More on that Wole Soyinka interview...

[Ikhide]

Soyinka says calling Achebe father of African literature is “as ridiculous as calling WS [Wole Soyinka] father of contemporary African drama!” Well, Soyinka is great at drama, a near-genius even, but no one I know has ever called him the father of contemporary African drama. It is fair to conjecture that his retort, cute as it seems, is self-serving and meant to remind us that he is at par with Achebe. You do not reject that which is not offered you. Indeed, In terms of drama as a pioneer, he would be in great competition with greats like Herbert Ogunde and the playwrights of South Africa who danced and fought their way to freedom. I wish people would read a bit of history; for example, go read the South African play, Sizwe Banzi Is Dead by Athol Fugard and learn about John Kani, and Winston Ntshona.

So, on the eve of Achebe’s funeral, what is the problem Soyinka is trying to solve? It bears repeating; It was the Nobel Laureate Nadine Gordimer that bestowed the title on Achebe, not a reprobate not an ignoramus. Achebe, a humble man, waved it aside. I honestly had forgotten about the title until Soyinka resurrected it. It is a (mostly) free world, why would Soyinka be declaring an intellectual fatwa on the heads of those of who regard Achebe as their alpha and omega? Who cares? If he is so bent on protecting the sanctity of African literature, where was his and your outrage when a few weeks ago, Pius Adesanmi, Nduka Otiono and Harry Garuba tried to canonize el-Rufai’s pretend book, The Accidental Public Servant (TAPS) into “contemporary African literature” at Carleton University in Canada?
 

Read more of my response to Tolu Ogunlesi's Facebook response to my response to Professor Wole Soyinka's interview:

 

https://www.facebook.com/#!/ikhide/posts/10151949735289616?comment_id=33009536&notif_t=comment_mention

 

 

- Ikhide

 

Stalk my blog at http://www.xokigbo.com/

Follow me on Twitter: @ikhide

Join me on Facebook: www.facebook.com/ikhide

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

Even if one is to buy the idea, the proper concept is

"Father of Modern African Literature"

because African literature existed centuries before Achebe and Soyinka.

We should do our best to correct that insidious attitude that suggests that African literature is  less than 100 years  old.

thanks

Toyin

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsub...@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Chidi Anthony Opara]

The earlier we forget about that interview, the better for everybody.
When for instance, a writer of WS's status said that there were things
CA should not have written in his last book, it spoke volume of WS's
tolerance of other peoples views. Problem was that the interviewers
refused to probe further to find out those things CA should not have
written and why he should not have written them. Anybody who could
read between the lines would know that, that interview was a veiled
put-down on CA and a veiled self glorification of WS's "literary
genius". It was also a subtle hatchet job for the Obafemi Awolowo
family, whose late patriarch's role during the Nigeria-Biafra civil
war CA criticized in the book in question and whose foundation
honoured WS recently.

CAO.

>  https://www.facebook.com/#!/ikhide/posts/10151949735289616?comment_id...
>
>
> - Ikhide
>
> Stalk my blog athttp://www.xokigbo.com/

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

Was Biafra Prepared for War?

'This week he is now telling us that he personally told Ojukwu that Biafrans were unprepared for war. Haba!

 Does that make sense to you? Is he a military expert?

Why would he be telling military experts (trained soldiers) they are unprepared for war?

And if you were Ojukwu would you not be a drunken soldier to listen to this civilian’s war strategy?'

Being prepared for war implies time to prepare for the kind of war to be fought.

This time implies means, time and personnel to purchase weapons.

It implies the time  to train people to use those weapons as well as in other aspects of military action.

It also implies time to measure the length of the war against the challenges arising from geographical considerations as these relate to continuity of supplies. Once the Biafran Midwest offensive failed to penetrate the West, it meant Biafra would have to fight a defensive war, with supply routes likely endangered.

Biafra did not have the time to address any of these adequately and was hobbled throughout the war on account of these limitations.

These limitations were obvious to various commentators, not only Soyinka.

Awolowo is quoted as making the same point in his last meeting with Ojukwu before hostilities began.

It has been argued that Biafra going into the war was a demonstration of a  form of group mind set when superior reason is  temporarily suspended in the name of group pressures.

Civilians in War Strategy: WWII and the Nigerian Civil war

Military  and war strategy in various wars have been organized  by civilians in collaboration with  soldiers. 

WWII and the Allied Heads of State

The grand strategy  that brought the Second World War to an end was conducted by civilians working with the military.

The decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan and the decision  for the Allies to enter Europe in a manner that divided the continent for decades after between the Soviet Union and the Western powers was not due purely to military initiative.  Political considerations masterminded by civilians  were also at play.

Joseph Stalin, F.D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill, heads of the Soviet Union, the US and the UK,respectively, and all civilians, although Churchill had been a trained and most courageous military officer with a long military career, and Stalin had informal military training and significant military experience, met at the Yalta Conference  in 1945 to discuss the way forward towards wrapping up the war and the shape of the post war world, at a time when it was almost clear that Germany and its allies had lost the  war.

English Minster of Aircraft Production, Lord Beaverbrook

Secondly, England's Minster of Aircraft Production in that war and who was central to accelerating production   of the Spitfire fighter plane as a central defense strategy   in the Battle of Britain, was Max Aitken, Lord Beaverbrook,  a civilian.

The Wikipedia Bevearbrook essay, quoting various sources,  describes his role as fundamental:

"During the Second World War, his friend Winston Churchill, the British Prime Minister, appointed Beaverbrook as Minister of Aircraft Production and later Minister of Supply. Under Beaverbrook, fighter and bomber production increased so much so that Churchill declared: "His personal force and genius made this Aitken's finest hour."

Beaverbrook's impact on war time production has been much debated but his innovative style certainly energised production at a time when it was desperately needed. However it has often been argued that aircraft production was already rising when Beaverbrook took charge and that he was fortunate to inherit a system which was just beginning to bear fruit.^[16] Still, a Time Magazine cover story wrote, "Even if Britain goes down this fall [1940], it will not be Lord Beaverbrook's fault. If she holds out, it will be his triumph. This war is a war of machines. It will be won on the assembly line."^[17]

The Nigerian Civil War and Obafemi Awolowo

Finally, one of the most significant strategists  in the Nigerian Civil War was Obafemi Awolowo, a civilian.

He developed a strategy that may be described as achieving maximum devastating effects  through structural initiatives rather than military action. 

His changing of the currency after Biafran troops  raided Nigerian banks made sure the money stolen became useless overnight and further forced Biafra to the wall in terms of armament procurement, contributing to the serious shortage of weaponry Biafra suffered during the war, although the enigmatic  story of what happened to the monies Ojukwu reportedly  committed to arms procurement from his father's fortune is described as contributing to the shortage of arms.

Biafra is famous for its fabrication of weapons but that was not enough to meet the shortfall.

Awolowo's creation  or advising of the starvation blockade  was one of the most devastating strategies  of the war.

With Biafra already hemmed in by the fall of Port Harcourt and Calabar, thereby blocking access to the sea, with the fall of Enugu, meaning all land routes to the rest of Nigeria were cut off, Biafra struggled to grow its own food through the Land Army, if I remember the name accurately, but the effort could not address the needs of such a large population in the midst of such constant disruption.

Biafra was eventually able to get food in through international pressure, and also smuggle in weapons through the same route, but by then, it may be described as too late.

The contrastive approaches  represented by the non-military strategies in the war-the starvation blockade and Biafra's use of the images and descriptions of the  terrible results of that starvation as a  strategy to refuel itself to keep fighting by inspiring global sympathy that brought in food and weapons  through a most impressive propaganda campaign operating through Biafra radio, Biafran print publication-text and cartoons,  and the foreign PR company that represented Biafra abroad is one of the more intriguing aspect of that war.

Was the Declaration of Biafra  Inevitable?

Secondly, it is not true that the declaration of Biafra was inevitable.

It is true that the Nigerian government may be described as passive in the face of the Northern pogroms.

The question is-

having fled to the East, were the Igbos safe?

Could the pogromites be expected to chase them to the East?

No. That would have been an impractical   expectation particularly since after the pogrom the government tried to arrive at a rapprochement  with Ojukwu and appealed  to him to join the Supreme Military Council.

Ojukwu's rejection of the government's amendment of the Aburi accord may be related to fears  of the govt's accepting most of the Accord  but still chose to state that it had a right to declare a state of emergency in any region, if I remember well.

Would that imply that the govt could invade the East at will?

I would think that the 'Biafra was inevitable' argument si better conducted in relation to the room for maneuver that Ojuwku  had in maintaining control over the territory that he controlled.

Perhaps it was held that the pogroms implied that the very concept of Nigeria had no more meaning for the East  and for  Ndigbo in particular and so should be done away with.

Whatever the case made, we need to scrutinize uncritical declarations that Biafra was investigation. It  was not because various possibilities were open.

thanks
toyin

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

APOLOGIES. CORRECTED VERSION

Was Biafra Prepared for War?

'This week he is now telling us that he personally told Ojukwu that Biafrans were unprepared for war. Haba!

 Does that make sense to you? Is he a military expert?

Why would he be telling military experts (trained soldiers) they are unprepared for war?

And if you were Ojukwu would you not be a drunken soldier to listen to this civilian’s war strategy?'

Being prepared for war implies time to prepare for the kind of war to be fought.

This time implies means, time and personnel to purchase weapons.

It implies the time  to train people to use those weapons as well as in other aspects of military action.

It also implies time to prepare various strategies, such as measuring  the length of the war against the challenges arising from geographical considerations as these relate to continuity of supplies. Once the Biafran Midwest offensive failed to penetrate the West, it meant Biafra would have to fight a defensive war, hemmed within a landlocked mass, with supply routes likely endangered.

Biafra did not have the time to address any of these adequately and was hobbled throughout the war on account of these limitations.

These limitations were obvious to various commentators, not only Soyinka.

Awolowo is quoted as making the same point in his last meeting with Ojukwu before hostilities began.

It has been argued that Biafra going into the war was a demonstration of a  form of group mind set when superior reason is  temporarily suspended in the name of group pressures.

Civilians in War Strategy: WWII and the Nigerian Civil war

Military  and war strategy in various wars have been organized  by civilians in collaboration with  soldiers. 

            WWII and the Allied Heads of State

The grand strategy  that brought the Second World War to an end was conducted by civilians working with the military.

The decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan and the decision  for the Allies to enter Europe in a manner that divided the continent for decades after between the Soviet Union and the Western powers was not due purely to military initiative.  Political considerations masterminded by civilians  were also at play.

Joseph Stalin, F.D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill, heads of the Soviet Union, the US and the UK,respectively, and all civilians, although Churchill had been a trained and most courageous military officer with a long military career, and Stalin had informal military training and significant military experience, met at the Yalta Conference  in 1945 to discuss the way forward towards wrapping up the war and the shape of the post war world, at a time when it was almost clear that Germany and its allies had lost the  war.

           English Minster of Aircraft Production, Lord Beaverbrook

Secondly, England's Minster of Aircraft Production in that war and who was central to accelerating production   of the Spitfire fighter plane as a central defense strategy   in the Battle of Britain, was Max Aitken, Lord Beaverbrook,  a civilian.

The Wikipedia Bevearbrook essay, quoting various sources,  describes his role as fundamental:

"During the Second World War, his friend Winston Churchill, the British Prime Minister, appointed Beaverbrook as Minister of Aircraft Production and later Minister of Supply. Under Beaverbrook, fighter and bomber production increased so much so that Churchill declared: "His personal force and genius made this Aitken's finest hour."

Beaverbrook's impact on war time production has been much debated but his innovative style certainly energised production at a time when it was desperately needed. However it has often been argued that aircraft production was already rising when Beaverbrook took charge and that he was fortunate to inherit a system which was just beginning to bear fruit.^[16] Still, a Time Magazine cover story wrote, "Even if Britain goes down this fall [1940], it will not be Lord Beaverbrook's fault. If she holds out, it will be his triumph. This war is a war of machines. It will be won on the assembly line."^[17]

         The Nigerian Civil War and Obafemi Awolowo

Finally, one of the most significant strategists  in the Nigerian Civil War was Obafemi Awolowo, a civilian.

He developed a strategy that may be described as achieving maximum devastating effects  through structural initiatives rather than military action. 

His changing of the currency after Biafran troops  raided Nigerian banks made sure the money stolen became useless overnight and further forced Biafra to the wall in terms of armament procurement, contributing to the serious shortage of weaponry Biafra suffered during the war, although the enigmatic  story of what happened to the monies Ojukwu reportedly  committed to arms procurement from his father's fortune is described as contributing to the shortage of arms.

Biafra is famous for its fabrication of weapons but that was not enough to meet the shortfall.

Awolowo's creation  or advising of the starvation blockade  was one of the most devastating strategies  of the war.

With Biafra already hemmed in by the fall of Port Harcourt and Calabar, thereby blocking access to the sea, with the fall of Enugu, meaning all land routes to the rest of Nigeria were cut off, Biafra struggled to grow its own food through the Land Army, if I remember the name accurately, but the effort could not address the needs of such a large population in the midst of such constant disruption.

Biafra was eventually able to get food in through international pressure, and also smuggle in weapons through the same route, but by then, it may be described as too late.

The contrastive approaches  represented by the non-military strategies in the war-the starvation blockade and Biafra's use of the images and descriptions of the  terrible results of that starvation as a  strategy to refuel itself to keep fighting by inspiring global sympathy that brought in food and weapons  through a most impressive propaganda campaign operating through Biafra radio, Biafran print publication-text and cartoons,  and the foreign PR company that represented Biafra abroad, is one of the more intriguing aspect of that war.

Was the Declaration of Biafra  Inevitable?

Secondly, it is not true that the declaration of Biafra was inevitable.

It is true that the Nigerian government may be described as passive in the face of the Northern pogroms.

The question is-

having fled to the East, were the Igbos safe?

Could the pogromites be expected to chase them to the East?

No. That would have been an impractical   expectation particularly since after the pogrom the government tried to arrive at a rapprochement  with Ojukwu and appealed  to him to join the Supreme Military Council.

Ojukwu's rejection of the government's amendment of the Aburi accord may be related to fears  of the govt's accepting most of the Accord  but still choosing  to state that it had a right to declare a state of emergency in any region, if I remember well.

Would that imply that the govt could invade the East at will?

I would think that the 'Biafra was inevitable' argument is better conducted in relation to the room for maneuver that Ojuwku  had in maintaining control over the territory that he controlled.

Perhaps it was held that the pogroms implied that the very concept of Nigeria had no more meaning for the East  and for  Ndigbo in particular and so should be done away with.

Whatever the case made, we need to scrutinize uncritical declarations that Biafra was inevitable. It  was not because various possibilities were open.

thanks
toyin

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

APOLOGIES. FULLY CORRECTED VERSION

Whatever the case made, we need to scrutinize uncritical declarations that Biafra was inevitable. It  was not, because various possibilities were open.

thanks
toyin

[Chidi Anthony Opara]

Toyin,
At this juncture, I am not interested in a rehash of "why Bafra lost
the war". I talked about the interview, the type which if a chidi
opara reports' network member (reporter) sends in, I would not
authorize publication, primarily to protect WS, whom I regard as a
national treasure, mainly on account of his human rights activities.
That interview brought him down by severally rungs.

CAO.

On 21 May, 09:41, Oluwatoyin Adepoju <ovadep...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *APOLOGIES. CORRECTED VERSION*

> Was Biafra Prepared for War?
> 'This week he is now telling us that he personally told Ojukwu that
> Biafrans were unprepared for war. Haba! Does that make sense to you? Is he
> a military expert?
> Why would he be telling military experts (trained soldiers) they are
> unprepared for war?
> And if you were Ojukwu would you not be a drunken soldier to listen to this
> civilian’s war strategy?'Being prepared for war implies time to prepare for
> the kind of war to be fought.
>
> This time implies means, time and personnel to purchase weapons.
>
> It implies the time  to train people to use those weapons as well as in
> other aspects of military action.
>
> It also implies time to prepare various strategies, such as measuring  the
> length of the war against the challenges arising from geographical
> considerations as these relate to continuity of supplies. Once the Biafran
> Midwest offensive failed to penetrate the West, it meant Biafra would have
> to fight a defensive war, hemmed within a landlocked mass, with supply
> routes likely endangered.
>
> Biafra did not have the time to address any of these adequately and was
> hobbled throughout the war on account of these limitations.
>
> These limitations were obvious to various commentators, not only Soyinka.
>
> Awolowo is quoted as making the same point in his last meeting with Ojukwu
> before hostilities began.
>

> * *It has been argued that Biafra going into the war was a demonstration of

> a  form of group mind set when superior reason is  temporarily suspended in
> the name of group pressures.
>

> *Civilians in War Strategy: WWII and the Nigerian Civil war*

>
> Military  and war strategy in various wars have been organized  by
> civilians in collaboration with  soldiers.
>

> *            WWII and the Allied Heads of State*

>
> The grand strategy  that brought the Second World War to an end was
> conducted by civilians working with the military.
>
> The decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan and the decision  for the
> Allies to enter Europe in a manner that divided the continent for decades
> after between the Soviet Union and the Western powers was not due purely to
> military initiative.  Political considerations masterminded by civilians
> were also at play.
>
> Joseph Stalin, F.D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill, heads of the Soviet
> Union, the US and the UK,respectively, and all civilians, although
> Churchill had been a trained and most courageous military officer with a

> long military career<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill#Military_service>,
> and Stalin <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin> had informal

> military training and significant military experience, met at the Yalta

> Conference <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yalta_Conference>  in 1945 to

> discuss the way forward towards wrapping up the war and the shape of the
> post war world, at a time when it was almost clear that Germany and its
> allies had lost the  war.
>

> *           English Minster of Aircraft Production, Lord Beaverbrook
> *

> Secondly, England's Minster of Aircraft Production in that war and who was
> central to accelerating production   of the

> Spitfire<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Spitfire>fighter
> plane as acentral defense strategy   in the Battle of
> Britain<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_of_the_Battle_of_Britain>,
> was Max Aitken, Lord
> Beaverbrook<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Aitken,_Lord_Beaverbrook>,

> a civilian.
>
> The Wikipedia Bevearbrook essay, quoting various sources,  describes his
> role as fundamental:
>
> "During the Second World War, his friend Winston

> Churchill<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill>,
> the British Prime
> Minister<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Minister_of_the_United_Kingdom>,

> appointed Beaverbrook as Minister of Aircraft

> Production<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_of_Aircraft_Production>and
> later Minister
> of Supply <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_of_Supply>. Under

> Beaverbrook, fighter and bomber production increased so much so that
> Churchill declared: "His personal force and genius made this Aitken's
> finest hour."
>
> Beaverbrook's impact on war time production has been much debated but his
> innovative style certainly energised production at a time when it was
> desperately needed. However it has often been argued that aircraft
> production was already rising when Beaverbrook took charge and that he was
> fortunate to inherit a system which was just beginning to bear

> fruit.[16]<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Aitken,_Lord_Beaverbrook#cite_note-16>Still,
> a Time
> Magazine <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_%28magazine%29> cover story

> wrote, "Even if Britain goes down this fall [1940], it will not be Lord
> Beaverbrook's fault. If she holds out, it will be his triumph. This war is
> a war of machines. It will be won on the assembly

> line."[17]<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Aitken,_Lord_Beaverbrook#cite_note-17>
>
> *         The Nigerian Civil War and Obafemi Awolowo*

> *Was the Declaration of Biafra  Inevitable?*

>
> Secondly, it is not true that the declaration of Biafra was inevitable.
>
> It is true that the Nigerian government may be described as passive in the
> face of the Northern pogroms.
>
> The question is-
>
> having fled to the East, were the Igbos safe?
>
> Could the pogromites be expected to chase them to the East?
>
> No. That would have been an impractical   expectation particularly since
> after the pogrom the government tried to arrive at a rapprochement  with
> Ojukwu and appealed  to him to join the Supreme Military Council.
>
> Ojukwu's rejection of the government's amendment of the Aburi accord may be
> related to fears  of the govt's accepting most of the Accord  but still
> choosing  to state that it had a right to declare a state of emergency in
> any region, if I remember well.
>
> Would that imply that the govt could invade the East at will?
>
> I would think that the 'Biafra was inevitable' argument is better conducted
> in relation to the room for maneuver that Ojuwku  had in maintaining
> control over the territory that he controlled.
>
> Perhaps it was held that the pogroms implied that the very concept of
> Nigeria had no more meaning for the East  and for  Ndigbo in particular and
> so should be done away with.
>
> Whatever the case made, we need to scrutinize uncritical declarations that
> Biafra was inevitable. It  was not because various possibilities were open.
>
> thanks
> toyin
>

> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Oluwatoyin Adepoju <ovadep...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Was Biafra Prepared for War?
> > 'This week he is now telling us that he personally told Ojukwu that
> > Biafrans were unprepared for war. Haba! Does that make sense to you? Is
> > he a military expert?
> > Why would he be telling military experts (trained soldiers) they are
> > unprepared for war?
> > And if you were Ojukwu would you not be a drunken soldier to listen to
> > this civilian’s war strategy?'Being prepared for war implies time to
> > prepare for the kind of war to be fought.
>
> > This time implies means, time and personnel to purchase weapons.
>
> > It implies the time  to train people to use those weapons as well as in
> > other aspects of military action.
>
> > It also implies time to measure the length of the war against the
> > challenges arising from geographical considerations as these relate to
> > continuity of supplies. Once the Biafran Midwest offensive failed to
> > penetrate the West, it meant Biafra would have to fight a defensive war,
> > with supply routes likely endangered.
>
> > Biafra did not have the time to address any of these adequately and was
> > hobbled throughout the war on account of these limitations.
>
> > These limitations were obvious to various commentators, not only Soyinka.
>
> > Awolowo is quoted as making the same point in his last meeting with Ojukwu
> > before hostilities began.
>

> > * *It
>
> ...
>
> read more »

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

If it is the 'father of African lit' title, I am not pleased Soyinka did not decry the sacrilegious character of the title.

The fight for African literature as an ancient legacy, predating European languages, is too significant for  the mistake in naming to be ignored.

Perhaps Achebe is better seen as one of the fathers of African literature in European languages.

thanks

toyin 

On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Oluwatoyin Adepoju <ovad...@gmail.com> wrote:

Sorry, Chidi, I thought I was responding to Ikhide, not you?

I dont see how the interview brought Soyinka down.

He insulted someone in his colorful style.

Was he not responding to the chap who tried to ridicule him?

He said there were things he wishes Achebe should not have written in his book.

So?

Soyinka suffered in the war, in prison for almost two years,  bcs he was seen as a traitor to Nigeria, which might have been the case. 

He said Igbos suffered genocide before the war but that during the war both sides committed atrocities, a fact not difficult to prove.

He said Biafra was tactically inadequate in entering into war. 

Did some Igbos not say so and were punished for it by Ojukwu? Why was Hilary Njoku, the highest ranking Igbo officer  put in prison by Ojukwu during the war? (My deductions here are partly speculative)

Why did Ojukwu and Zik fall out eventually, Zik  describing the fears through which the Biafrans were being goaded into continuing to fight, a cock and bull story, an April Fool's tale?

Why did Philip Efiong pointedly allude to  Ojukwu as a barrier to peace in his surrender speech?

If there is any Nigerian who needs to be hailed on Biafra, it is Soyinka. 

Soyinka has demonstrated greater emotional and cognitive maturity than Achebe on the war. 

He expelled his own bitterness on that war decades ago, with The Man Died, where the vitriol he unleashed and the agonizing character of his experience,  elevated to the level of cosmographic power, make that perhaps his greatest work. The book was even taken to court for libel.

Achebe waited for 40 years to pen his own view, setting his perspectives in the emotional and mental landscape of the war,  bequeathing a harvest of short sighted vision to Ndigbo. 

But of course you would publish that last essay of  our friend Achebe whose vision for Ndigbo was stuck in 1968 and who had nothing to say about Igbo economic,  political and cultural demographics which have played a central role in shaping Nigeria since the end of the war more than 40 years ago.

I beg, no vex.

You know I like you.  I am tired of the noxiating  of the air which is what I am able to see Achebe as contributing by his last intervention.

toyin 

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

Sorry, Chidi, I thought I was responding to Ikhide, not you?

I dont see how the interview brought Soyinka down.

He insulted someone in his colorful style.

Was he not responding to the chap who tried to ridicule him?

He said there were things he wishes Achebe should not have written in his book.

So?

Soyinka suffered in the war, in prison for almost two years,  bcs he was seen as a traitor to Nigeria, which might have been the case. 

He said Igbos suffered genocide before the war but that during the war both sides committed atrocities, a fact not difficult to prove.

He said Biafra was tactically inadequate in entering into war. 

Did some Igbos not say so and were punished for it by Ojukwu? Why was Hilary Njoku, the highest ranking Igbo officer  put in prison by Ojukwu during the war? (My deductions here are partly speculative)

Why did Ojukwu and Zik fall out eventually, Zik  describing the fears through which the Biafrans were being goaded into continuing to fight, a cock and bull story, an April Fool's tale?

Why did Philip Efiong pointedly allude to  Ojukwu as a barrier to peace in his surrender speech?

If there is any Nigerian who needs to be hailed on Biafra, it is Soyinka. 

Soyinka has demonstrated greater emotional and cognitive maturity than Achebe on the war. 

He expelled his own bitterness on that war decades ago, with The Man Died, where the vitriol he unleashed and the agonizing character of his experience,  elevated to the level of cosmographic power, make that perhaps his greatest work. The book was even taken to court for libel.

Achebe waited for 40 years to pen his own view, setting his perspectives in the emotional and mental landscape of the war,  bequeathing a harvest of short sighted vision to Ndigbo. 

But of course you would publish that last essay of  our friend Achebe whose vision for Ndigbo was stuck in 1968 and who had nothing to say about Igbo economic,  political and cultural demographics which have played a central role in shaping Nigeria since the end of the war more than 40 years ago.

I beg, no vex.

You know I like you.  I am tired of the noxiating  of the air which is what I am able to see Achebe as contributing by his last intervention.

toyin 

On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Chidi Anthony Opara <chidi...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Ibukunolu A Babajide]

Again who ever wrote this is not thinking straight.

There is a maxim in law. NEMO QUAD NON HABET meaning you cannot be given what is unavailable to be given to you

What was given to Achebe was not available to be given to Achebe and likewise by Soyinka's analogy what he propositioned was equally unavailable for him.

If only we can all be a trifle humble and do a bit of thinking before we strike our keyboards, we would all avoid embarassing ourselves.

Just a note of friendly advice

Have a great day one and all.

IBK

[Chidi Anthony Opara]

“Re- "When for instance, a writer of WS's status said that there were

things
CA should not have written in his last book, it spoke volume of WS's
tolerance of other peoples views."

By the same token, your wanting to deny Mr. Soyinka's right to
criticize
Mr. Achebe, speaks volumes about your own intolerance of other
people's
rights”.
-------Mazi Cornelius


Mazi,
I was not “wanting to deny Mr. Soyinka’s right to criticize Mr.
Achebe”, I was rather “wanting” to stop “Mr. Soyinka” from stopping
“Mr. Achebe” from expressing his views.


“I beg, no vex.

You know I like you.”
----Toyin.


Toyin,
We no dey fight, na talk we dey talk, I no vex.

Please do not allow the likeness to stop you from hitting at my posts
whenever the need arise.


CAO.

On 21 May, 16:51, Cornelius Hamelberg <corneliushamelb...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Chidi.
>
> Re- "When for instance, a writer of WS's status said that there were things

> CA should not have written in his last book, it spoke volume of WS's
> tolerance of other peoples views."
>

> By the same token, your wanting to deny Mr. Soyinka's right to criticize
> Mr. Achebe, speaks volumes about your own intolerance of other people's
> rights.
>
> But Wole Soyinka was not forbidding Chinua Achebe the right to freedom of
> expression. what he was saying there is that CA saying some kind of things
> is ill-advised and not very helpful - we don't know exactly what he has in
> mind, so please don’t jump to any conclusions – he was not trying to
> silence the truth – anyone's truth. You know  - from your own admiration
> for Mr. Soyinka's Human Rights activism, that he is not the kind of man who
> would want to deny freedom of speech as enshrined in *Article 19<http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=article%2019&source=web&cd=1...>– you also know how the brave man suffered on behalf of Biafra ...
> *

[Chidi Anthony Opara]

Mazi,

That "I beg no vex" and "You know I like you.” was a reference to
Toyin's earlier comments, it was not meant for you.

See what I wrote:
“I beg, no vex.
You know I like you.”
----Toyin.

After that I wrote:
"Toyin,
We no dey fight, na talk we dey talk, I no vex.
Please do not allow the likeness to stop you from hitting at my posts
whenever the need arise".

It would be best, if we peruse and ponder before commenting.

CAO.



On May 22, 3:23 pm, Cornelius Hamelberg <corneliushamelb...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> *Chidi,
>
> Why I go vex now? And how could Brer Soyinka (or anyone else) have stopped
> Brer Achebe from expressing his views? By putting up a road sign saying** "
> **STOP ! <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVq6F2dMhXU>“ ? By saying, “
> Please, I beg”? *
>
>  *Mr. Soyinka was expressing regret at some of the things that Mr. Achebe
> had said that's that's all. That's how I under stand what he said. Not that
> he was issuing the eleventh commandment ( God forbid) or the 614th Mitzvot<http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&gs_rn=14&gs_ri=psy-ab&cp=7&gs_id=7&xhr...>
> *
>
>  *As for me, I love everybody in the USA- Africa dialogue series, everybody
> without exception, including the CEOs who make a couple of million bucks a
> year and those ou I know outta here who own planes and shipping vessels,
> and bags of diamonds yet uncut...*
>
>  *By the way, you notice that I didn't say to Brer Ikhide “ I beg, make yu
> no vex” ?*
>
>  *Not that I fear an attack from him or anyone else. I have my own
> unorthodox methods of self-defence, my own nuclear arsenal and some
> unexpected vulnerable points that can be attacked even if you are one of
> these<http://top10listz.blogspot.se/2012/08/top-10-most-intelligent-people-...>– and you care ( give a damn) - depending on the greatness of your ego and
> the signs of this would-be greatness heard shooting homilies about humility
> from the other side of the mouth and about the quantity of cum laude
> degrees and the languages mastered, from the other corner of the mouth...*
>
>  *Of course, humour can also be used as a weapon.*
>
>  *Sometimes a more extreme measure has to be taken to pre-empt one of his
> nuclear strikes which could cause the kind of silence that silences even
> the most loquacious of the anti-Obama Mwaliminuses and the best way of
> doing that with regard to e.g. Brer Ikhide is by wishing God's blessings on
> him in advance and wishing that the Almighty strengthens his pen and gives
> more grease to his elbows. No one is going to attack you after that...*
>
>  *These are sombre moments, thinking of Chinua Achebe.*
>
>  *Sin-cerely,*
>
>  *http://www.thelocal.se/blogs/corneliushamelberg/*<http://www.thelocal.se/blogs/corneliushamelberg/>

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

This is beautiful:

'Strangely enough, as I read that Achebe's burial rites begin as body arrives in Nigeria , and this is after praying this morning and I intend to pray specially for him later today and tonight ( of course I'm not going to fast or call for that – I didn't fast for my mother - and as far as I know calling for a Muslim fast for Achebe, would be what Muslims know as bid'ah – innovation ) but pray we must – all those who have read and appreciated his contributions to the enrichment of our own lives and our world, so let us pray together for him and his family, his life's work is done, he's in the barge now , so let's wish him a light journey to the other side of the river....

Cornelius Hamelberg

Fantastic.

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Cornelius Hamelberg <cornelius...@gmail.com> wrote:

This Chinua Achebe, An Interview enhances his reputation, throws considerable light on his novel, “Things Fall Apart” and on his ideas about the novel and his own role in this world, all in his own words.

I guess that true to his own conscience Achebe's memoir,, “There was a country” is a counterweight to Soyinka's five memoirs published between 1971 and 2006

Unfortunately, because of all these debates and discussions in the public sphere, comparisons and juxtapositions with Soyinka have become almost inevitable and are still being made, every day.

I'm doing that now, thinking of some of Wole Soyinka 's defining essays such as “Neo-Tarzanism: The Poetics of Pseudo-Transition Art “, “Dialogue, and Outrage: Essays on Literature and Culture” ,Myth, Literature and the African World . “From Drama and the African World View”, ”The Credo of Being and Nothingness “ and “A Climate of Fear” - his memorable 2004 Reith Lectures on the BBC and the fifth lecture in that climate of fear series with the ominous subtitle, reminiscent of Abacha times “I am Right; You are Dead “

Strangely enough, as I read that Achebe's burial rites begin as body arrives in Nigeria , and this is after praying this morning and I intend to pray specially for him later today and tonight ( of course I'm not going to fast or call for that – I didn't fast for my mother - and as far as I know calling for a Muslim fast for Achebe, would be what Muslims know as bid'ah – innovation ) but pray we must – all those who have read and appreciated his contributions to the enrichment of our own lives and our world, so let us pray together for him and his family, his life's work is done, he's in the barge now , so let's wish him a light journey to the other side of the river...