had the right to go into
Africa and try and change people's beliefs because this was their job
in life.

[Ali Smith]

I liked the ending of the story, I though it was interesting how all
the animals ending up fighing for the last home. This remined me the
class disscussion we had on colonialism. The middle of the story was
symbolic of how all the European countries at first took what they
could find, when there was what seemed like endless land and resources
to be had in Africa. But by the end of the story when the houses were
decaying, because the animals neglected to take care of them, all the
animals ended up fighting for the little space left in the last house.
This is symbolic of competition for land and resources between
European countries. Once the resources started to get used up and the
soil became less fertile, each country got more greedy and craved more
and more power.

[Jacqui]

I also agree with Adam how this fable reminds me of a gorier
children's fable. It almost reminds me of the animalism of animal farm
and how each animal represents a symbol, for instance I saw each of
the animals representing different european countries attempting to
take parts of Africa for themselves, while attempting to take over
different countries (huts) for themselves. I would find it interesting
to see what time period this short story was written in, if it was
close to the publishing of animal farm or not. I feel it was powerful
of Kenyetta to use a man instead of another animal, for it makes the
read er sympathize with him, which makes them reevaluate about how
hypocritical they are acting.

[Joshua P]

After I read this story I thought of all the animals as different
countries. The elephant to me represented the Dutch because the other
animals didn't take any huts until after he took the first hut. The
dutch were like the elephant because they were the first big explorers
of Africa. I think the claws and teeth that all the animals had were
weapons that the Europeans had, like guns and swords. The huts rotting
could symbolized the Europeans crops because in many places their
crops couldn't grow.

[young]

Wow, this was quite the story. I thoroughly enjoyed it despite the
grim message at the end. I agree with everyone so far in the aspect
that the animals were most definitely the European countries. The
Animals felt that the man wasn't using what he had to the best of his
ability so they took it and exhausted the huts. This is very similar
tho how the Europeans treated the Africans with their land and
resources.
Mei-Yee's point was very interesting too. It didn't even register
with me that the author chose to depict the Europeans as animals.

[young]

The "moral" of the story, if you will, is that peaceful negotiations
don't always work out, and that the ends justify the means when
working towards peace. I think this is the wrong way to go about
problems, but i can see where the man in the story is coming from. He
tried to be nice, and when that didnt work out, he had to start over.
This happened, and happened until he had to step in and stop the
animal from taking advantage of him.

[Tim Lamere]

What disturbs me about this story is that it enforces the idea that
two different civilizations or people cannot work together peacefully.
Instead the story outlines that each culture tries to take advantage
of the other culture and remain "on top." Conflict ensues conflict
until one of the civilizations is eliminated. As much as I disdain
this idea it seems to be supported by both Things Fall Apart and
Nervous Conditions. In both books conflict rises until one side cannot
withstand it.

[Bella]

This was a nice read. After the first paragraph i thought the man
could be related to Nyasha when her dad wasn't listening to what she
had to say after she came home from the dance with Tambu and Chido.
Babamukuru had already put an idea in his head that Nyasha was
disobedient and loose. When Nyasha tried to defend herself Babamukuru
didn't want to hear it and got so upset that he began to beat her.
Like Nyasha, the man in the short story didn't have a chance to defend
himself against the elephant. By the end of the story i felt as if the
man reminded me more of Tambu because he tried to build another hut
and the Rhinoceros ordered him to quit. In Nervous Conditions Tambu
tried to raise money for her school fees and her mother tried to
discourage her from selling the mealies. Soon after her brother stole
her mealies, an attempt to stop her from raising money.

[Connor]

I think it is also important to look at some of the other symbols
represented in the story. for example the man is much worse off thhen
the other animals because he cannot defend himself against their claws
and teeth. the claws and teeth could represent the resources that the
european countries have that are not available to the people in Kenya.
For example weapons and money. But even with a lack of these resources
the people of Kenya defeated the Europeans through wit and
intelligence.

[Connor]

i also think it is important to note that the man tried a nonviolent
approach to the situation and it failed. He was not given proper
treatment and his hearing was very biased and one sided. had the man
protested he would have been attacked by the animals so his only
approach was to kill them while they were unaware. By tricking the
animals the man leveled the playing field and made a fair fight.

[McKenzie]

I liked this story a lot. When I was reading I saw similarities in
Nyasha and in the Kenyan man from the story. Nyasha kept her
frustrations bottled up inside. Just like the man when he did not get
a chance to tell his side of the story, he just did what the council
told him to do which resulted in each of his huts being taken away
from him by another animal. Each time a hut was taken from him, his
anger built up more and more. When he finally tricks them he also
releases all the anger that was inside him and can now live peacefully
in the forest. Nyasha has her own moment when she is talking with
Tambu in the middle of the night and she becomes louder and begins to
rant about the pressure that she deals with from school. She held it
all inside her and let it out in a bold way. At one point she gets on
all fours and begins to rip up her school books with her teeth. Both
Nyasha and the man hold their anger and thoughts in until they cannot
take it any longer, they realize something needs to be done.

[McKenzie]

I agree with Mei-Yee when she compared the animals in the story to the
European countries invading Africa, and how the man in the story
represents Africa trying to protect what is rightfully his. The
Europeans were manipulative and used force when they saw something
they wanted, which is exactly what the animals did whenever the man
built a brand new hut for himself after the previous animal took the
previous hut.

I also like a point that Tim made about how it was tough to see 2
different cultures clash and not be able to work together and how they
would rather provide for themselves. It really shows us how unwanted
each were to the other.

> > animals the man leveled the playing field and made a fair fight.- Hide quoted text -

[TJordan]

I thought this story did a great job of showing the dilemma of
colonized people, within a sort of children's fable. It also really
seems to reflect the situation in Nervous Conditions, especially
through Nyasha's eyes; the Africans are lured into accepting the
colonizers because they're told that they're really being helped, like
through education (and in this story through "occupying undeveloped
space"), but in reality they are being manipulated. Kenyatta's
attitude towards this also reflects Nyasha's: they both feel like they
are being "trapped" by these colonizers, who are slowly changing the
laws and social rules to take power away from the Africans and give it
to themselves. Kenyatta and Nyasha also both share the feeling of
wanting to break free of this entrapment, but while Kenyatta is able
to successfully do this by using the animals' own greed to destroy
them, Nyasha is unfortunately less powerful & triumphant in her own
story.

[Zack Cutler]

I found it interesting how the "colonizers" were portrayed as jungle
animals and that the "colonized" was portrayed as a man. This goes
against the premise of colonization; that the colonizers are making
the people they are colonizing more civilized. However, the jungle
animals are the ones doing the colonizing, suggesting that they are
either more uncivilized than the man or that they have no right to be
colonizing his land.

[Zack Cutler]

I agree with Connor, and this can relate to colonialism. The people of
Africa were given no opportunity to shed their thoughts on what was
happening, because the Europeans deemed, them uneducated, just as the
animals did to the man in the story. Since the Europeans did what they
thought was in the best interest of the Africans, they instead
stripped the Africans of their rights.

On Oct 6, 9:43 pm, Connor <con...@deignan.com> wrote: