“Ecriture Feminine” at the Hands of Post-Colonial African Female Writers: the case study of Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie and Buchie Emecheta
Written by:
Bouterra Bouchra
University of 20 Aout 1955-Skikda
Writing their own story has always been the concern and the tool for empowering women throughout history. Since the first wave of feminism, female scholars called women to emancipate using their own pens. This article highlights the issue of the feminine language from a very distant spot. The sphere of postcolonialists has always been far from that of the feminists, our study, though, shows how two African female writers used a Western concept in a way that even its own founders were not able to. The writers we have chosen for this article are just an example of the transformation and the intelligence of the African female. They demonstrate the role of African women in the history of Africa. This article, then, is going to focus on ecriture feminine and how it was applied by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie and Buchie Emecheta in their novels Half of a Yellow Sun and Destination Biafra.
Ecriture feminine is a Western concept par excellence. Western linguists have been questioning whether the difference in sexes entails a difference in the use of language. The first male writers have produced a patriarchal sexual language that oppresses women. Feminist critics starting with the French ones, decided to clean the language from its sexiest aspects. They called women to generate an anti-anarchical speech. Women were called to speak up their mythical secret language and do as men do in order to be participants in the making of ‘herstory’, since the very first problem was the ignorance of the female texts.
Some critics call to end the relation between gender and identity. Monique Wittig, for instance, believed in a new language to accomplish such mission.(Dani Cavollaro, 74)Witting took as an example the French pronouns ‘ils’ and ‘elles’ which correspond to the English ‘they’. The masculine plural ‘ils’, seems to be more powerful than the ‘elles’. ‘Elles’ indicates only a group of women. ‘ils’, however, can refer to a group of people even if there are a lot of females and just one man. Witting believes that this indicates the weak position that a large group of women can experience in front of one man. She wants to start her revolution on this basis. Having a female language was not just a French Feminist interest. Scholars all around the world start claiming for the importance of a feminist language; a language that fights back to the center and replaces the male existing language that was used in the misrepresentation of women:
“ the reason why changes ought to made in language is to bring it into line with the way things really are. It is the bussiness of language to represent reality, so to the extent that it is stuck in a vanished world where women’s place was in the home, and so on, language s misleading us and failing to do its job.” (Deboral Cameron, 103)
Female writers chose to design their characters on the way they conceive things by their feminine eyes, and they started following this new notion known as “ecriture feminine”. This notion,
“Calls for women to “write themselves’’. Typically translated as ‘feminine writing’ or ‘ writing the body’…”Writing the body’’ means rejecting traditional discourse, which is thoroughly male inscribed … and… attempting to write from a uniquely feminine perspective, substituting the biology of the female for that of the male’’ Pam Shurner-Smith, 158.)
Different feminists, thus, started questioning, and later insisting that the female language is different from the male’s. Such beliefs are primarily, Western beliefs. Virginia Woolf was the first to claim the women writers’ ownership of a ‘’female sentence’’. (Virginia and Heidi,187.) Woolf was later followed by different French feminists including Irigaray and Cixous. At the beginning feminists believed that the difference in language comes as a result of the difference in power. Such difference leads some scholars to believe in the weakness of the female language. Some radical and literal feminists like Dabe Spender and Robin Lakoff begin to think that the female language is
“more hesitant, less fluent, less logical, less assertive than men’s speech. Women in their way, are more silent, interrupt less frequently than men, use tag-questions and model verbs more than men, use cooperative strategies in conversations rather than competitive ones, and so on. It is interesting to note that this type of research has never defined, except by implication, the male norm from which female speech is supposed to deviate’’(feminist stylistics , P34).
The belief that language belongs to man pushes women writers to decide to create their own styles. They know that such a language will not help them to transmit themselves into words because it fits only men’s needs, desires, and principles. Women, then, started manipulating the male discourses in order to assert a firm feminine discourse. The “Other” body started writing her own story.
The negative thing about this notion of Ecriture feminine lies on its abstraction. Western feminists talk about a feminine language that lacks a concrete explanation. They try to explain it on the basis of being taken for granted by all women. The African woman, though, comes to realize this notion on her own feminine way. Giving their postcolonial background, Emecheta and Adichie write their way out of the male-centric literature of the civil war and the colonial-centric perceptions and explanations of the African feminine. In writing her Destination Biafra, Emecheta tries her best to fit the norms of the war literature in a womanist way. The fact that, “The war having been widely represented in narratives by male writers, she sets out to fictionalize the painful history of national division from a woman’s point of view.” (Boehmer, Elleke, 115)She insists that being a woman will not prevent her from joining the loud mess of the Nigerian writers.
One of the main concerns of the Nigerian literature of the civil war is to highlight the influence of the external forces in the war. Emecheta, as her male followers, attacks the Western involvement in the affairs of her country. She links the new betrayal to the old betrayal of the colonial governor. Such betrayal is highlighted at the eve of the braking out of the war. It starts with the very first Nigerian elections. Emecheta clarifies that,
“Nigeria was in a fever of excitement. The country’s first general election was to take place soon, an election that would decide the first prime minister of independent Nigeria, its first president and members of Federal House . it was not surprising Macdonald was playing his golf alone. He knew the great responsibility that lay on his shoulders. He had to make sure that the right man was elected who Britain would accept as head of state, the man who would offer the least resistance to British trade yet would be accepted by the majority of natives and ensure stability.”(D.B3,4.)
Emecheta’s very first pages insist on the colonizers will to greet Nigeria its independence only if it stays under a new British control. The Western greed is later presented through Debbie’s lover, Alan grey. Alan embodies all the imperial attitudes. He provides arms to the federal forces and to the Biafran forces as well. He plays the role of the war’s trigger. Abosi claims that, Alan,
“Is England in this war. He arranges mercenaries and arms to be sent to Momoh, then comes to Red Cross our people. He wants to fatten us up for the slaughter. …Some people have no conscious. This war is Britain’s great shame. I hope the world never forgets that.”(D.B.217)
Britain, then, decides to divide Nigeria in order to rule it easily. As the male writers attack this reality, Emecheta makes it clear that all what Alan and the Britain want was that “any profit to come out of Nigeria should go to Britain rather than to other countries.”(D.B.16). Emecheta, then, persists on proving her presence in the Biafra literature. She talks about Alan’s coming to Nigeria loaded with arms saying, “… Alan Grey landed in Nigeria in a plain loaded with discarded British armory. A new trade, in ammunition and human blood, had begun.’’(D.B149)
Adichie , also, wants to have her print in the literature of her country. She wants to prove that a woman writer can ensure her position among series of male writers. She attacks the whole foreign forces that caused the war and that were watching while Nigerians were murdered. She even talks on behalf of Biafrans who consider Nigeria to be the reason behind war. She mentions Pastor Amberose’s morning prayers that says, “God bless His Excellency! God give Tanzania and Gabon strength! God destroy Nigeria and Britain and Egypt and Algeria and Russia! In the mighty name of Jesus!”(H.Y.S.335)
Such prayers indicate the character’s awareness of the influence of the foreign white forces in the destruction of his country.
Okeama was one of the Biafran soldiers who worked under the command’s of a white mercenary. He talked about this British commander in a way that accuses the British forces even more. Okeama said, “
We should easily have retaken Enugu if the man only listened, but the thinks he knows more about our own land than we do. He has started commandeering relief cars. He threatened his Excellency last week that he would leave if he does not get his balance.”(H.Y.S.321)
Ugwu is one of the characters who are aware of the influence of the foreign forces in the fate of his country. He insists that Britain was convincing the whole world that Nigeria was in the palm of its hand, this is why no country dared to stop the bloody massacres. He believes that,
“The arms and advice that Britain gave Nigeria shaped other countries. In the United States, Biafra was ‘under Britain’s sphere of interest’. In Canada, the Prime Minister quipped ‘Where is Biafra?’. The Soviet Union sent technicians and planes to Nigeria; thrilled at the chance to influence Africa without offending America and Britain. And from their white-supremacist positions, South Africa and Rhodesia gloated.”(H.Y.S,256)
The British, then, knew that their benefits are in the civil war. They lit the fire and waited the whole nation to be burned so that they can take whatever they want. As Kainene said to Richard on behalf of Adichie, “ It’s you white people who allowed Gowon to kill innocent women and children.”(H.Y.S.179) The Nigerian woman, then, was aware of the role that the white men had played during their civil war.
The Western influence seems to shake any peaceful attempt to talk the war to an end. The civil war, then, has gained that momentum because,
“The British supplies the Nigerians with arms and on the other side, the East supplies Biafra with arms. These friendships are carried out of the greedy and selfish desire to find markets for the surplus arms produced by both the East and the West. So the arm producers fan the war while the corrupt local soldiers-turned-politicians use these arms to propagate and satisfy their personal greed for power and eventual control of the oil wealth.” (N. Ngwaug Emanuel, 295)
Attacking the local leadership of the Nigerian elites prior and during the civil war is also one of the Biafra literature concerns. It is highlighted in different male novels such as Cyprian Ekwensi’s ‘Survive the Peace’ and John Munonye’s ‘A Weather for the Maiders’ Wendy Griswold insists that,
“Corruption is a concern of both Igbo and non-Igbo authors, and both Biafra and Nigeria are depicted as riddled with greed and hypocrisy. A number of novels depict corrupt relief officials and military officers who use their positions for personal gain.” (Wendy Grisworld, 234)
Emecheta, also, shows such a critical eye towards the Nigerian leaders. It all starts with Debbie’s father who uses his position as a minister in the cabinet of the first post-independent government to make money. Straight often his election, the man starts making wine business with whites and all what concerns him was that the business’s “percentage should be paid to a named Swiss Bank account.”(D.B.29)
These attacks are also presented in Adichie’s novel. And “In places, she offers a view of the war as a competition of elites.” (Mai; Kairson, 94) Olanna’s father is also presented as a corrupted man. As she was talking to Odenigbo about the servant who was kneeling in front of her mother begging for forgiveness because he stole some rice, Olanna insists that,
“My father and his politician friends steal money with their contacts, but nobody makes them kneel to beg for forgiveness and they build houses with their stolen money and rent them out to people like this man, charge inflated rents that makes it impossible to buy food.” (H.Y.S.219)
Such words, though, condemn every Nigerian politician. The difference between our writers and the other male writers lies in the feminine strategies that they used as true contributors in the literature of their country. When the male writers focus on the failure of the elite leadership, Emecheta and Adichie focus on gender; that is, on the failures of masculine leadership. They blame the deconstruction of their country on ‘male’ elites. Both writers make corruption not a part of the leaders’ identities, but a part of the ‘male’ leaders’ identities. Our writers characterize their male characters with the greed for power and self interests. Male politicians did not care about the real needs of their people. They watched, joyfully, the death of their own followers. The leaders of both sides are shown as two kids that are playing a childish game. The war over independence becomes a challenge between the North and the Biafra leaders where each one tries to kill the largest number of innocent people.