Most African writers take as much swipe against dictators as they have taken against American imperialism. For example, Ayi Kwei Armah's "Two Thousand Seasons", "Why Are We So Blest", "Fragments" and even "Osiris Rising" are ... read full comment
Most African writers take as much swipe against dictators as they have taken against American imperialism. For example, Ayi Kwei Armah's "Two Thousand Seasons", "Why Are We So Blest", "Fragments" and even "Osiris Rising" are novels that target American hypocrisy as much as the African leadership conundrum.
Also, Kobina Sekyi's "The Blinkards", Ama Atta Aidoo's "Dilemma of a Ghost" and Wole Soyinka's "Death and the King's Horseman" are all damning criticism of the white man's way of life which they saw as being in total conflict with the egalitarian African way of life. It is Soyinka's "Kongi's Harvest" and "Dance of the Forest" that particularly lampoon arrant dictators of Nkrumah's template.......
Thus if the CIA indeed financed African writers, then it is so much to its own chagrin, since African writers have never spared American imperialist hypocrisy. And you may say that in this sense, African writers were much like Nkrumah who took American largese and became her fiercest critic, or who lived and studied in America and returned to become the worst African dictator far beyond Iddi Amin, burning and banning books and silencing all those who opposed him, or even killing them.......
Meanwhile, it is important to note that the untramelled freedom of African writers to criticise both the African leadership and western imperialism was much curtailed when Nkrumah incarcerated key African writers and creative artistes, due to his incessant paranoia.......
Your essay is a convolution of bizarre verbiage without focus, and reflects an undisciplined mind disorganized by an atavistically poisonous ideology; but at least you show impressive depth in literary references which the weed junky Lungu will never match. He himself confesses that he is unlettered in these matters. And I say kudos to you for making me remember the canon of literary reading I did in the university.
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Hi SAS,
What's up?
Please will you bother to take another look at what scholars of African literature, literary critics, and Soyinka himself has to to say about "A Dance of the Forests"?
There are tons of interviews ... read full comment
Hi SAS,
What's up?
Please will you bother to take another look at what scholars of African literature, literary critics, and Soyinka himself has to to say about "A Dance of the Forests"?
There are tons of interviews on Youtube in which Soyinka addresses questions related to "A Dance of the Forests."
For instance, Maja-Pearce's devsasting review of one of Soyinka's political memoirs, "You Must Set Forth At Dawn," which he aptly titled "Our Credulous Grammarian" (see the London Review of Books), recounts the Soyinka own first-hand experiences (when Soyinka was doing his graduate studies at University of Ledds) with the first-generation of Nigerian nationalists who came to negotiate Nigeria's independence.
I will not go further. You may have to read the story yourself. Soyinka himself has repeated this in his books, public interviews and lectures, etc. Therefore, "A Dance of the Forests" has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with Nkrumah?
I wachted/listened to interview yesterday (BBC) granted on Soyinka's 80th birthday where he went into greater detail which first-hand experience gave him the material for "A Dance of the Forests."
As for technical texts dealing with the meaning of "A Dance of the Forests," I bet I should stop here. You may not have the time to read them because there are a lot of them.
I will not touch on "Kongi's Harvest" because you have not come back with a refutation of the two texts I asked you to read. I was waiting for you to that before giving you more to read.
I also want to end by saying that there is no bizarre verbiage in this piece. NOT ONE. Remember that I am not bound by any rules. I write as I see fit!
In fact, there are so many literary critics (Chinweizu and his school of thought are just one; I can give a tall list of other literary critics who have leveled the same charge against him).
Also remember I will not be the first and shall neither be the last. Not even William Faulkner, a Nobel Laureate, escaped similar charges.
If you care to remember, I did a long series on literary giants across time and place where, in one instance, I treated TEN OF THE MOST INFLUENTIAL WRITERS IN THE WORLD (20th century) who have been charged with constructing bizzare verbiage). You may want to go back to my series "Fate of A Sick Scholar" for references.
As for focus the less said about it, the better. Show me one examples of it and I will surely explain to you where you may have gone wrong.
Having said that, if you want technical references on "A Dance of the Forests" and less technical texts dealing with the same question, you can oblige me and will assemble a few for you. Please understand again that "A Dance of the Forests" has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with Nkrumah.
I am surprised you are saying this because this is one area (experiences that prompted him to write "A Dance of the Forests") where Soyinka has spent much time in the public arena talking about. Let me help you if you need direct information involving Soyinka and "A Dance of the Forests."
Let me conclude by saying that Soyinka has discussed "A Dance of the Forests" with the British editor, writer, publisher, and litrary critic Margaret Busby (part Caribbean and part Ghanaian). Busby is the author of "Daughters of Africa: An International of Words and Writing by Women of African Descent."
Allison & Busby Ltd, a UK-based publishing company which she co-founded, has published titles covering a wide of authors from Nurrudin Farah, Buchi Emecheta, Ishmael Reed, Chester Hines, George Lamming, C.L.R. James and a number of other world-famous authors. More important, though, she has performed abridged dramatizations for radio (some of those whose works she has used are Walter Mosley, Soyinka, Henry Louis Gates, Jr., etc.)
In other words, Busby is one of Britain's current literary minds. So, you can go ahead and start your own research from the little I have given you here.
All errors are mine.
Have a great weekend.
Thanks.
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Hi SAS,
I want you to know that I have read "A Dance of the Forests" too.
I am also familiar with the most authoritative texts of literary criticism on the play.
Thanks.
Hi SAS,
I want you to know that I have read "A Dance of the Forests" too.
I am also familiar with the most authoritative texts of literary criticism on the play.
Thanks.
YAW 8 years ago
Why bother replying to Sarfo"s constant stream of abusive comments to you, lungu,and Nkrumah"s legacy? His candour is insolence and outright lies about Kwame Nkrumah. Has he forgotten force-feeding us with Thayer Watkin"s and ... read full comment
Why bother replying to Sarfo"s constant stream of abusive comments to you, lungu,and Nkrumah"s legacy? His candour is insolence and outright lies about Kwame Nkrumah. Has he forgotten force-feeding us with Thayer Watkin"s and J Kludze"s polemics about Nkrumah? as I said before, there is always two sides to every question-and all-knowing Sarfo, always take both.
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Dear YAW,
How are you?
I decided to respond to SAS just so readers will not be taken by his gross misrepresentation and erroneous ideas about Soyinka's works.
I don't think SAS is more knowledgeable than Soyinka. I ... read full comment
Dear YAW,
How are you?
I decided to respond to SAS just so readers will not be taken by his gross misrepresentation and erroneous ideas about Soyinka's works.
I don't think SAS is more knowledgeable than Soyinka. I am therefore responding to SAS because I want commentators to read Soyinka themselves and to listen to Soyinka discuss his works with literary critics around the world.
In other words, I do not want readers who are unfamiliar with the terrain of African literature in particular and world literature in general to overlook SAS's grossly ill-informed remarks about Soyinka's texts and what he himself [Soyinka] has to say about his own work.
I still wonder why SAS is doing this. Hahahahaha…Soyinka has addressed most of these questions in international interviews with literary scholars, critics, historians, linguists, philosophers, editors, etc. Most of these are in the public forum (internet—Youtube, books, and what have you).
The Royal African Society, editor and critic Margaret Busby, and Soyinka relatively recently (mid-2014 or so) discussed “A Dance of the Forests” among others. This has been shown to the world.
This is why I have given those readers enough resources to start their own research. YAW, also remember that I get private emails seeking further clarification on Soyinka's literary works and what he has to say about them.
It is why I expanded this second installment. As for SAS and literature, please don't worry. I can always contain him. You should also take into consideration that I am not going to take SAS's words over Soyinka's. NEVER. And I wish readers do the same.
One of my New York White friends invited me to a poetry reading in New York in the 2000s, where Soyinka was the major presence; I (and others) got the opportunity to interact with him. He got the chance to be asked to respond to some of the issues I am discussing in this series.
But I have kept my personal encounter with Soyinka (and our discussion with him) so that others don't say I am a name dropper. I have to even say here that I have to tell one of my staunchest readers, him/herself a onetime professor of African literature and comparative literature in the US, that I have not personally met Soyinka (and discussed some of the issues here).
I did so because he/she has written to me earlier suggesting that some of my comments to readers might be taken to have come from a columnist who is boastful. So I had to lie.
Yet this is a writer and poet who appeared with Soyinka and Nurrudin Farah, to mention but two, in some of the prominent platforms in Europe to showcase their literary works.
However, I should say it is not personally meeting him that is important but having him respond to some of my questions (and other questions some of the audience members directed at him). I have to follow up his responses with my own close reading of his works and what literary critics had to say on the subject. This I have done over the years.
The fact is not no piece of literature stands alone. Any piece of literature has a history (internal and external), culture (internal and external), personality (internal and external), emotions (internal and external), society (internal and external), spirit and soul (internal and external). And every piece of literature is also political (internal and external). Therefore a piece of literature cannot be taken outside these contexts.
More important, I have friends who did their doctoral dissertations on Soyinka (and others) and have taught his works for decades. Hence I have to answer SAS so that the "credulous" ones among us do not take his word as the final statement on Soyinka. They have to read Soyinka themselves and listen to what he has to say.
I have nearly read all of Soyinka’s work and closely studied the authoritative texts of literary criticism accompanying his works. Thus I know where I stand as well as where Soyinka stands.
I hope you will appreciate why I have to respond to SAS. I am doing this for the sake of the "credulous" ones on Ghanaweb. Not to worry, I can always contain SAS when it comes to literature, whether it is of Africa, South America, Asia, Canada, Europe, and Australia. So don’t worry. We have to do this for the “credulous” ones.
Remember I am not type to intimidate. SAS can NEVER abuse me for that matter. It is a different matter if I had/have no clue what I am talking about! I do however understand where you are coming from!
I always know what I am doing and have the hard facts to defend myself. As for the Kludzes I have read them many, many years before they became fashionable on Ghanaweb. To tell you the truth, I did not even read any of SAS’s renditions on Kludze (and the PDA). There was nothing to Kludze really!
All errors are mine.
Have a great weekend.
Thanks anyway for showing great concern for truth.
Namesake.
Mahmoud 8 years ago
Francis Kwarten Is A Communist Relic, and he has nothing useful to tell anybody.
Francis Kwarten Is A Communist Relic, and he has nothing useful to tell anybody.
Prof Lungu 8 years ago
BY , DR. SAS, ATTORNEY AT LAW
READ:
"....Biological sciences affirm the notion that all humankind are equal, and that exposure to knowledge and culture accounts for why some are more inclined than others to achieve greatn ... read full comment
BY , DR. SAS, ATTORNEY AT LAW
READ:
"....Biological sciences affirm the notion that all humankind are equal, and that exposure to knowledge and culture accounts for why some are more inclined than others to achieve greatness, power and wealth...Therefore the defining variable in mental development is “opportunity” which establishes the most legitimate intellectual differentials in the cognitive abilities of groups and individuals.../
\...It is in the context of all this knowledge that Ghana’s first president, soon after independence, deemed it fit and proper to concentrate on the formal school system to boost the African personality and to merge the tribes under one great banner of nationhood . Dr. Kwame Nkrumah’s vision for Ghana was the elevation of the confidence of the African and the unity of the nation and her people. This vision extended beyond Ghana’s borders to include the whole of Africa. What Nkrumah conceived of nationhood made philosophical sense because without knowledge and unity, no country can claim nationhood. If ignorance makes people show greater allegiances to tribes at the expense of the nation, then the survival of the nation is under serious threat. For a country to be a nation, her people will have to subsume ethnicity under the aegis of the national interest. The present conflicts amongst the tribes, though so far verbal, is a testimony that our country comprises nations within the state. In effect, we of this generation have repudiated the concept of nationhood with our ethnic animosity and undermined the very tenets under which the nation was founded..." ( 6 February 2007, Ghanaweb, Samuel Adjei Sarfo, J.D., AKA, Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law).
Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law 8 years ago
I have never, and will never read any of your tall list of references. If you like, you can present a synopsis of any reference you make and have a debate based on the summary of the cogent content. Don't defer a discourse ju ... read full comment
I have never, and will never read any of your tall list of references. If you like, you can present a synopsis of any reference you make and have a debate based on the summary of the cogent content. Don't defer a discourse just to send people on your ego trip of outside reading. That actually constitutes an escape from a facial debate, and we are tired of your trick of providing a tall reading list pending succinct debate. Nobody will read your list.
Neither do I care about those scholarly reviews which you consider to be rave. I have also told you that I don't care what a writer says about his or her work, or what others have said about it.
I have sufficient ability and training to discuss every work and form a salient conclusion about same on my own.
In fact I have told you several times that your heavy reliance on what writers have said about their works, and what other scholars have said about them constitutes literary hearsay common with people who lack confidence in the originality of their own analyses and interpretation of literary texts..,..
I always find it rather funny that you can spend time analyzing what somebody else has already analyses.You spent a whole series analyzing Dompere's own analyses of Nkrumah's "Consciencism" all to what purpose? Can't you have your own original opinion about that book just like Dompere's?
And what is all this noise about what this book or that book is about? Are you seriously into the craft of what this or that truly means to the total exclusion of all other meanings? What is your understanding of the scope of the literary trope? And from whence do you derive its length and breadth? And by what exact training, philosophy or authority.
Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law 8 years ago
And by the way, where from this iron-clad conclusion of yours that Soyinka's "A Dance of the Forests" has absolutely nothing to do with Nkrumah?
It is all in the interpretation and the contextual support one lends to his a ... read full comment
And by the way, where from this iron-clad conclusion of yours that Soyinka's "A Dance of the Forests" has absolutely nothing to do with Nkrumah?
It is all in the interpretation and the contextual support one lends to his arguments my friend; but I see that you have provided no content nor context here for your categorical denial of Soyinka's thematic scope in that seminal work.
But if you understand the play to be saying that Africa's past savage leadership is a template to its present dictatorship, then Nkrumah becomes a central villain, since he indeed provided the leadership template for Africa's post-independent dictatorships.
Soyinka's work is much akin to Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" in its portrayal of Africa's violent past. And it sorely tracts the thematic preoccupation of Yambo Ouologuem's "Bound to Violence". And no sane critic will dare to limit its scope by inferring what it means or does not mean. There is no literary tradition or philosophy that can restrict the meaning of any work of art.
MARCUS AMPADU 8 years ago
The same thing can be said about your ego tripping about Nkrumah being worse autocrat than Iddi Amin. And by what "exact training, philosophy or authority", your exact words, can you summon to call the founder of our nation a ... read full comment
The same thing can be said about your ego tripping about Nkrumah being worse autocrat than Iddi Amin. And by what "exact training, philosophy or authority", your exact words, can you summon to call the founder of our nation a dictator and a killer? SAS is nothig but a polemic who throws reflection to the wind.
Your irrational thinking baffles me; and you are supposed to be an attorney.
Ken Ababio 8 years ago
DR SAS,could you please elaborate on your statement ...."when Nkrumah incarcerated key African writers and creative artistes,due to his incessant paranoia".
DR SAS,could you please elaborate on your statement ...."when Nkrumah incarcerated key African writers and creative artistes,due to his incessant paranoia".
Prof Lungu 8 years ago
In his Feature Article of Wednesday, 4 February 2015 Columnist: Sarfo, Samuel Adjei
READ: "...Nkrumah jailed virtually all the other members of the Big Six:..."
NOW, THE "PARTY" PROGRESSES:
"...when Nkrumah incarcerate ... read full comment
In his Feature Article of Wednesday, 4 February 2015 Columnist: Sarfo, Samuel Adjei
READ: "...Nkrumah jailed virtually all the other members of the Big Six:..."
NOW, THE "PARTY" PROGRESSES:
"...when Nkrumah incarcerated key African writers and creative artistes,...".
WE SAY: Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law surely owes a response to Ken Ababio with respect to the "key African writers and creative artistes", Ghanaians and non-Ghanaians, "...Nkrumah incarcerated...".
Prof Lungu 8 years ago
We are guessing we have a case of "Radio Silence" New Jersey-style!
Or might it be Texas-10-Gallon-Hat style that don't hold a heckuva pint of water?
Again....
WE SAY: Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law surely owes a response ... read full comment
We are guessing we have a case of "Radio Silence" New Jersey-style!
Or might it be Texas-10-Gallon-Hat style that don't hold a heckuva pint of water?
Again....
WE SAY: Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law surely owes a response to Ken Ababio with respect to the "key African writers and creative artistes", Ghanaians and non-Ghanaians, "...Nkrumah incarcerated...".
We all want to know!
Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law 8 years ago
We(ed) will think that you will shut up when literature is being debated, Lungu. But we(ed) see that your plural self has no shame. Must your plural weed dual personality pose questions only in instances where we rightly prai ... read full comment
We(ed) will think that you will shut up when literature is being debated, Lungu. But we(ed) see that your plural self has no shame. Must your plural weed dual personality pose questions only in instances where we rightly praised Nkrumah? Does that take away his dictatorship?
Conclusion I: Indeed, we consider your double personality syndrome as part of your diminutive thinking process.
Can you even read and understand anything Lungu? Your weedy majesty is unlettered, and can you even write?
Item: After noting the extensive multistate exams one has to write before becoming a lawyer here in the USA (i.e. Multistate Bar Examination, Multistate Essay Examinations, Multistate Performance Examination and Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination), you
could not even wrap up your head around the concept that the expression "Multistate" denotes a nationally standardized testing and evaluation which all prospective lawyers in the USA write.
And you continued to argue that I am wrong in telling you that Bar Exams here in the USA is nationally standardized, and that once you are barred in one state, you can fully practice in all other states on either pro hac vice or by a fringe state exam, the latter in the case where you want to be permanently barred in a particular state.
You made reference to states like California, New York and Louisiana in some presumption that these states have some superiority in training lawyers. You should understand that unlike many other states, one can even be admitted to the bar in California and New York without a JD (i.e. with some inferior certificate) whereas in most states, the JD ( a full doctorate) is the basic academic requirement. And the only peculiar thing about Louisiana is that the state practices the Napoleonic Code, and you cannot tell me how that code is any more superior to the Anglo-Saxon Law. In sum, once barred in one state, you are a lawyer in all the states as per the multistate nature of the law exams here. The only point that may confuse you is that you discussed all the national exams that are had on two days but failed to acknowledge that the third day exam is the state-specific variant; and that segment of the exam, comprising not more than thirty percent of the total, is what one writes in case one wants to be permanently associated with a particular state. Otherwise, one can practice in all states with a pro hac vice, a term whose meaning you have not even bothered to search.
Conclusion II: You must stick to your life as a failed felon, daily puffing weed and hiding in the shadows of the real world. You are nothing! You are a criminally minded individual who supports arrant dictatorships and uses an intractable moniker to hide his identity while surfing the net for information on others.
Conclusion III: You are ironically advocating for freedom for information from all others except yourself. What are you afraid of? You are not morally or intellectually fit to rant about the legacy of the law in which we are the duly certified experts here.
Item: We say what the law is; not you and your superficial ilk who have never seen a law certificate in their entire lives.
Prof Lungu 8 years ago
Haba!
Wondering, what compelled you to answer this time, Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law?
But yes, you have superior certificate and intellect!
So, tell us what now riled you up, so, Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law, enough for yo ... read full comment
Haba!
Wondering, what compelled you to answer this time, Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law?
But yes, you have superior certificate and intellect!
So, tell us what now riled you up, so, Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law, enough for you to revert to what you are best at - hurling invective, after invective!
But, that one is elementary!
"Multistate" = more than one state!
Multi-State!
Otherwise, we'd be looking at "National", as in National Standardized Test.
Keep on pushing, Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law!
Tim Owusu 8 years ago
DR SAS,you better stop spreading BLATANT LIES.Come on,stop beating about the bush and answer Ken Ababio's question.How many African writers did Nkrumah incarcerate? You and SARPONG are noted for propogating falsehood about t ... read full comment
DR SAS,you better stop spreading BLATANT LIES.Come on,stop beating about the bush and answer Ken Ababio's question.How many African writers did Nkrumah incarcerate? You and SARPONG are noted for propogating falsehood about the greatest African,Kwame Nkrumah.Shame on you.
BOY KOFI 8 years ago
The struggle between Monarchs and Republicans for political power can be traced to the Battle of Waterloo in 1815.The European monarchs believed that they have the divine right,the privilege to rule forever.The Progressive Fo ... read full comment
The struggle between Monarchs and Republicans for political power can be traced to the Battle of Waterloo in 1815.The European monarchs believed that they have the divine right,the privilege to rule forever.The Progressive Forces who fought during the French Revolution established the Republican States,free from divine privilege but on meritocracy.Napolean tried to spread the new idea of freedom,human rights and equality in Europe but was resisted by the Great Monarchs in Europe until defeated in Waterloo by Allied Forces led by a British general,Duke of Wellinton in 1815.This is not different in Africa,whoever tries to unite the continent with any progressive ideas will be resisted by the monarchs in Europe.Mind you,there are very few Republican States in Europe today, even though they have made lot of progress on human rights and found reasons to accept merits of individuals and states.African writers must understand what Europe stands for to balance the struggle for Africans.Thank you.
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Dear BOY KOFI,
How are you?
I beg to differ. Those who fought in the French Revolution introduced anarchy and other forms of brutality and inhumane to humanity.
Neither did Napoleon "tried to spread the new idea of ... read full comment
Dear BOY KOFI,
How are you?
I beg to differ. Those who fought in the French Revolution introduced anarchy and other forms of brutality and inhumane to humanity.
Neither did Napoleon "tried to spread the new idea of freedom, human rights and equality in Europe." You may want to go into what his army did to other human beings in the areas his forces conquered.
You did not tell us why Napoleon was deposed. You did not tell us why some prominent European nations don't want to celebrate Napoleon. You also did not mention that Napoleon was a thief and a plunderer.
What you have said here is revisionist history. African writers don't have to understand Europe what Europe stands to do the right.
Most of the conflicts in the past five hundred years have been occassioned by Europe's greedy desire to dominate the world.
Slavery, Apartheid, the Holocaust (German extremination of the Herero and Namaqua; the Germans began their Holocaust experiments with these two Namibian ethnic groups before Hitler and the Nazis rose up in Gemany. Please read the book "THE KAISER'S HOLOCAUST: GERMANY'S FORGOTTEN GENOCIDE AND THE COLONIAL ROOTS OF NAZISM.") and economic exploitation are just three good examples. Europe denied the rest human rights, etc., for five hundred years while it colonized the rest of the world.
Have you thought of what Europe did to Native Americans, Africans and African-Americans, and Australian Aborigines? Please make time to read Mazower's "Dark Continent: Europe's Twenitieth Century."
I don't want to go into any lengthy dissertation on the wickedness, callousness, and Machiavellianism of Napoleon. I found this little piece for you:
Title: The French should end their love affair with Napoleon – he was an utterly brutal and callous dictator
We’ve all been there. Every nation has skeletons. History is a sorry roll-call of atrocities, as genocidal young men gave free reign to their darkest urges. A king we style “the Lionheart”, whose proud statue stands next to Parliament, slaughtered thousands of Muslim hostages before the walls of Acre; centuries later millions of abducted Africans were crammed on to filth-covered orlop decks and put to work as slaves, by men who smile at us from Gainsboroughs.
Americans annihilated a race of people as they forged a vast empire, called it a nation and said it was destiny. Even our unimpeachable, tree-hugging brethren in the Nordic countries were once ironsided warriors whose dragonships penetrated Europe’s great rivers like poison moving through arteries. This year Germany is yet again being made to confront its gigantic historic crimes with another round of anniversaries, of the liberation of Auschwitz, and its final defeat.
Now France, too, is finding itself in the unwelcome position of confronting anniversaries in which it is cast as the aggressor. Two hundred years ago this month, the deposed Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte was rampaging north to Paris, intent on seizing back power. He had chosen to go out in a blaze of glory rather than risk death by a thousand ignominious slights in exile.
Better to die with sword in hand, he said grandly. Brave words, coming from one who knew that he would almost certainly not die of a sword thrust to the guts on a battlefield among a carpet of dead and wounded boys, his ears echoing with screams of agony and loss – a fate which now awaited thousands of others, condemned by his ambition.
In 1815, Europe agreed on little. The furious King of Prussia even challenged the lead Austrian negotiator at the Congress of Vienna, the post-war carve up of Europe, to a duel. Yet they were as one when it came to Bonaparte. Napoleon was an unacceptable threat to European stability. He embodied a terrifying mix of age-old French expansionism married to a fresh, visceral, liberal stirring that, combined, spelt the absolute destruction of ancien régimes. The Russians, Austrians, Prussians, Dutch, British, Spanish and many others combined to ensure that Europe would not be dragged back into the abyss of appalling violence that had scarred the previous decades.
They were successful. At the battle of Waterloo, a rapidly assembled allied army from the UK, Low Countries and several German principalities, under the command of the Duke of Wellington, fought a tenacious defence, buying time for the Prussian army to crash into Napoleon’s eastern flank.
Victory was total. Waterloo entered our lexicon as a reverse from which there is no possible salvation. Expensive, ponderous, jealousy-ridden, but effective. It is not surprising that Europe today seeks quietly to celebrate this achievement. An innocuous coin will be minted. The French have gone bananas. It is fascinating. They presumably think Angela Merkel should be forced to sit through unending interpretative dance on D-day beaches to atone for Germany’s aggression, but when Germany and others dream up a coin to mark the end of Napoleon, a man who occupied Berlin, looted Frederick the Great’s tomb, treated Germany as today a student treats their parents’ fridge, well, that is totalement inacceptable.
Many people, understandably, are sympathetic to anyone, even Napoleon, who threatened the continued domination of Europe by a caste of befeathered Emperors and Prince Bishops. However, as 1918 was to show, the violent removal of this anachronistic vestige did not lead to fully fledged Lockean liberal states springing like Athena from the forehead of Zeus.
It is true that Napoleon Bonaparte, as a politician, favoured the application of enlightenment principles in government, having little time for religion and other medieval practices. But he was also responsible for the deaths of millions of men, women and children across Europe and beyond. He was a military dictator. A brilliant, utterly brutal and callous one. He, alone in European history, conquered an empire that stretched from Portugal to Moscow. His cunning, speed, firepower, concentration of overwhelming force, charisma, energy and ability to inspire loyalty made him virtually unbeatable. However, the rapacious reality of his rule belied his lofty ideas. The financial costs of his conquests were imposed on the defeated. His men scoured the landscape for supplies, like locusts leaving famine in their wake. Cities were sacked, women raped, treasures looted. His siblings and cronies were installed on thrones in client kingdoms, and flowery hereditary titles were bestowed with abandon.
In battle he sacrificed men like a chess master does his pawns. He abandoned his own army in the depths of a Russian winter; in Egypt he bolted, leaving another entire army to rot. He counted not the cost. When he needed to he unleashed massive, bludgeoning attacks against enemy strongpoints, sending his loyal followers into the teeth of withering enemy fire while cynically boasting that his men “will fight long and hard for a bit of coloured ribbon”.
Napoleon, Caesar, Clive, perhaps even Churchill, are heroes for an age that is past. An age of empires and armies, of conquest and power. We can be awe-struck by their brilliance and the sheer scale of their ambition, but we should be grateful that we no longer live in a world which allows them to dominate and mobilise entire societies.
Napoleon was a brilliant commander, an able administrator, a man who bent to the arc of history with the heat of his desire. But also a man who made legions of widows, orphans and invalids as he pursued his version of destiny. What nation that bore the highest toll of casualties? You guessed it, France. The French should learn to marvel, but not admire. They should let us have our coin and perhaps even slip one into their own wallets.
.........................................................................................................................................................
){kind=link}
Most African writers take as much swipe against dictators as they have taken against American imperialism. For example, Ayi Kwei Armah's "Two Thousand Seasons", "Why Are We So Blest", "Fragments" and even "Osiris Rising" are ...
read full comment
Hi SAS,
What's up?
Please will you bother to take another look at what scholars of African literature, literary critics, and Soyinka himself has to to say about "A Dance of the Forests"?
There are tons of interviews ...
read full comment
Hi SAS,
I want you to know that I have read "A Dance of the Forests" too.
I am also familiar with the most authoritative texts of literary criticism on the play.
Thanks.
Why bother replying to Sarfo"s constant stream of abusive comments to you, lungu,and Nkrumah"s legacy? His candour is insolence and outright lies about Kwame Nkrumah. Has he forgotten force-feeding us with Thayer Watkin"s and ...
read full comment
Dear YAW,
How are you?
I decided to respond to SAS just so readers will not be taken by his gross misrepresentation and erroneous ideas about Soyinka's works.
I don't think SAS is more knowledgeable than Soyinka. I ...
read full comment
Francis Kwarten Is A Communist Relic, and he has nothing useful to tell anybody.
BY , DR. SAS, ATTORNEY AT LAW
READ:
"....Biological sciences affirm the notion that all humankind are equal, and that exposure to knowledge and culture accounts for why some are more inclined than others to achieve greatn ...
read full comment
I have never, and will never read any of your tall list of references. If you like, you can present a synopsis of any reference you make and have a debate based on the summary of the cogent content. Don't defer a discourse ju ...
read full comment
And by the way, where from this iron-clad conclusion of yours that Soyinka's "A Dance of the Forests" has absolutely nothing to do with Nkrumah?
It is all in the interpretation and the contextual support one lends to his a ...
read full comment
The same thing can be said about your ego tripping about Nkrumah being worse autocrat than Iddi Amin. And by what "exact training, philosophy or authority", your exact words, can you summon to call the founder of our nation a ...
read full comment
DR SAS,could you please elaborate on your statement ...."when Nkrumah incarcerated key African writers and creative artistes,due to his incessant paranoia".
In his Feature Article of Wednesday, 4 February 2015 Columnist: Sarfo, Samuel Adjei
READ: "...Nkrumah jailed virtually all the other members of the Big Six:..."
NOW, THE "PARTY" PROGRESSES:
"...when Nkrumah incarcerate ...
read full comment
We are guessing we have a case of "Radio Silence" New Jersey-style!
Or might it be Texas-10-Gallon-Hat style that don't hold a heckuva pint of water?
Again....
WE SAY: Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law surely owes a response ...
read full comment
We(ed) will think that you will shut up when literature is being debated, Lungu. But we(ed) see that your plural self has no shame. Must your plural weed dual personality pose questions only in instances where we rightly prai ...
read full comment
Haba!
Wondering, what compelled you to answer this time, Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law?
But yes, you have superior certificate and intellect!
So, tell us what now riled you up, so, Dr. SAS, Attorney at Law, enough for yo ...
read full comment
DR SAS,you better stop spreading BLATANT LIES.Come on,stop beating about the bush and answer Ken Ababio's question.How many African writers did Nkrumah incarcerate? You and SARPONG are noted for propogating falsehood about t ...
read full comment
The struggle between Monarchs and Republicans for political power can be traced to the Battle of Waterloo in 1815.The European monarchs believed that they have the divine right,the privilege to rule forever.The Progressive Fo ...
read full comment
Dear BOY KOFI,
How are you?
I beg to differ. Those who fought in the French Revolution introduced anarchy and other forms of brutality and inhumane to humanity.
Neither did Napoleon "tried to spread the new idea of ...
read full comment