WE have so far looked at various theories of literature and can conclude that they all hail from Europe.
All of them were developed to explain European literature.
We can safely describe them as ‘non-African theories of Literature’.
Yes that is what they are; which perhaps makes you wonder whether we have African theories of Literature too.
Yes we do.
But we prefer to call them ‘African notions about Literature’; about African Literature.
They include Hunhu/Ubuntu, pan-Africanism, Negritude, Afrocentricity, Afrology, Africa-centredness and Africa-centred metaphysics.
We will discuss the tenets of each notion, but first I need to sensitise you about the centrality of culture because culture runs through all the African notions of Literature.
I am convinced that you are now clear about the limitations of non-African theories of Literature insofar as appreciating African art.
The major limitation, if I should remind you, is the fact that they are all reductive, treating humanity as individuals not as social units.
They are divisive.
They disassemble.
They dismember.
They deconstruct.
They do not enrich.
They impoverish.
You will see a yawning difference when we start on African notions about art and you will see the nobility of what you have been cheated for centuries to run away from.
A people’s culture is the source of all systems of ideas, thoughts and practices (ideologies).
Ideology in the African context cannot be understood outside African culture, hence the need to define how Africans understand culture.
According to Ngugi (1972: 4), culture, in its broadest sense:
“Is a way of life fashioned by a people in their collective endeavour to live and come to terms with their total environment.
“It is the sum of their art, their science and all their social institutions, including their system of beliefs and rituals.
“In the course of this creative struggle and progress through history, there evolves a body of material and spiritual values which endow that society with a unique ethos.
“Such values are often expressed through the people’s songs, dances, folklore, drawing, sculpture, rites and ceremonies.
“Over the years these varieties of artistic activity have come to symbolise the meaning of the activities, but we must bear in mind that they are derived from a people’s way of life and will change as that way of life is altered, modified, or developed through the ages.
Ngugi’s view of culture is also shared by Preiswerk and Perrot.
Both define culture as the complex of values, behaviour patterns and institutions of a human group, shared and transmitted socially.
According to Preiswerk and Perrot (1978: 3):
“It includes all the creations of man: the cosmogonies, ways of thinking…value systems, religions, customs, symbols, myths.
“It also encompasses the material works of man, technology, (and) methods of production, the system of exchange, as well as social institutions and moral and juridical rules.”
In the wider sense, culture is not the result of man’s free imagination, but of the action which men exert on their natural environment as interactive groups.
Put simply, culture is ‘the way we do things around here’.
It refers to a people’s shared bundle of assumptions about the way the world works, beliefs, values, symbols, rituals and practices that consciously or unconsciously drive the thoughts, feelings and actions of its members.
For this reason the meaning of any culture can never be the same for an insider as for the outsider.
The meaning of Zimbabwean culture cannot be the same for the Zimbabwean and the Westerner.
To understand Zimbabwean life one would have to look at it as a Zimbabwean born, with Zimbabwean temperament, Zimbabwean attributes and a Zimbabwean set of values.
To this end in Africa culture is the incubator that gives birth to the system of ideas (ideology) that informs our worldview (how we see and interpret the world).
According to Novikov (1981:20) the truthful portrayal of reality is what determines the social function of art.
Put differently, both the artist and the critic need to embrace the sensibility of the subject if they are to fulfill the supreme aim of art: the truth.
Otherwise both end up imposing other people’s values on those being written or theorised about.
A critic is a philosopher deriving intellectual authority from the ideologies and experiences that shape him or her.
Much as it can be argued that there is no universal philosopher, it can also be said that there is no universal set of ideas or experiences.
All knowledge (wisdom) is as a matter of fact confined to time and space.
Social reality varies over time in the relationships among individuals, groups, cultures and societies.
This fact acknowledges the uniqueness of Africa as of any other geo-cultural entity; insisting that to understand any phenomenon from an African perspective one has to use an African theory.
The above assertion does not mean that we must throw away Western theories of literature.
No.
African philosophy is perhaps the first theory to acknowledge the importance of cohabitation and sharing.
The point is we need to be aware of the values that informed the theories, thus acknowledging the strengths and also limitations of each in terms of relevance to explaining African realities and experiences.
But as we celebrate this diversity of thought in the world let us remember to do so as Africans for that is what we are and will be forever.