Lost your password?

Revisiting the Soyinka-Bọ́lẹ̀kájà Debate

August/September 2024Readingvol8-no3
Soyinka

(L-R) Wole Soyinka, John Pepper Clark, Christopher Okigbo. Photo Illustration by Dami Mojid / THE REPUBLIC.

THE MINISTRY OF IDEAS

Revisiting the Soyinka-Bọ́lẹ̀kájà Debate

Since the landmark Soyinka-Bọ́lẹ̀kájà debate of the 1980s, African poetry has sparked intense discussions about authenticity and the influence of Western literary traditions and forms on its poets.
Soyinka

(L-R) Wole Soyinka, John Pepper Clark, Christopher Okigbo. Photo Illustration by Dami Mojid / THE REPUBLIC.

THE MINISTRY OF IDEAS

Revisiting the Soyinka-Bọ́lẹ̀kájà Debate

Since the landmark Soyinka-Bọ́lẹ̀kájà debate of the 1980s, African poetry has sparked intense discussions about authenticity and the influence of Western literary traditions and forms on its poets.

In 2023, the Nigerian literary scene witnessed a fervent debate among poets and critics that brought to the forefront long-simmering tensions between tradition and innovation, identity and influence, and the very definition of what constituted Nigerian literature. That year, in December, Afrocritik published a collection of essays that reflected 2023’s remarkable output in essay writing and criticism. Among the 18 shortlisted essays, some focused on contemporary Nigerian poetry, questioning its authenticity and validity as Nigerian, while a few defended it. At the centre of this maelstrom was Ernest Ògúnyemí’s provocative essay, ‘Is Contemporary “Nigerian Poetry” Nigerian?’ which argued that the current crop of Nigerian poets had been overly seduced by the influences of American poetry, resulting in a homogenous and unoriginal ‘poetry-scape’. Ògúnyemí claimed that Nigerian poetry does not yet exist because today’s Nigerian poets are not working within a poetic tradition that can be characterized as Nigerian but one that is mainly American. This, among other criticisms, sparked a fiery response from Kanyinsola Olorunnisola whose responsive essay, ‘Our Literature Has Died Again: Nigerian Literature in the Era of Nomadists’, offered a piercing rebuttal, challenging Ògúnyemí’s essentialist view and arguing that the concept of ‘Nigerianness’ is rooted in colonialist fantasy and therefore cannot be used to define authenticity.  

This kind of debate on African poetry is not without precedent. In 1973, the troika of Ibekwe Chinweizu, Onwucheka Jemie, and Ihechukwu Madubuike wrote a powerful essay titled, ‘Prodigals, Come Home!’ which was later, in 1983, compiled as Towards the Decolonisation of African Literature, a book in which the self-acclaimed Bọ́lẹ̀kájà critics condemned the overwhelming recourse to Western literary models and forms by poets such as Wole Soyinka, Christopher Okigbo, and John Pepper Clark, and urged a return to African traditions. These critics aimed for an African poetry purified of colonial impressions and claimed that the poetry written by these poets at the time was ‘unAfrican’. In their opinion, African poetics need to be laid on the foundations of oral traditions.  

In 1975, Soyinka wrote a critical essay, ‘Neo-Tarzanism: The Poetics of Pseudo-Tradition’, where, in response to the claims of the troika, he argued that African poetry goes beyond the myopic and simpleminded perspectives put forward by the Bọ́lẹ̀kájà critics. He argued that African poetry is not limited to easy-to-read verses, popular lyrics, and age-old praise and invocative songs. That traditional African poetry also exists in the arts of riddling, healing, mediums, divination, divine liturgies and cultic mysteries. He then urged the critic to have deeper knowledge of the dynamism of traditional poetry before questing for African poetics. This exchange set the stage for ongoing discussions about the nature and direction of African literature. 

THE SOYINKA-BỌ́LẸ̀KÁJÀ DEBATE: ISSUES AND PERSPECTIVES

The Soyinka-Bọ́lẹ̀kájà debate, a seminal moment in African literary history, raised fundamental questions about the nature of African poetry and its relationship with tradition, culture, and identity. At its core, the debate revolved around the tension between preserving traditional African forms and embracing Western literary influences. Soyinka, a proponent of innovation and experimentation, argued that African poetry must evolve and engage with global literary trends.  

In contrast, the Bọ́lẹ̀kájà critics, champions of cultural authenticity, advocated for a return to indigenous African traditions and a rejection of Western literary dominance. This debate exposed deeper concerns about the role of the poet in African society, the significance of cultural heritage, and the challenges of literary decolonization. The Soyinka-Bọ́lẹ̀kájà debate highlighted the complexities of African identity and the need for distinct African poetics that balance tradition and innovation. The key issues and perspectives that emerged from this debate are related to the ongoing quest for a unique African literary voice and the evolution of African poetics. 

THE BỌ́LẸ̀KÁJÀ CRITICS’ PRESUPPOSITION

In the battle over African poetry, the Bọ́lẹ̀kájà group of critics and Soyinka exchanged words to justify their views on poetry and its functions in contemporary African society. The Bọ́lẹ̀kájà critics drew the battle line, accusing Soyinka and his fellow Ibadan/Nsukka contemporaries of being inauthentic imitators of rich African poetic traditions. They argued in ‘Towards the Decolonization of African Poetry’ that the poetry of these writers was marred by deficiencies, chiefly the abandonment of oral poetic traditions in favour of European ideals. 

In their quest to examine modern African poetry, the Bọ́lẹ̀kájà critics scrutinized the poetic works of these writers, defining exemplary African poetry in English as that which is accessible, musical, and deeply rooted in oral literary traditions and imageries. They argued in their published essay Towards the Decolonization of African Literature that African poetry values the economy of language, lucidity, normal syntax, and direct imagery. In contrast, the poetry of the Ibadan/Nsukka writers was criticized for its use of outdated, rough, and unmusical language, which the Bọ́lẹ̀kájà critics saw as imposing obscurity upon their poems. According to these critics, this made the African audience apathetic towards poetry, and they dismissed the poets as ‘Europeanized sensibilities in Nigerian skin.’ 

In their critique of the Ibadan/Nsukka poets, the troika identified four key shortcomings in their poetry. Firstly, they accused these poets of using outdated, cumbersome, and unmusical language. Secondly, the troika argued that the excessive use of obscure and inaccessible diction in the Ibadan/Nsukka school’s poetry confuses the African audience, deliberately burying ideas beneath a plethora of obscure idioms. Thirdly, they criticized the poets for transporting foreign imagery into their work, such as Clark’s reference to Greek mythology in ‘Cry of Birth’ and the abundant use of Latinate expressions in Okigbo and Michael Echeruo’s poetry. Okigbo was particularly faulted for his extensive use of Catholic imagery in his poems. Lastly, they argued that these poets had abandoned African oral poetic traditions and lacked oral aesthetics in their work. The critics concluded that Ibadan/Nsukka poets were failed imitators, unable to revive traditional religious poetry and cited Soyinka’s Idanre as an example. They summarized their arguments against Soyinka, stating: 

We must stop thinking that the past trajectory of Western history, literary or otherwise, is our own. Soyinka in Idanre snobbishly detached from and convulsively involved with the goings-on around him. Soyinka is a genius looking at his early poetry, before he abandoned his early transparency and humour of ‘Telephone Conversation’ and choose to wallow in dense obscurities.  

Chinweizu and his co-critics argued that African poetry is hamstrung by foreign dominations and called for decolonized African literature. They urged poets, writers, and critics to shed colonial mentality and to, instead, establish a new framework for contemporary African literature. African poetry, they argued, should transcend protest, privatism, and mystical traditions and incorporate oral traditions like legends, fables, myths, celebrations, humour, dirges, occupational poetry, and funeral dirges, which were rapidly becoming inaccessible. Furthermore, they emphasized the importance of simplicity in language, advocating for clear, contemporary English in Nigerian poetry. They praised Okigbo’s later work, ‘Path to Thunder’, as an example of healthy traditionalism, noting a significant improvement from his earlier poetry. They encouraged other poets, including Clark, Soyinka, and Echeruo, to abandon their ‘modernist’ posturing and return to their African roots, rather than masquerading as Western-style modernists. 

shop the republic

shop the republic

SOYINKA’S DEFENCE AND EXCORIATING RESPONSE

Soyinka in his essay, ‘Neo-Tarzanism: The Poetics of Pseudo-Traditions’, responded defensively to the troika’s criticisms, and launched a scathing attack on them. He called them ‘feigning frontiers of African poetics’ who claim to champion traditional African poetry but lack genuine understanding. Soyinka argued that they should ‘mind the thorns’ and delve deeper into the essence of poetry in traditional art to avoid contradicting themselves due to their superficial grasp. He accused them of being opportunistic critics, ridiculing select African poets to appear relevant, rather than genuine lovers of poetry. Soyinka saw them as ‘unsure critics’ and ‘superficial traditionalists’ who uncritically advocate for traditional themes and motifs in contemporary African literature without substance. 

Soyinka rebuked what he considered the troika’s narrow interpretation of Africa’s poetic landscape, which, he argued, they portrayed as primitive and unsophisticated, likening airplanes to ‘iron birds’. Soyinka considered their criticism reductionist and as a slight to Africa’s potential, akin to Hollywood’s stereotypical portrayal of Africans as uncultured and unsophisticated. Instead, he envisioned a progressive African society that embraces technological advancements and reflects universal ideas. Soyinka emphasized the importance of adopting modern terminology, using ‘aeroplanes’ instead of ‘iron birds’ and ‘railway trains’ instead of ‘iron snakes’ to reflect a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of the world. 

Soyinka challenged the troika’s insistence on ‘musicality’ in African poetry, pointing out that ancient forms don’t always have smooth rhythms. He mocked their implied imposition of a uniform musicality on contemporary African poetry, citing examples like Yoruba lyrical recitations with purposefully staccato melodies (rough and disjointed). As a champion of African rights, Soyinka saw no issue with African poets engaging with conventional poetry. However, he suggested that African poets can draw on traditional resources from nearby libraries rather than returning to their villages. Unlike the troika, Soyinka believed that nuance and depth in imagery should not be sacrificed for simplistic diction in modern African poetry. He argued that a poem’s understandability does not necessarily make it mellifluous. Soyinka criticized the troika’s approach as ‘destructive’ and ‘inaccurate,’ urging them to delve deeper into a poem’s social meaning beyond its surface-level language presentation during evaluation. 

In the concluding paragraphs of his essay, Soyinka shifted his stance, acknowledging the troika’s criticism that poets often indulge in ‘wilful obscurantism and private esotericism.’ However, he justified this complexity as a deliberate ‘imaginative challenge,’ implying that poetry is meant to stimulate the mind and spark creativity. By using ‘armoured diction’, Soyinka argued, poets aim to engage readers on a deeper level, fostering a more nuanced understanding of the subject matter. In essence, Soyinka defended the strategic use of complex language in poetry as a means to challenge and inspire, rather than simply to obscure or confuse. 

The Bọ́lẹ̀kájà critics and Soyinka employed a combination of intellectual and emotional approaches to convey their arguments. The Troika’s essay demonstrates intellectuality through its structured approach, addressing key issues in African literature and supporting its claims with empirical evidence. Similarly, Soyinka mounts an intellectual defence drawing inferences to counter the critics’ arguments. However, emotional intervention adds a biting tone to both essays, with both parties using derogatory language. The critics label the Ibadan/Nsukka poets ‘ineffectual imitators’ and Soyinka’s work ‘pleasurable nonsense,’ while Soyinka retorts by calling the critics ‘unsure’ and ‘superficial traditionalists,’ accusing them of ‘intellectual laziness.’ Despite the heated exchange, both essays ultimately contributed to the evolution of African poetry, urging poets to remain rooted in their heritage while adapting to a dynamic world. 

shop the republic

shop the republic

shop the republic

shop the republic

THE INFLUENCE OF THE SOYINKA-BỌ́LẸ̀KÁJÀ DEBATE ON AFRICAN POETRY

African poetry has long been a focal point of critical attention, with issues of poetic expression and identity being at the forefront of literary debates. The misinterpretation of identity and authenticity has been a persistent theme in poetic criticism, which may be attributed to the fact that Africa lacks a definitive theory of poetry, yet African poets, as P.B Shelley argued in ‘A Defence of Poetry’, play a crucial role in shaping society as ‘the institutors of laws, founders of civil society, and inventors of the arts of life.’ The African poet is a visionary, with their imagination primed to shape the continent’s cultural landscape. 

The discursive exchange between Soyinka and the troika exemplifies the dynamic interplay between critics and poets that has shaped the trajectory of African literature. While the Bọ́lẹ̀kájà critics accused Soyinka of mimicking European styles, many critics and academics praise him for infusing his work with profound themes. In his 1988 essay, ‘Beating the White Man at his Own Game’, Bernth Lindfors noted that a chorus of esteemed literary figures have lauded Soyinka’s writing for its transcendent universality, linguistic mastery, and nuanced articulation of the African experience. Such figures include feminist critic, Molara Ogundipe-Leslie; novelist, poet, and critic, Isidore Okpewho; academic and scholar, Abiola Irele; and literary critic and culture theorist, Biodun Jeyifo. These scholars argue that Soyinka’s work demonstrates a deep commitment to African perspectives, solidifying his position as a dedicated African writer. 

One of the influences of the Soyinka-Bọ́lẹ̀kájà debate is the lasting impact it has left on emerging poets and writers. It has paved the way for a certain kind of awareness, one that makes them continually examine and question their identity and place in the world. This awareness has sparked the current debate in African literature regarding the fragility of African identity and the need for a new paradigm in literary studies. As a result, generations of African poets have been inspired to experiment, innovate, and push boundaries, ensuring that African poetry remains a vibrant, diverse, and ever-evolving art form. The debate around African literature has evolved beyond decolonization, now encompassing a redefinition of African identity and its relationship to the global cultural economy. However, this examination has consistently overlooked the profound themes and pressing personal, national, and global issues that these poets tackle in their work. Despite the focus on identity and cultural economy, the rich and complex explorations of human experience, social justice, and political critique that underpin much of African poetry remain woefully underappreciated. 

The current generation of poets in the Nigerian literary sphere has undergone a significant shift, marked by a distinct ideological worldview and publishing presence. These poets serve as catalysts for change and guardians of sanity and justice in a Nigerian society where the political, social, economic, moral and legal system often falls short. The Fourth Generation (2010s-present) is distinguished by a focus on performance poetry, spoken word, and experimental forms. The three poets shortlisted for the NLNG Prize for poetry in 2022, all part of this generation, explore the fragility of identity in the twenty-first century. The shortlisted collections —Memory and the Call of Water by Su’eddie Vershima Agema, Nomad (published in the US as The Gathering of Bastards, University of Nebraska Press, 2023) by Romeo Oriogun, and Your Crib, My Qibla by Saddiq Dzukogi—tackle profound and deeply moving themes such as the fragility of contemporary existence and the burden of negotiating identity and space, reflecting the amalgamation of various generations of poetic forms in Nigerian poetry. Other notable poets of this generation include Umar Abubakar Sidi, who explores the body, soul, and spirit through Sufi and Surrealist lenses; Rasak Malik, who examines issues surrounding home, exile and identity in his 2019 poetry chapbook No Home in this Land; and Ndubuisi Martins, who reflects on the fixations of contemporary Nigerian existence and seeks answers in his second poetry collection, Answers through the Bramble. These poets are speculative, reflective, and redefining Nigerian poetry, experimenting with performance, oral traditions, and contemporary forms while exploring themes like identity, gender, and social justice. 

Contemporary Nigerian poets are pushing the boundaries of form and content, simplicity and complexity, collective and personal expression. With a focus on performance poetry, spoken word, and experimental forms, these poets have made significant contributions to the Nigerian literary landscape, exploring themes like identity, gender, and social justice. The crop of poets, as seen in Sọ̀rọ̀sóke: An #Endsars Anthology (edited by Jumoke Verissimo and James Yékú), reflects the post-COVID-19 disillusionment that characterizes Nigeria, bearing witness to the hopes and anguish of the silenced in a country where power is often weaponized against its citizens. The poetry of this generation is therefore a testament to the ongoing struggle for justice and equality that has characterized Nigerian (and African) poetry.  

AFRICAN POETRY IS ALIVE

African poetry does not operate on a cul-de-sac, isolated from the rest of the world. Rather, it is a dynamic and diverse body of work that encompasses the complex historical, cultural, and social contexts in which it is written. African poetry is not a monolith, but a rich collection of voices, styles, and themes that reflect the continent’s varied experiences and perspectives.  

Recently, debates have surrounded the evolving nature of African literature. Oris Aigbokaevbolo argues that Nigerian literature is in decline, citing the exodus of writers to foreign MFA programs as a key factor in his essay, ‘The Death of Nigerian Literature’. Ernest Ògúnyemí’ also argued that contemporary Nigerian poetry has lost its Nigerian essence, as poets imitate American writers like Lowell and Plath to gain publication in American magazines and journals. This trend continues to raise questions about the authenticity and direction of modern African literature.  

Conversations about the death of our national literature have sparked a new wave of critical thinking about African poetry, opening up the genre to fresh perspectives and appraisal. Yet, this is not the first time we are witnessing this sort of dilemma. When the literary scholar, Obi Wali predicted a dead end for African literature in 1963 and sparked a conversation about decoloniality, did African literature die? Instead, generations of talented writers continue to emerge, navigating the complexities of linguistic nationalism and cultural identity.  

For several years, African poetry has remained deeply rooted in social and political commitment, reflecting the continent’s complex history and ongoing struggles. The notion that literature is dying, or dead tends to be a recurring anxiety, not among writers, but among concerned thinkers. Yet, African poetry is alive and vibrant, blending traditional forms with experimental styles to create a unique fusion that challenges dominant narratives. African poetry is a self-transforming art form, proclaiming its uniqueness and defying categorization. It is an art that speaks for itself, with each poet leaving their mark. Critics may offer their views, but ultimately, the literature speaks for itself. African poetry remains a dynamic and diverse art form, shaped by the continent’s rich cultural heritage and complex history; it is an art that is resisting labels and categorization; a collective social and multicultural reflection and production of the African imaginary⎈

shop the republic

BUY THE MAGAZINE AND/OR THE COVER