An excursion into the mind, activism of Prof. Omole at 70

Title: Linguistic Criticism of The African Novel Author: Kayode Omole Publisher: Bloom Media Network Ltd, Abuja, Nigeria Pages: 161 Reviewer: Prof Gbenga Ibileye

This work is divided into two broad sections. The first part, which spans the first to the sixth chapters, outlines the theoretical ingredients of the sociolinguistic approach. Here, Omole outlines his conception of linguistic criticism as being marginally different from literary criticism. The other preoccupations of the section as set out in the chapters are: sociolinguistics and the novel; sociolinguistics and African Literature; the language of African Literature: a review; Eurocentricism; and Soyinka’s ‘The Interpreters’: A Sociolinguistic Perspective. In all the six chapters of part one of the book, Omole provides an insightful dose of the richness of his theoretical proposition and its applicability in a test dissection of Wole Soyinka’s ‘The Interpreters’.

Generally, the essays lay out a general theoretical framework situated within sociolinguistics for the interrogation of texts located in an aesthetic context in the belief that a text, literary or otherwise, is created within a cross-current of social, historical, economic and existential realities which in turn impinge on and determine not only the thematic essence of the text but also construct its linguistic and literary architecture. However, the end of the analytic excursion is not the structure or form. Rather, it is in how it reflects the society and at the same time interprets it.

In short, the chapters in the first part of the book are devoted to the enunciation and theoretic character and strength of the sociolinguistic approach to the study of the African novel with Soyinka’s ‘The Interpreters’ at the core of its exemplification. Overall, Omole’s thesis in this background is that the study of the

African novel, and by logical extension, African literature, can be better apprehended when subjected to sociolinguistic analysis. The implication of this is that the sociolinguistic approach which situates the African novel within its socio-cultural cum linguistic context, becomes more potent at revealing the instrumentality of the linguistic resources (and naturally, its thematic forage) of the African novel Review

Specifically, in chapter one, and to a reasonable extent, in chapter two, and in answering the question of what the uniqueness of his insight is, Omole defines his unique approach and its usefulness in the following ways:

‘... linguistic criticism in this essay refers to a sociolinguistic model of literary criticism, an approach that will be able not only to set African literature in relation to its social origins, but will also explicate the socio-psychological context of otherwise irregular linguistic phenomena in African literature. This type of stylistics will enable us establish the socio-linguistic, cultural and historical forces behind the linguistic simplicity or complexity of some African novels in English.’ (1)

In setting out the specific features of African literature that make them amenable to sociolinguistic analysis Omole in chapter three avers that the first of these attributes is the inclusion and deployment by African writers of bits and pieces of the native languages in their narrative, the variety of English used (which assumes a unique phonological, syntactic, lexical and semantic characteristics in different regions of the world). These peculiarities necessitate the nativisation of English in African creative writings through direct literal translation of proverbs and idioms into English, the use of nativised rhetorical strategies of speech initiators, local address forms, nativisation of cohesion and cohesiveness, etc. In chapter four, Omole lends his authoritative and assertive voice to the debate, started by Ngugi, Soyinka and Achebe, about the adoption and use of colonially inherited European languages such as English in their literary expressions or the indigenous languages. He, while adumbrating some potent and convincing evidence for the continued relevance of English in African, and especially Nigerian literature argues equally strongly that ‘African writers should ideally make conscious effort to write either in their indigenous languages or the English language on account of the ...advantages of both, on the one hand, the preservation of Africa’s indigenous culture and identity is not negotiable. On the other hand, the self-effacement of African thoughts, culture and identity on account of non-universal or ethnic medium of expression should not be encouraged. The overall implication of this dilemma is that prolific production of indigenous literature may eventually attract world attention, especially if our literati consider translation as useful intellectual engagements capable of internationalizing our arts’ (23-24) As evident in chapter five, Omole’s stylistic criticism tends towards liberality and hybridity, a fusion of the extreme poles of ‘ Euro-centricism’ or ‘ Euromodernism’ typified by the elevated arts of writers such as Soyinka and the ‘PanAfricanists’, represented by writers such as Achebe, Ngugi, Tutuola and Senghor. The sociolinguistic approach which he proposes, when applied to African literature, can highlight and indeed unearth the Africanisms or (Pseudo) Eurocentricism in a work of art and will prevent “the labelling of an ‘authentic’ African novel as alien, un-African or Eurocentric. Rather, it will provide a perspective for understanding African works of Arts” (31). Thus, it can be safely asserted that Omole, through his sociolinguistic critical intervention, resolved the extreme and previously conflicting opposites of ‘Euromodernism’ and ‘Pan-Africanism’ in African literary criticism. In chapter six titled ‘Soyinka’s ‘The Interpreters’: A sociolinguistic Perspective’, Omole wades into the ever-present debate about the oft touted obscurantism of Wole Soyinka’s writings; especially, ‘The Interpreters’. He avers that using the sociolinguistic approach which situates the work in its universe of contexts will reveal that ‘the stylistic sophistication of ‘The Interpreters’ is a function of the selective avoidance of the socio-linguistic features of traditional African discourse patterns and strategies’ (38). This sociolinguistic excursion allows Omole, unlike some other critics of Soyinka’s works, to conclude that “there is ‘method’ in Soyinka’s ‘Madness’ “.

The second part of the book which comprises chapters seven to sixteen is aptly titled ‘Analytical Issues’ because this is where the tenets of the sociolinguistic approach are applied to specific texts - Soyinka’s, Ngugi’s, Achebe’s, Marechera’s - and general cultural and contextual conclusions drawn. In the case of Soyinka’s texts, which many scholars including Chinwezu et al have characterised as linguistically impregnable, Omole succinctly submits that an adoption of his sociolinguistic approach will make such obscurantists’ writings much more amenable to study.

In “towards a sociolinguistic study of African Literature”, co-authored with Adewole Gerald, it is averred that, like Omole has done in the theoretical aspect of the book, “formal approach to literature is inherently deficient. Literature is a social product and a social practice. As a social institution of man, it cannot be studied in abstraction from the society....” (43).

The different other sociolinguistic parameters, such as code-switching, nonstandard English, technical register, satire, variation, rhetorical questions, idiolects as well as linguistic experimentation, are appropriately and clinically deplored in the study of some African literary texts including The Interpreters and Ayi Kwei Amah’s ‘The Beautyful Ones Are Not Yet Born’.

The beauty of Omole’s proposition in this book is that it successfully reorients criticism of the literary text away strictly from mere literary appreciation to a commendable fusion of sociolinguistic as well as structural features of the text. As it were, one could rightly conclude that the old, and the new find their essence in the outcome of this experimentation.

On the whole, Omole’s scholarship as typified in his choice of the sociolinguistic approach to the study of the African novel gels with his non-conformist spirit and restless soul. These tendencies to rebellion define the fecundity of Omole’s mind and his critical appraisal of issues, events, personalities and epochs. This crave for the uncharted course must have propelled him to this excursion, a fresh and unique approach to the study of the African novel. The effort, I dare say, has yielded a pragmatic home grown theoretic and scholarly understanding of the studied texts in his book ‘Linguistic Criticism of the African Nove’l. Much more pleasing is that the book sets a template for linguistic and literary scholars to dissect and analyse African novels with fruitful outcomes.