Discuss Tradition and Modernity ' A study of social change in The Swamp Dwellers'

Discuss Tradition and Modernity “ A Study of Social change in Swamp Dwellers”

v     About the author and his style

Wole Soyinka’s play The  Swamp Dweller  was written in 1957. The Nigerian playwright WoleSyoinka was born in 1934.  Soyinka was one of the few African writers to denounce the slogan of Negritude as a tool of autocracy . Soyinka also enjoys the rank as the first black African to be awarded the Nobel prize in literature. He wrote the lays like

1.    The Invention

2.   The Lion and the Jewel

3.   A Dance in the Forest

He also wrote the famous poems like

 The Immigrant

My Next Door Neighbour

                              In his plays , he showed his ability to project traditional Nigerian themes and stories through English rather than Yoruba. He is famous as a dramatic poet and skilled dramatic craftsman. He was concerned with the universal problems. His plays are concerned with town life, a retrograde countryside and the ambitions of the new “Nigerians”

 Soyinka presented Nigeria as a country in tradition, attempting to mold itself out of a variety of tribal cultures and a turbulent Europe colonization. He was willing to charge Nigerian politicians and bureaucrats with barbarity and corruption as he was to condemn the greed an materialism of the Europeans. Some of hi works took on a darker and angrier tone. 

v        About  the Play

Soyinka’s drama presents the post- colonial Nigerian. In the drama he contrasts rural and Urban areas, he contrasts tradition and Modernity. The playwright discuss the Urban area through implications. The story’s setting is in the Swamp community on which outside world has many effects. Wole Soyinka’s  peculiarity is that he hardly presents the countryside as a stable and innocent world. He very carefully designs the generation gap and differentiates the traditional  from modern as –

          

Makuri: “ Ah....well ... Those were the days .... Those days were really good. Even when times were harsh and Swamp overran the land we were able to laugh with the serpent.... but these young people...... They are no sooner born than they want to get out of the villages as if it carried a plague......”

           This play brings light to the corruption and contradiction found throughout Nigerian society including both traditional and modern views.

      “The play examines the suffering and hardships of the people living in Nigeria – Delta. The Suffering of Nigerian people has been guided by the federal thoughtlessness and domination. The purpose of writing the play is to keep the focus on the society operating through modification between the city and the country of course there are some characters in the story but the main theme revolves around the story of a woman named Alu. Through the character of Alu the playwright gives the concept of aspiration and determination, especially focusing on women. The story contrasts the differences between the tradition and modernity of south Nigerian people Alu is represented as a traditional woman while Desala represents modernity.”

                                    The play has a setting in marshy swamp with one hut built on stilts. It features five visible characters the aged Makuri and his wife Alu, their son Igwezu the blind Beggar from the North and the Village priest, called the Kadiye. Also, there are two important characters who are never featured physically but they influence the story. The story gets over within one day. The play opens with old quarrelsome couple. The couple worried about their son Igwezu who went to the city where his twin, Awuchike disappeared before many years. The father Makuri is worried about the rain, where as the mother; Alu is tense about the return of Igwezu who has been out the whole day. Alu is also worried for her son Awauchike she thought him dead in the city but it wasn’t so.

He was lost in the glamour and corrupt world of the city. The play deals with social, economical, traditional, modern, superstitious, issues, of the village. Also, the young and old presented in the drama are issues to be discussed as the youngsters have great attraction towards the city. Youth wanted to live the life of luxury. They had no moral, after living the village they forget their village their parents and relatives. They forget their ethics and morality. For example, some youngster never looks back at their parents, never sent money for their old parents. They just ran behind money. If we talk about the twin brothers, Igwezu lost her wife to his brother. Desala left Igwezu because he had no money. She went to live with Awuchike who had lots of money.  Igwezu was robbed of his wife and money. Igwezu was traditional. He sent the item he promised to his parents as soon as he reached the city,. The village had no jobs; the crops were ruined by the rain. The youngsters were captivated by the dazzle of the city. Awauchike on the other side was unlike Igwezu . Awuchike never looked back. In fact his mother Alu thought him dead because he never returned or sent message.

             Awuchike represent modernity, but his brother can be called traditional. Both were twin, yet there was a large difference between  the.

          Igwezu comes back from the city. “ Igwezu’s flight need  not be taken as a confirmation of the elders fears that the young people have abandoned tradition in favour of the city. In ‘ The Swamp dwellers the thematic statement is complex. The city and the trusted traditional home seem to conspire against the individual and destroy him in different ways. It seems Soyinka is raising the issues of human disillusionment with the pillars of society that people have been conditioned to trust, like one’s siblings, the religious head, and the soil that yields the Dwellers crops.

                                           The playwright enlightens us on the theme of Tradition V/S Modernity while discussing the city and the country. A person who goes to the city dies spirituality . The death of Awauchike is metaphorical and not real. Makuri discussed the city –

                      “ It ruins them the city ruins them. What do they seek there excepect money?  There was Gonushi’s son for one..... Left his wife and children ... not a word to anyone.”

                     Even outside the Yoruba belief the city is a Swamp, a place of moral degradation. Alu compares the city with Swamp , Alu’s village started receiving the result of industrialization. Modernity started questioning traditionality Kadiye’s fear. Here traditional aspects are heavier to modernity. Tradition throws Igwezu to the city to face the modernity. The beggar who is blind could see the reality; he could guess and understand the reality of life. Igwezu twin did not support him but the beggar who is blind took his fields and parents responsibility on him.

                         Modernity invades the tradition of the village. Forty years later after the cruel alliance of shell Oil and the Nigerian military in repressing Nigerian democracy. The capitalism industrialization, the city has already invaded the countryside here, in the form of spillage from the drilling of oil, drilling that eventually grow to enormous ecological and human waste.

                    The opening scene also suggests that modernity entered the village. Icon of modernity was gift to Makuri from Igwezu, when Igwezu was in the city. This gift has great importance in the next _

                         “When they were bringing it over the water, it knocked a hole in the bottom of the canoe and nearly sank it”

               If we see the literal meaning of the above statement we see it as a virtual liberalization of the idea that traditional practise cannot bear the weight of modernity but sink under the load. Further in the drama _

“The carrier got stuck in the Swamps and they had to dig him out”      

           We can conclude through the statement that modernity, commodities things acquired for money in the city, are precisely the things that increase pride, envy and greed and thus invite destructive chaos.

      The other example of tradition and modernity is represented by Alu, the mother -  in – law whom we here mention and is not physically present. Soyinka has depicted it through artistic conversation as Alu and Makuri converse. Alu is a traditional woman whose husband praised her    _

                            Makuri: “There wasn’t a woman anywhere more faithful than you, Alu, I never had a moment of worry in the whole of my life...And the chance you could have taken.  Those traders - every one of them wanted you to go back with him; promised he’d make you live like a lady, clothe you in silks and have servants to wait on your smallest wants.......’  

 On one side there is a faithful wife Alu living miserable life in poverty with her husband but her daughter – in – law leaves her traditional husband who was poor and went to leave with his twin brother so that she can enjoy the life of luxury. Desala married to Igwezu with a condition that both of them would leave the village and settle in the city Swallows the newcomer to the city.

              Makuri : What did he do son? What happened in the city?

              Igwezu : Nothing but what happens to a newcomer  to the race.

                                The city reared  itself  in the air, and with the strength of its legs

                              Of brass kicked the adventure in the small of his back.

v      Conclusion

                               There was a complete change in the people of village once they reach the city. Also, the villages started changing , young people don’t allow  anyone or anything blindly as Makuri did because they raise questions as Igwezu did.

The Swamp dwellers believe in the infallibility of Kadiye, priest of the serpent. Igwezu questions Kadiye, and his ways. It tells us of the clash between tradition and modernity in Southern Nigeria. The play shows contrast, parallelism humour, and irony in a suitable manner, Soyinka focuses the plight of the Swamp dwellers are at the mercy of furious nature until they compromise tradition with modernity, embrace modern technology.

 

               

     

              

                              

 

                

      

The differnces between shakespeare's The Tempest and Aime Cesaire's A Tempest paper no 11

the differences between Shakespeare's the tempest and aime cesaire's a tempest

Name : Gohil Hetalba

Std    : m.a. – II   sem -  III

Sub   :  paper no :  11 ( post – colonial Literature )

Topic :  the differences between the Shakespeare’s “the                          tempest” and amie cesaire’s ‘’ a tempest”

Roll no : 08

Submitted to : smt. S.b. gardi

                                Dept. of English

                                 m.k. Bhavnagar university

year : 2013 – 2014

 Amie Cesaire was born on June 26, 1913 and died in 2008. He dealt with literature and politics. His way from a small Caribbean island to the global stage was traced in a variety of genres poems, plays, essays, prefaces, speeches interviews declaration manifestos letters , telegrams , translations, a film review and a historical study. The liberation of people from all forms of exploration was his main theme of writing.

               His contribution to world literature take many forms. His works have been translated into many languages, a number of which appear in the voluminous anthology prepared student in university courses .  He introduced to the language of liberation the word “negritude”, which conveys the awareness of one’s own roots in Africa and of the need to spread this awareness to other peoples in the African Diaspora. Negritude severed as a banner for those African and Caribbean writers in the 1930s who rejected French cultural assimilation and who wanted to focus instead on their own heritage. The term entered French dictionaries in 1948 after the publication of “ Anthologies de la malagache de language francaise.”

    UNESCO declared 2013 a year for honoring Rabindranath Tagore, Pablo Neruda and Aime cesaire as exemplars of a “reconciled universal.

 Known in the world of letters as the progenitor of Negritude,  a major voice of surrealism and one of the great French poet, Cesaire is equally revered for his role in modern anti-colonial and Pan – African movements.

  He believed that the assimilation of the old colonies into the republic would guarantee equal rights but this turned out not to be the case.

Cesaire believed that colonialism and racism were the fundamental problems that the world faced. He defined “Universal” in a different way  _

“ I have a different idea of a universal’’,

Cesaire explained to his former communist comrades _

“ It is of a universal rich with all that is particular there are the deepening of each particular, coexistence of them all.”

 In his final exploration of colonialism Cesaire retread from modern history and turned to Shakespeare as his vehide. His 1969 adaptation of “ The Tempest ” explored the relationship between Prospero who is the colonizer and his colonial subjects, who are Caliban and Ariel. Caliban rebels outright whereas Ariel attempts to appeal to Prospero’s moral conscience. Caliban is crushed when he attempts to become his own master, but before figuring out that Prospero’s domination and claims to superiority are based on lies. Caliban’s mouth. The mouths of the radical black intelligentsia produced by colonial education. _

       “ Prospero, you are the master of illusion,

         Lying is your trademark.

          And you have lied so much to me

         ( lied about the world, lied about me )

         That you have ended by imposing on me an image of my self.

          Underdeveloped, you brand me, inferior, that’s way you have forced me to see my self.

          I detest that image ! what’s more, its a lie !

          But now I know you, you old cancer, and I know myself as well.”

 He wrote : “ poetic knowledge is born in the great silence of scientific knowledge.” 

          Cesaire has denied trying any linguistic echo of Shakespeare, but the translation of his play into English shows some echoes. An English of American spectator cannot help but “hear ” behind the language of the play, the original text resounding  in all its well known beauty, its familiarity. The modern play has many echos of the former play ‘The Tempest.’

 ‘A Tempest’  is a 1969 play. It is an adaptation of Shakespeare’s ‘The Tempest’ from a post colonial perspective. The play was first performed at the Festival d’ Hammamet in Tunisia under the direction of Jean Marie surreal. Cesaire uses all of the characters from Shakespeare’s version, but he specifies that Prospero is a white master, while Ariel is a mulatto and Caliban is a black slave. These characters are the focus of the play as Cesaire foregrounds issues of race, power and decolonization.

             Synopsis of ‘The Tempest’

Alonso ( Naples’ king ), his brother Sebastian, his son Ferdinand, Alonso’s counselor Gonzalo and Antonio are on a ship with crew caught in storm. When the storm subsides, the exiled Duke Prospero, his daughter Miranda lived on the island for 12 years. Miranda talked about seeing a ship to her father but explained that it was his  magic. He tells her that once he was Duke of Milan, but his brother Antonio took studying literature. They survived as Gonzalo had given Prospero money, clothes and his sorcerer books in the boat. When he saw his enemies nearby he caused storm. His spirit Ariel helped him. Alonso is thought to be dead. Prospero rescued Ariel from the ‘foul witch’ Sycorax and will free Ariel him self when his plans for the nobles are complete. Ariel was imprisoned in a tree. Sycorax also had a deformed son – Caliban. Prospero makes him his slave.

Ariel scared Ferdinand as he wanders. He met Prospero and Miranda. Miranda and Ferdinand fall in love, Prospero pretends to be tough towards Ferdinand. Alonso and his crew are alive but feared death of Ferdinand. At Prospero’s cave, Miranda saw Ferdinand carrying logs for her father. They vow to marry.  Prospero, watching in secret approves. Caliban convinces Stephano to kill Prospero and seize Miranda. Ariel informs Prospero about this.

Prospero brings the nobles to his cell and reveals himself to them. He forgives Alonso, Antonio and Sebastian them tells them about Ferdinand and Miranda Alonso restores Prospero’s dukedom and Prospero promises to return all home safely to Italy. As for Caliban, he promises to mend his ways while Stephano and Trinculo repent for plotting to kill Prospero. Ariel is freed.

Aime cesaire’s ‘A Tempest’ is a politicized which is based on Shakespeare’s play. This play is created during the late 60s, a time of great social change. It is really a post – colonial response to ‘The Tempest’. It deals much more with the history from the point of view of Caliban and Ariel. In Aime Cesaire version Caliban is a Black slave and the spirit Ariel is represented as a mulatto slave.

 This version follows the same story however there are other differences from play which influenced it. The dialogue on Caliban’s part is ‘harsh’. He says _

I’ll impale you! And on a stake that you’ve sharpened yourself Caliban’s aggression and hate towards Prospero is found.

There are boundary lines drawn among the characters those based on race and even the formerly neutral Gonzalo is condescending towards what he views as a rebellious Caliban obviously in need of Christianity.

 Caliban’s race got a bit low treatment. Ariel was treated as mulatto Ariel’s role here is of a willing servant. He was treated in a better way but was a captive still.

   Caliban was actually a ruler of the island before Prospero’s arrival. Caliban and Ariel react differently to their situation. Caliban favors revolution over Ariel’s non – violence and rejects his name as the imposition of Prospero’s colonizing language. He complains stridently about his enslavement and regrets not being powerful enough to challenge the reign of Prospero to consider giving him independence. At the end of the play Prospero grants Ariel his freedom, but retains confront of that island and of Caliban. This is a notable departure from Shakespeare’s ‘The Tempest’. In his daughter and the men who were shipwrecked there at the beginning of the play.

 In ‘The Tempest’ there are quite a few characters that might be easily identifiable as villains but the main figure, Prospero seems to play, many routes, good as well as bad. All of the events in the play are more or less orchestrated by him in his attempt to get justice and return to Milan. It can be said that is at fault for his current situation because he neglected his duties as duke. He passed his own responsibilities to his brother . Whether Prospero is a villain or not in Cesaire’s work is not clearly shown. It’s not mentioned clearly that his purpose as colonialist was oppressive like Britisher.

Prospero is also a good example of the role power plays in the story. He was a magician in Shakespeare’s as well as Aime Cesaire’s play. He possessed great ability to do anything through the loyal spirits on his side. He uses his powerful spirits which he uses to take revenge and also control all the characters around him. Colonialist did this in Cesaire’s play. He controlled his daughter with magic. He used his daughter Miranda, as a tool of reconciliation with king Alonso by marrying her off to his son. Alonso’s party  is wandering the island Prospero conjures up a feast using his magic only to Snatch it away from them. In doing so he demonstrates his power over his enemies, whom he frightens and forced them to flee.

The character called Stephano who happens to meet Caliban as he is hidden gives us another example of powerful person in the play and more specifically how the characters bring their end. When Caliban swears his loyalty to him he readily agrees and takes advantages and declares himself king of the island. This way Caliban once again trusts outsider.

Miranda is the only one female character on the island. She is depicted as a helpless character. Caliban is the name that reminds us of the Canibals. Miranda is helpless whose care is to be taken as she has been the focus of Caliban. Caliban is treated in the text as a person who comes to represent ‘bestial desire’ and Miranda establish herself as an innocent in need of constant Protection.

The ends of the both plays are a bit different Caliban’s character and the way Prospero treats him is a nice representation of colonial attitudes towards indigenous people. “Well I hate you as well !

             For it is you who have made me doubt my self for the first time.” His rebuke of the idea that Prospero did him a favor by teaching him English synonyms with the view of many especially, the late sixties when Cesaire wrote his version.

Cesaire’s rich and insightful adaptation draws on contemporary Caribbean society, Africa – American experience and African mythology to raise question about Colonialism , racism and their effects. _

And now, Caliban it’s you and me !

What I have to tell you will be brief:

 ten times a hundred times, I’ve tried to save you above all from yourself.

But you have always answered me with wrath and venom

like the opossum that pulls itself up by its own tail ,

the better to bite the hand that tears it from the darkness.

Well, my boy, I shall set aside my indulgent nature

And henceforth I will answer your violence with Violence!            

  

                       

  

comparison and differentite of behaviorist theory and nativist theory paper no 12 elt

comparison and differentiate of behaviorist theory and nativist theory

Name : gohil hetalba

Std    : m.a. -  ii   sem – iii

Sub   :  paper no 12 ( elt)

Topic : comparison and differentiate  of behaviorist theory and nativist theory on learning and acquisition .

Roll no : 08

Submitted to : dept. of English

                      Maharaja Krishna kumarsinhji Bhavnagar university

Year : 2013 – 2014

There are some basic advanced to describe how language is acquired learnt and taught. The behaviorist theory Mentalist theory , Rationalist theory and Interactionism, Native theory are some of these theories.

      The behaviorist theory and mentalist theory are mainly applicable to the acquisition of native languages. While the rest can account for foreign language acquisition. The theories are complementary to each other.

  Native language growth must pave the way for foreign language growth. The basic theories are fundamental pillars of language learning. Whose relevance to education is undeniable.

 “Infants learn oral language from other human role models through a process involving, imitation, rewards, and practice. Human role models in an infant’s environment provide the stimuli and rewards.”

               _ Cooter and Reutzel, 2004

When a child attempts oral language or imitates the sounds or speech patterns they are usually praised and given affection for their efforts.

 Behaviorist theory is basically a Psychological theory. It was founded by J.B. Watson, is actually a theory of a native language learning advanced in part as a reaction to traditional grammar. Leonard Bloomfield, O.N. Mowrer, B.F. Skinner, A.W. Staats. Behaviorism was advanced in America as a new approach. It was based on verbal behavior. Educational world gave him considerable response.

  The Nativist theory is where it is believed that we have an inborn ability to learn and learning is in our genetics. N. Chomsky did many researches on this and has the greatest influence on this theory.

Nativist theory can be interpreted as under :

Advocating the perpetuation of native societies. “ the old nativist prejudice against the foreign businessman”, the nativistc faith preaches the old values.

              _ C.K. Kluckhohn.

Nativist is of or relating to or advocating nativism, nativist theories the traditional controversy between the nativistc and empiristic theories.

 The nativistc theory with the biological belief that language is an innate feature of the infant. Researcher Noam Chomsky is a firm advocate for this theory. He gave the idea of a language organ which is called the Language Acquisition Device (LAD). Other researchers have discredited Chomsky’s theories.

The behaviorist theory depends on the analysis of human behavior in observable stimulus response interaction and the association between them. Thorndike was the first behaviorist to explore the area that learning is the establishment of associations on particular process of behavior and consequences of that behavior. The behaviorist theory is a theory of stimulus – response psychology.

  “ Through a trial and error process in which acceptable utterances are reinforced by comprehension and approval an unacceptable utterances are inhibited by the lack of reward, he gradually learns to make finer and finer discrimination until his utterances  approximate more and more closely the speech of the community in which he is growing up.”

                         _ Wilga M Rivers

 A highly complex learning task can be learned by being broken down into small habits. The acquisition of learning in infancy is governed by the acquisition of other habits.

             The nativist theory tells us that language does not develop quickly. According to the Nativist theory it is more gradual process. Also this theory does not put into account the many different languages spoken throughout the world. Nativist theory deals with the development processes most closely associated with initial language acquisition.

 Acquisition of language is the study of the process by which a person learns a language. Nativist theories hypothesize that language is an innate fundamental part of the human genetic make – up and that language acquisition occurs as a natural part of the human experience.

 Nativists believe that children are born with an innate ability to organize laws of language which enables children to easily learn a native language. They believe that the children have specific language ability which assists them as the move ahead. This idea is often contrasted to the behaviorist perspectives of Skinner and Watson.

Some principles operating on behaviorism:

Ø Behaviorist theory dwells on the language that is spoken.

Ø  Behaviorist theory is the habit formation theory of language teaching and learning reminding us the learning of structural grammar.

Ø The stimulus response chain, S – R, is pure case of conditioning. Behaviorist learning theory emphasizes conditioning and building from the simplest conditioned responses to more and more complex behaviors.

Ø  Positive reinforcement is reward while negative reinforcement is punishment.

Ø  Each person can learn equally if the conditions in which the learning takes place are the same for each person.

                

             Some limitation of Nativist theories are:

Language doesn't develop as forecast by Nativists. This theory does not put different language spoken in account. It is somewhat in contrast with the behaviorist theory. The process of language acquisition in children is constrained.

The theorist  of nativism believes that it is difficult to explain how children within the first five years of life routinely master the complex and puzzling grammar and the rules of the native language. Other scholars however resisted the possibility that infants routine success at acquiring the grammar of their native language requires anything more than forms of learning.

  Basic strategies of language learning within the scope of behaviorist theory are imitation reinforcement and rewarding. In behaviorist theory the process of learning relies more on generalization rewarding condition three of which support the development of analogical learning in children objection made on instinctively based learning will doubtlessly harm the creative way of learning . Behaviorist theory does not explain social influence rate on a learn equally well in the same conditions in which learning takes place. This theory is useful for the most part on animal experimentation and learning.

  It can be concluded for behaviorist theory that as learning process  is complex language acquisition cannot take place through habit formation. Behaviorist theory aims at discovering behavioral justification for designing language teaching in certain ways being a hub of many language teaching and learning theories .

 Now if we talk about the nativist theory the debate surrounding the nativist theory is in the center on whether the inborn capabilities are language specific or domain general such as those that enable the infant to usually make sense of the world in terms of objects and action.  The anti nativist view has many strands  but a frequent theme is that language emerges from usage in social contexts , using learning mechanisms that are a part of a general cognitive learning apparatus.