I’ve always been fascinated by myths
politicized because of the politicization of the Chibok abductions. Does poetry have to have a political core to have relevance?
My take is that every writer must find what works for him or her in the process of interrogating issues that arise from within society. I am more comfortable with having politics imbuing my art and vice versa, because I believe that our lives are basically governed by some form of politics. As Luc Tymans put it, “Life is politics, basically, but you don’t just go to a gallery and put the words ‘art’ and ‘politics’ on the wall.” In other words, the writer must be able to use find the right artistic fusion between art and politics, because the writer is first and foremost an artist and not a political propagandist. That will always be the challenge.
Why do you think that poets and their poetry are inevitably politicized? Take for instance Pablo Neruda. He wrote unapologetic love poems but the politics of Chile interfered with his life and death. Is this something that poets here have had to contend with as well?
Poets, like other writers, tend to be more sensitive about things happening around them. Consequently, they also tend to be more critical because intense observation enables them see several perspective to issues. I also think that there is the added burden of what one does with all that observation apart from writing. Writing can only get so much done, and some writers therefore feel they ought to match words with action and walk the talk.
There have been instances where certain people have demanded, sometimes belligerently, that writers take a political stand. Do you subscribe to the view that writers must hold and proclaim political opinions?
Writers tend to be seen like some sort of leaders because they are opinion moulders and influencers of some sort. This is more so in Africa where the quality of political leadership has been highly manipulative and essentially visionless. I believe that because politics runs through the entire fabric of human existence, there is nothing like being apolitical because that in itself is a political stance. So by implication everyone, not just the writer, must have a political opinion. The writer’s position becomes significant because he or she has a platform of visibility and influence that most others in society do not have. So there are expectations that writers should be some kind of ethical standardbearers, to the degree which the political class in a country fails in its leadership roles and responsibilities. A democracy ideally should operate with in-built checks and balances, but when that does not happen, especially where the media becomes unduly compromised, it is no surprise that people then look up to writers to do something other than putting words on paper.
Poetry is one genre that has suffered and some people have held opinions that the NLNG Nigeria Prize for literature should not necessarily be awarded for poetry because not many people engage with poetry and that some poets publish poetry just to enter for the prize without making efforts to make their works available elsewhere. Are these calls valid, you think?
On the contrary, more people are writing poetry as I have explained earlier, because of the misconception that it is easy to write, or that one can freestyle without any care for extant conventions and traditions. Whereas it is always important to know what exists, before trying to do something different.
Then there is the issue of what the public actually purchases amongst the genres. Poetry is the least patronized and this has inadvertently affected the attitude of publishers and the rest of the related value chain. I am certain if more people patronize poetry books, more publishers would seek for poetry manuscripts, and more bookshops would have the end products on their shelves. It is a general problem, but other countries have found ways of providing solutions and ensuring that poetry is as healthy as the other genres.
Taking away the Poetry aspect of the NLNG Literature Prize would be the most unwise decision by the sponsors. First, it would unwittingly validate the assumption that this aspect of the prize has never been run forthrightly. Second, it would also taint the entire prize, because there would now be need to explain why the other two should be sustained and what happens if there are problems in the future.
The organizers seem to be the ones giving room for the criticisms and some of the issues raised about the contest this year cannot be overlooked. I have already hinted at some of them, and another one is that the organisers introduced some kind of in-house check a few years ago, by bringing on board a consultant for each genre. It appears to me that this year, there was even no consultant. But even then a consultant should, like the judges, have the capacity to engage the entries of a given genre. If Poet X has organized his or her collection strictly as a collection of sonnets, do they have the capability to sincerely analyse what the poet has done? Are there worthwhile inputs or creative inversions that make the collection worthwhile based on that basic standard? Shakespeare broke away from the existing sonnet form and created something new. Would the NLNG poetry judges be able to recognise a successful experimentation of form or content?
Also some level of equity must also be seen, so that the process is not tarnished because a basic ethical issue, like a judge being part of the adjudication in which he is also the publisher of an entry, is ignored. This should certainly be part of the terms and conditions of the contest for both judges and contestants. It is a basic universal standard for all kinds of contests globally. Overall, the organizers must ensure judges are not introducing unwholesome practices which they may have been imbibed from other less credible literary contests.
In that regards, what then are your thoughts on the longlist this year? They have come in for some criticism. Do you think the criticisms are justified?
I was surprised not to see some titles on the longlist but then I have to admit that I have not read all those on the longlist. This does not take away the validity of some of the criticisms that have been raised, particularly those that are not subjective. The judges have the advantage of looking at about one hundred and eight entries, which most of us will never be able to access, giving them a platform of holistic appraisal. But that gives the judges a huge responsibility based on their supposed competency in adjudicating over a particular genre. They should have enough time to read the entries, ensure there is a standard elimination process, and know precisely what qualities they are looking for in the winning entries. All these are critical especially when assessing entries that have been generated over a span of four years with all the related ebb and flow of literary trends, and sincere or patronising reviews. The reading span period for judges is critical and some organizers have made it a determinant as to when longlist and shortlist results are announced. So the result of a 2017 contest is announced in 2018.
Literary contests, even the established ones across the world, have had to grapple with some form of controversy. There is a basic reason for this as Mark O’Connell observes in his article, “Why Do We Care About Literary Awards ?”. It has to do with individual expectations and the contestations between literary culture and the demands of the publishing industry.
So organisers elsewhere continue to fine-tune their contests in ways that would ensure integrity is not compromised, while sustaining the original vision of the award. NLNG must look at how other organisers have sorted out their own controversies, and actually be seen to be refining the existing process without compromising the original vision. They should be able at all times to have a basic minimum of transparency that can be unashamedly and openly defended if the need arises like now.
It is hard to find traditional publishers for poetry , as you mentioned, and so we have had a proliferation of self-published poetry. Do you think this has compromised the standard of poetry?
The creative sector in Nigeria is not properly organised and the essential structures are generally lacking. The process of getting a book from the author’s imagination, to the reader’s hands is made up of several vital stages. The moment that work of imagination comes alive within the pages of a book, it becomes an economic commodity. So everything possible should be done within the production stages to ensure that the end product has quality. This is regardless of whether the work is self-published. Even some works published by so-called established publishing houses, have exhibited the same flaws associated with self-published books. So it is important for writers and publishers to understand the need for critical editing, good cover design, quality printing, promotion and effective distribution. But most importantly, poets must be willing to hone their skills. The quality of the first draft is important, because the editor should have something manageable to work with.
The quality of locally produced fiction has improved markedly in recent times because of interventions that have taken the foregoing issues into consideration.
Will poetry ever be profitable in Nigeria?
The real question is will creative writing be profitable in Nigeria? In other countries it is still an issue, but each country is finding meaningful solutions through an array of appropriate interventions including specialised workshops, residencies, publishing grants, festivals and promotions including book tours and advertisements. How many publishing houses in Nigeria organize book tours for their authors? There are fundamental structural deficiencies that have to be addressed for all the genres to be profitable in Nigeria. This is even the more reason why poets and publishers must not continue with this mindset that the NLNG Literature Prize is the be all and end all for poetry. That has never been the case in other countries, and there is enough reason to ensure it should not be the case in Nigeria.