The First (Igbo) Coup d'etat in Nigeria--A. M. Mainasara's The Five Majors - Why They Struck is Mere Ethnic Propaganda by Ubaji Isiaka Abubakar Eazy

The First (Igbo) Coup d'etat in Nigeria--A. M. Mainasara's The Five Majors - Why They Struck is Mere Ethnic Propaganda

--Ubaji Isiaka Abubakar Eazy

I read Adewale Ademoyega's Why We Struck a long time before now and found it an interesting and informative account (from an insider and an active participant in the coup) of the events that necessitated the first coup d'etat which took place in Nigeria. But when I came across A. M. Mainasara's refutation; The Five Majors-Why They Struck; I found myself scuttling back to Adewale Ademoyega's Why We Struck to ascertain the validity of A. M. Mainasara's facts, or perhaps opinions.

To A. M. Mainasara, the first set of coup plotters in Nigeria had no honourable , noble, or patriotic intentions. Rather, their concern was to wrest political power from the north which they assumed had become some sort of threat to the political existence of Nigeria. Let us hear him:

Redemption of the country was not their aim. Their purpose was to prevent a section of the country, the North, from effective participation in the governance of the country. This was to be accomplished through the physical elimination of the entire political and military elite of the North, beginning with the top leadership; the Sardauna of Sokoto, Premier of the Northern Region of Nigeria, the embodiment of the soul of the North and all that it stood for. The final solution of the so called Northern menace was to be effected after the conspirators had seized control of the government of the Federation. (A. M. Mainasara 9-10)

It is highly disturbing that some educated Nigerians prefer to distort history for the sake of ethnic propaganda. It is this kind of Mainasara's form of distorted history that is responsible for giving young Nigerians wrong notions of what transpired in the country's political past. An example is contained in the letter recently addressed to the acting president of Nigeria, Professor Yemi Osinbajo by the Arewa Youths Forum which in part states that:

“Our doubts are informed by the following historical antecedents that have characterized the behavior and conduct of the Igbo in Nigeria and previous efforts at containing them.

“The Igbo of Eastern Nigeria manifested their hatred for Nigeria’s unity barely five years after we gained our independence from the British when on January 15, 1966, their army officers carried out the first-ever mutiny that marked the beginning of a series of crisis which has profoundly altered the course of Nigeria’s history.

“By that ill motivated cowardly and deliberate action, the Igbo killed many northern officers from the rank of lieutenant colonel upwards and also decapitated the Prime Minister and the political leadership of the Northern and Western regions but left the zenith of Igbo leadership at the Federal level and the Eastern region intact.

“In line with the Igbo plan, General Aguiyi-Ironsi took advantage of the vacuum and, instead of returning power to the remnants of the First Republic government, he appropriated the coup and attempted to consolidate it for his people.

“Army officers of the Northern Region were eventually compelled to execute a counter coup on July 29, 1966 following a coordinated series of brazen provocations from the Igbo who taunting northerners on northern streets by mocking the way leaders of the region were slain by the Igbo. This unfortunately resulted in mob action which resulted in the death of many Igbos.

“And when Lt. Col. Yakubu Gowon, from the North took over as Head of State following the counter coup, the Igbo through Lt. Col. Ojukwu, characteristically refused to recognize Gowon. Ojukwu declared the secession of the Igbo people from Nigeria and the formation of the republic of Biafra on May 30, 1967 resulting in a civil war that led to the tragic deaths of more than 2 million Nigerians”. (Culled from https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/06/northern-youths-write-osinbajo-beg-allow-igbo-go-biafra/)

See, young people are getting things wrong! To the northern Nigeria educated youth, the first Nigerian coup had to be about Igbo officers killing the political leaders of the North, yet it is more than that. This kind of misconception is invented because some writers; such as A. M. Mainasara; choose to underscore facts or tell half truths for their words are biased and reek of ethnic bigotry. Their facts are meant only for the dim witted and those who fail to evaluate events from various angles by getting hold of available historical documents.

A. M. Mainasara's view of history is slanted and should be regarded as nothing more than mere ethnic propaganda. He had set out to refute the claims of Adewale Ademoyega and Ben Gbuile in their written accounts (Why We Struck and The Five Majors respectively) of the first Nigerian coup d'etat and their roles as active conspirators and participants but had unknowingly  proven their facts to be  correct as a result of his slanted diction and approach to issues.

Maybe A. M. Mainasara does not know, but Major Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu had more of the Hausa traits in him than being an Igbo man. He was born and brought up in the North, even bore the name "Kaduna" in addition to his Igbo names, he regarded himself first as  Nigerian before identifying with any tribe, religion, or region. Here is what Adewale Ademoyega has to say about Nzeogwu in his book:

Living with Nzeogwu gave me a deep insight into his character. He was the son of a civil servant. His parents hailed from Asaba in the Mid West (now Bendel), but he was born in Kaduna, schooled there and grew up there. He spoke HAUSA very fluently and he understood and HAD MANY HAUSA TRAITS.

I knew him to be extremely straightforward, open hearted and open handed. He spoke freely, hiding nothing. He gave generously. He was a good Christian (Roman Catholic), and attended Mass regularly. Unlike most single officers, he did not go around with girl friends. This surprised me, for, although we both agreed that there was no question of getting married before the revolution, I did not subscribe to total abstinence.

Nzeogwu was a good leader of men. The same could not be said of 90% of the officers. He drew the younger officers irresistibly to himself, endeavoring always to awaken in them both political and revolutionary consciousness and above all, patriotism. He spoke amusingly and all the young officers that had passes through his hands in the NMTC cherished him and held him in high esteem. Throughout 1965 Nzeogwu spoke freely and openly to some young officers about his intention to stage a revolution which would bring Nigeria to the path of greatness. All the young officers loved the idea and came closer to him. But the same could not be said of the middle level and senior officers, that is, Majors, Colonels, Brigaders and above. [Assented words are mine] (Adewale Ademoyega 68-69)

Judging by the words of Adewale Ademoyega, it is obvious that Nzeogwu had lofty ideas and was a detribalised Nigerian, unfortunately the same could not be said of A. M. Mainasara!

Nzeogwu was respected by his colleagues in the army including junior and senior officers that even when he died fighting on the side of Biafran forces during the Civil War, he was given and honorable burial benefiting a hero by the Federal Army. Nzeogwu died, not as a Biafran but, as a Nigerian.

We kept up our correspondence until the outbreak of the war on July 6, 1967. Three weeks later, I heard it over the NBC that Nzeogwu had been killed in the Nsukka sector of the war. I was utterly chagrined. Hours later, Biafra denied the report over their own radio. Later on, the Federal side confirmed the report and claimed that he was given "a hero's burial with full military honours". Pictures of him were displayed in the papers. Gowon also paid tribute to him saying "he was a gallant soldier, with principles." Many other Nigerians paid glowing tributes to his memory and everybody believed that he died a Nigerian, though fighting on the Biafran side. Of course, the Federal authority knew that it was they who had confined him inside Biafra, totally against his will. If the Gowon Government had released the whole lot of us detained by Ironsi, surely, Nzeogwu and the remainder of us would have returned to the places of our choice in Nigeria. Not one of us would have been involved in Biafra. (Adewale Ademoyega 201)

Now, I wonder why the Nigeria government then led by northern elite and soldiers would give a heroic burial to a man who A. M. Mainasara describes as a arch rebel and assassin in his book of refutations. The idea that the coup d'etat was only targeted at Northern leaders was mere propaganda in the hands of deceitful politicians to fuel the ethnic crises for their personal aggrandizement or to get hold of power. Yes, more northerners lost their lives in that unfortunate coup than any other group of people, but I also know that the premier of the then Western Region (Chief S. L. Akintola) and Finance minister, Chief Festus Okotie-Eboh also lost their lives in that coup, yet these were not northerners.

The crop of officers in the Nigerian army of those days were brewed from the barley of patriotism, they were uncommon soldiers and their kind is no more to be found in modern Nigeria. It is unfortunate, therefore, that A. M. Mainasara is still buying into the propaganda that led to the pogrom in the North, a counter coup and finally culminated in a Civil War and it is even more worrisome that this is coming many years after the execution of the first coup, when we should have been able to asses situations with a clear mind and an analytical approach to issues.

However we choose to see it, the fact remains that the British government introduced nepotism into the newly independent Nigerian government and they favored the north over other groups. Till date, the system is still not balanced and perhaps it is why we hear of agitations here and there, the latest being the demand for the sovereign state of Biafra.

If the coup was an Igbo coup as A. M. Mainasara seem to presume, how come it was still Igbo officers who frustrated it and arrested the perpetrators? If we are to go by Major Ademoyega's account, the roles played by Lieutenant-Colonel Odimegwu Ojukwu, Alex Madiebo, and General Aguyi Ironsi were instrumental to the unsuccessful completion of the coup.

Again I ask that if Nzeogwu had wanted power for himself and wanted northerners out of the political scene totally, would he have willingly accepted to function under a government headed by Aguyi Ironsi and handed over the reins of the Government of Northern Nigeria to Lieutenant-Colonel Hassan Katsina?

At the Brigade Headquarters, a short ceremony was staged. There was a parade. Nzeogwu took the salute and formerly handed over the reins of the Government of Northern Nigeria to Lieutenant-Colonel Hassan Katsina. It was a public ceremony. The press, the radio and the television were present, together with the world press. Hassan made a brief speech in praise of Nzeogwu. He lauded the selfishness of his fight and principles.

He also promised to stand by those principles and purpose for which Nzeogwu fought. After that, he embraced Nzeogwu and both of them parted as comrades-in-arms. Nzeogwu went from there to the airport and flew to Lagos. (Adewale Ademoyega 137-8)

Is it not then an irony that Lieutenant-Colonel Hassan Katsina (a northerner) emerged one of the major beneficiary of an Igbo coup?

Lastly, even it were Igbo officers (which is not even the case here for Adewale Ademoyega for example is not even an easterner, talk more of being Igbo) who conspired to run northern elite and politicians out of government, does it justify a reprisal attack, a counter coup, and the total annihilation and persecution of the Igbos in the north? While the coup plotters might have destabilised the north, we cannot but affirm that the greater damage had later been carried out by the northern elements. Historical records are always there for proper confirmation.

To A. M. Mainasara, the Hausa-Fulani has an advanced system of government when compared with other sections of the country and this might likely explain why they found favour with the British colonial administration:

Without doubt, the people (Hausa people) benefitted from the enlightened rulership of the Fulani and the reform of the social political institutions of the land. Meanwhile, the Igbos and other peoples in the South were leading a life of ignorance, indulging in all sorts of practices such as witchcraft, juju and cannibalism while the Northern peopled style of living was comparable to other peoples who are advanced to similar level. The conditions against macabre practiced and other acceptable rites performed out of a terror of the unknown or for material gain.

These pagan practices still occur in parts of the South as the story in the Daily Times of Wednesday 17th March, 1981 on the discovery of two near fresh human skulls at Murtala International Airport testified. [bracket mine] (A. M. Mainasara 20)

Wonderful! So A. M. Mainasara is in essence saying that the colonial administration finds it inconvenient handing power over to the "pagan South" due to the preponderance of pagan practices and lack of civilized ethos cum existence! Just wonderful! Yet, we know how civilized the north is, even in this new millennia. It would be foolish to enter into an argument of civility over an issue such as this, I would rather hands off! However, I wonder why Mainasara had no foresight to see that a statement such as the one above validates the idea that the political existence of Nigeria was manipulated by the British to favor the North?

A. M. Mainasara calls the officers who constitute the inner caucus of the coup plotters "An Igbo cast indeed, except for the presence of only one Yoruba officer" (23). Yet, that singular exception makes all the difference and invalidates the idea of the coup being strictly an Igbo coup. The writer also calls Aguyi Ironsi a true Nigerian yet he does not blame the northern officers for staging a coup that had him shamefully executed and betrayed by his trusted allies, the north! Mainasara would later assert that Aguyi Ironsi was spared in the first coup simply because he belongs to the Igbo tribe! Perhaps, he did not read Adewale Ademoyega account of how Aguyi Ironsi narrowly escaped Major Ifeajuna or did he purposely hide that fact in order to peddle false opinions and ethnic propaganda?

A. M. Mainasara goes about using uncouth language on others yet claims to be a part of the civilized northern society. Such language runs through his book of refutations. For men as Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa and Sir Ahmadu Bello, he has appellations as "great" and "noble" for them in his book but Nzeogwu and his co-conspirators can be no more than "assasins", "arch rebels", "murderers majors" etc. Who is Mainasara seeking to impress? After reading Mainasara book of refutations and Adewale Ademoyega's account, it becomes totally obvious that A. M. Mainasara is guilty of ethnocentrism and tribalism both in language and thoughts.

While I have much respect for Sir Ahmadu Bello, Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa and other notable great men killed in the first Nigerian coup d'etat, I also have great respect for the executors of the first Nigerian coup for their intention to pull Nigeria out of tribalism and nepotism. I believe both groups had noble intentions for this great country, it was only in approach that both groups differs.

However, what has happened has happened. Should we remain stagnant licking or nursing old wounds, there might never be progress. The need to look towards a great future is pertinent and beckons on us all to show responsibility towards such a cause. This is where I still favour Adewale Ademoyega over A. M. Mainasara. Ademoyega provides blueprints in his book that can move the country forward while Mainasara went about issuing threats and identifying rebels in his. His slanted version of history should be seen as nothing more than what it is, mere ethnic propaganda.

To end this essay, I end this essay with one of John Pepper Clark's poem titled "Seasons of Omen" to show the sentiments expressed by many Nigerians immediately after the January 15, 1966 coup was executed:

Seasons of Omens

When calabashes held petrol and men

    turned fagots in the streets

Then came the five hunters

When mansions and limousines made

    bonfires in sunset cites

Then came the five hunters

When clans were discovered that were not in tue book

    and cattle counted for heads of men

Then came the five hunters

When hoodlums took possession of police barracks

    in defiance of bullets

Then came the five hunters

When ministers legislated from bed and

    made high office the prize for failure

Then came the five hunters

When wads of notes were kept in infant skulls

    with full blessing of prelates

Then came the five hunters

When women grew heavy with ballot papers

    delivering the house entire to adulterers

Then came the five hunters

When a grand vizier in season of arson turned

    upon bandits in a far off place

Then came the five hunters

When men lost their teeth before they cut them

    to eat corn

Then came the five hunters

When a cabinet grew so broad the top gave way

    and trapped everyone therein

Then came the five hunters.

Works Cited

Adegboyega, Adewale. Why We Struck. Ibadan: Evans Brothers, 1981. Print.

Clark, J. P. "Season of Omens." Full Tide. Ibadan: Mosuro, 2010. Print.

Mainasara, A. M. The Five Majors - Why They Struck. Zaria: Hudahuda, 1982. Print.

Vanguard. "Northern Youths write Osinbajo, beg him to allow Igbo go with Biafra". https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/06/northern-youths-write-osinbajo-beg-allow-igbo-go-biafra/. Ret. Sept. 17, 2017.

© Ubaji Isiaka Abubakar Eazy 2017

Meet the Reviewer

Ubaji Isiaka Abubakar Eazy is a literary critic cum reviewer, poet, and writer. 

Womanism in African Literature: The Example of Flora Nwapa's Women are Different by Ubaji Isiaka Abubakar Eazy

WOMANISM IN AFRICAN LITERATURE: THE EXAMPLE OF FLORA NWAPA'S WOMEN ARE DIFFERENT

Ubaji Isiaka Abubakar Eazy

INTRODUCTION

How do you begin speaking of African female writers without mentioning Flora Nwapa? That woman led the way for other African female writers whose bloom came after hers. I mean writers as Buchi Emecheta, Tess Onwueme, Zulu Sofala, Mabel Segun, Nawal El Sadawi, Aminata Sow Fall, Mariama Ba, Zaynab Alkali, Akachi Ezeigbo, Ifeoma Okoye, Tsi Tsi Dangaremba, Alifa Rifaat, Bessie Head, Nadine Gordimer, and of course Ama Ata Aidoo (in no particular order). These women are the doyen of African female writings yet Flora Nwapa is a pioneer figure amongst them. These writers kick started the depiction of the feminist ideology in African literature. An ideology which younger ones as Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, Chika Unigwe, Amma Darko, Grace Akpan, Ehigiator Dumebi Ezar, and Maryam Bongel have kept its fire burning bright.

In an essay titled "A House Divided: feminism in African literature," Charles Nnolim, a revered critic of African literature, identifies five various camps of African female writers:

a. Womanists

b. Accomodationists

c. Reactionaries and Middle-of-the-Roaders

d. Gyandrists

e. Feminists

I shall provide brief explanation on the five groups.

Womanism is a black centered ideology whose link to feminism is the freedom and independence of black women but differs from radical feminism in its search for reasonable unification between black women, men, and children. Its focus is to ensure that men change their sexist stand. Its practitioners (womanists) do not end the plots of their novels with feminist victories. Flora Nwapa, Mariama Ba, Ifeoma Okoye, and Zaynab Alkali belong to this school of writers.

Accomodationists do not advocate total equality with men for even while asking for some measures of equality, they concede leadership roles to men and do not struggle to lead the home. Accomodationists stress reconciliation, convergence, affection, and love. Accomodationists have similar ideas as the womanists hence its writers overlap. Mariama Ba belongs to this group.

The Reactionaries and middle of the roaders do not join the feminist trend or declaim it even though they are often found praising their husbands for nurturing and raising them with tender loving care, a perspective which core feminists regard as an embarrassing self abasement. Zulu Sofala belongs to this camp.

Gyandrists refer to those male writers who either promote the feminist ideology or are praised by feminist critics for belonging to the feminist camp. Here you have Sembene Ousmane, Isidore Okpewho, Daniel Mengara and of course Ngugi wa Thiong'o.

Nnolim says the African feminist writers are Janus faced because even though the claim not to be of feminists in public, their works exhibit heavy influence of the feminist ideology. Buchi Emecheta and Flora Nwapa are examples of writers in this group.

It is however the first camp (womanism) which Flora Nwapa belongs that we wish to examine here using her novel Women are Different.

THE STORY

So, Flora Nwapa's novel (Women are Different) tells the story of four women from their teenage years at a girls high school down to their adult lives as married women and mothers. These four friends (Agnes, Rose, Dora, and Comfort) had set out to make a difference in the world which they perceive as largely paternalistic and are determined to make that difference. The privilege and exposure of an education under the tutelage of female European missionaries helped to boost self esteem and their need to become important people in the society. So, after school they set out on different paths.

Agnes got married immediately after school to a man old enough to be her father; with her step mother mounting pressure on the father to approve the marriage. This man had wanted to marry Agnes at a much younger age but Agnes' father insisted on following his late wife's wish that Agnes be educated in high school. Her suitor took care of her school fees from primary to secondary school, visits her at school with gifts and patiently waited for her to be through with her education before he would finally claim her for himself.

Agnes was clearly not for this plan, being a bright student, she had lofty dreams and she was determined that nothing would stop her from attaining her dreams, not even marriage. She passed her exams in flying colours and after four children, she decides to pursue her education against her husband's wish. She won the battle when her father intervened and talked sense to the husband who then gave his consent.

Agnes enrolled at the university for evening classes where she met and fell in love with her lecturer, Mr Ayo Dele. The result was that her marriage fell apart and she moved in with Ayo Dele who is old enough to be her grand father. Ayo Dele being a gentle man takes care of her kids while she attends classes and he encourages her to further her education to the master's level. Agnes father; on receiving the news of what Agnes did to her husband; felt heartbroken and died as a result of the shame.

Although Ayo Dele later dies, Agnes would go on to become a highly placed civil servant (after the departure of the British; in the days immediately after independence), she would also become an executive of a private firm and live a comfortable life.

After school, Dora (another of the young women) trained to become a nurse and later married Chris, her boyfriend from the boys' grammar school. Chris worked as a court clerk after school and was fond of corrupt practices such as taking bribes.

Dora worked as a nurse till she had her fifth child and decided to branch out into bakery business. She made much success that she was able to fund her husband's extravagant and ostentatious lifestyle and assist him to build a house in his hometown.

However, Chris began having problems at work because of his brusque attitude towards his colleagues and he was forced to apply for a leave of absence without pay. He told his wife that his intention was to travel abroad to further his education. He secretly sold off the house his wife helped to build and travelled overseas.

Chris would abandon his family for many years, even as the Nigeria-Biafra Civil War came and went by. Luckily, Dora is a shrewd woman and her business acumen would make her survive through the period of the war with her kids. She would also make a lot of money from her business, acquire property, and emerge from the civil war unscathed, and a richer woman. She goes seeking her husband abroad but finds out he has forgotten his family and now lives under the care of a woman in Germany.

Rose, the third young lady, acquires a Diploma in Education from the University of London and becomes a Woman Education Officer in Queen's college, where she taught Mathematics. She would be jilted by Mark, would tighten her girdle and decide to forge ahead irrespective of the disappointment and challenges she had to live through. She later gets a job with a public relations firm and she lives comfortably. Rose becomes wealthy but she yearns for things she was never lucky to get; a stable relationship, children, or marriage; and she felt unfortunate that none of these things ever happened to her. She remains a spinster while her friends already had grown up kids of 20 years.

Comfort also trained as a nurse and ended up marrying a rich man who took good care of her.

Now, while these four women toiled to attain the position they arrived at in life, they failed to pass a good legacy to their children. Dora first daughter, Chinwe would not want to be educated as her mother, she wanted to be part of the business world as her mother. Albeit she was a successful business woman and married a well to do man, she abandoned her husband when he choose to bring into their home a younger lady as a second wife. Chinwe would later become the paramour to a rich old man with wife and children in his house. The man buys her a house and she is happy. Comfort (her mother's friend) would even say that she has the right to be different, that the younger generation of women are bold and should be allowed to make their own decisions and mistakes, rather than being tied up and having to depend on the men in their lives.

If Dora's daughter became a wayward woman, Agnes' daughter (Zizi) did not turn out any better. At eighteen she runs away from home to live in a brothel where she ends up as a lady of the night. Her mother's attempt at forcing her back home was rebuffed as she accuses her mother of not being a better woman for she abandoned their father to live with her lover while her children were yet young. This would cause Agnes to go seeking her now very old husband and bring him out of his poverty to live with her. She takes care of him and provides for his needs. Yet Zizi had become too wild to be tamed, she would get involved in narcotics and be arrested at the airport in London. After she has been freed due largely to her mother's effort, she marries within one week and get divorced the following week.

Dora's husband (Chris) returns to Nigeria and Dora welcomes him as if nothing happened. She is happy to have her husband and marriage back because she fears living the life of single woman without a father for her children. She introduces Rose (who had never been lucky in her past relationship with men) to Olu (who had been her lover while her husband was away) and she hopes Rose and Olu will be a perfect match for each other.

MY VIEWS

First, I must say that I love the style employed in narrating the story even though it is set down in a chronological order. The writer brought the girls together as friends in high school, then after high school, we delved into the lives of the ladies (who had become young women) individually, a chapter each was sacrificed to narrating what transpired in the lives of these women after their secondary school days; except Comfort who did not get much coverage. Then towards the end, the novelist links their stories together and creates some sort of unification.

Now, in line with the womanist perspective, this novel clearly does not end with feminist victory. The novel emphasizes the completeness of the family whereas a family is not made of just the mother and children alone, a father has to be in the picture for the man's position in the household cannot be obliterated. This is why Dora would gladly have her husband back without having to quarrel, even though he had longed abandoned his family, why Agnes would go bring back a man she abandoned years back in pursuit of her dreams, and why Rose feels unfulfilled without a man in her life (even though she is wealthy and quite comfortable). Flora Nwapa seems to advocate for the unity of the family and sees it as non-negotiable. Nonetheless, the novel has proved to us that women also have needs that seeks gratification and the society must work towards providing avenues for them to satiate their needs. The female child education must therefore be taken seriously, early marriage should be abolished, women are partners in a relationship and not subordinate, and should be taken seriously and consulted before decisions are taken. Flora Nwapa (using this novel) makes a loud statement on issues facing African women and we are glad to be enlightened. Yet, I do have my objections on her novel, especially with its characterisation and her love for scandalous heroines.

I strongly believe that literature is about life and when people read books, they are influenced by what they read, either consciously or subconsciously. This is what most feminist writers fail to comprehend; or are they just pretending not to know this? For if they claim to be unaware of the powerful influence of literature on a reader's perception of life and reasoning, the purpose of writing feminist stories, in the first instance, would have been defeated.

I seem to remember that one of the bashful comments by feminists critics on Cyprian Ekwensi's Jagua Nana is that he projects women in a bad light, showing them as prostitutes and rogues. If Cyprian Ekwensi is being put down for such depiction, why should feminist writers continue to project such image of women? Is it only wrong when a male writer depicts female characters in this light but accepted if the writer is a woman?

In Nwapa's Women are Different, the manner in which the female characters attained their "dignified" status is wrong! To use the right word, it is immoral and I wonder what these writers teach their female readers. Women empowerment can be attained, yes, but it should not be through prostitution and immoral acts. In the novel, Agnes abandons her husband in a bid to get higher education and she ends up with an older man old enough to be her grandfather even though she claims to find some difficultly in accepting her husband after four children. Her brazen act resulted in her father's untimely death! Are we still wondering why her daughter ran away from home at the age of 18 to become a lady of the night?

What about Rose, she bumbles from one relationship to the other and would befriend a man even though she  knows quite well that the man is married with children.

Comfort is so saintly that she advises Chinwe to abandon her husband and go ahead to enjoy her life with a man capable of providing for her needs, what I would never understand is that, Chinwe left her husband because he choose to take a second wife only to become the paramour of a much older man who is already married. It is the same scenario with Agnes who abandons her husband and moves into the apartment of her old lecturer with five kids. She complains that her husband is old yet she choose a lover older than her father and old enough to be a grand father to her. While I am not in support of child marriage, we should not fail to also consider the fact that the man Agnes deserted sponsored her through primary and secondary school and was responsible for her upkeep. He loves her and never maltreated her yet she could just decide to abandon a man she had four children for to go stay with a much older lover.

Agnes is particularly inconsiderate and selfish because she abandons her husband and the father of her four children while the children were still young without considering the psychological effect of her attitude on the children and this is definitely the reason why Zizi takes to prostitution and becomes bitter with her mother. Agnes also did not think that her actions would lead to her father's demise and she remains unrepentant even after his death. Clearly, she was determined to pursue her own happiness irrespective of whose ox is gored. Such an existential existence is dangerous for the human society.

If the generation of the four women lived well, their children (Chinwe and Zizi) are wild and are hardly any example to go by and it is a great failure on their part as parents.

Women can attain greatness in the society but I do not think the only route towards such greatness should be one strewn with scandals and disregard for cultural and societal norms. Feminist writers should write us stories of women who attained greatness but with less immorality and respect for society. We would not want our mothers, sisters, and wives who read these works to assume that women can only make impact in the society by living an amorous lifestyle.

However, I think the character of Dora stands out amongst the others in the novel for her entrepreneurial skills, her ability to forgive her husband and accept him back to her life after years of being deserted, and her knack her survival; as well as that of her family; during a horrendous civil war that ravaged the country for almost three years, even though she could not stand her ground and insist that her daughter should never compromise her moral principles.

Another issue I have with the novel is the portrayal of men in the story, the men were just never good enough! As if the feminist agenda is to demonize men in their works! Agnes' husband is a doting husband who loves his wife so much but the writer found a blemish for him; he is having an amorous relationship with Agnes' stepmother and Agnes had to catch them red handed to give her an excuse for deserting the man. Chris (Dora's husband) grows up to become a bribe eater and an irresponsible fellow, he lives an ostentatious lifestyle at the expense of his wife and would abandon his family for an European lady in Germany. Ernest, who was formerly Rose's lover, also grows up to become a criminal and hard drug peddler who is always having problems with law officials. Mark, Rose's husband, jilts her, and the next man she meets again happens to be  a married man running after unmarried young ladies. Olu, might be a better man from the rest but he seems to be having psychological problems too! Then, Chinwe's husband had to go get a second wife to save face in the society (he did not want to be that big man chief in his community who could not get a second wife). I cannot be angry with him because he also, like most women, is a victim of society. He wanted to live up to the status society arrogated to him. And maybe in the actual sense, we all are victims of society.

Lastly, I must say that the womanist writers have me confused in no little way. Well, I can understand the core feminist whose wish is to debunk patriarchy in all ramifications while striving for equality but I have never been able to ferret these womanist writers who seek to make men change their sexist stance yet encourage patriarchy. In Women are Different, the role of the man as the leader and father in the home is still emphasized, and also, the fact that a woman is unfulfilled without a husband is still foregrounded as exemplified in Rose continual search for a man to marry, and also evident in the reunification of Agnes and Dora with their husbands. So I am left wondering where this brand of feminism is headed if it cannot divorce itself from the same things it preaches against.

CONCLUSION

For me, I think a world without women would be unlivable as a world without men would mostly likely be the same. I have never believed in the equality of the sexes and still do not till date. But I think that men and women are not equal because they were they never meant to compete. They are meant to complement each other, a man completes a woman as a woman completes a man for what a man does not have should be found with the woman so both must work together to create a better society.

Flora Nwapa is classified as a womanist by Charles Nnolim (a critic of African literature) and we have tested this ideology on her novel, Women are Different, to see how it aids our understanding of the work. Above all, I am glad that the African feminists, even in their campaign for gender equality, understand the need for a complete family setting rather than one of single parenthood. I am glad that they understand forgiveness, and preach unification instead of separation or divorce. I only hope that the younger generations of African feminists would study and take a leaf out of the books of old female writers as Flora Nwapa.

© Ubaji Isiaka Abubakar Eazy 2017

WORKS CITED

Ekwensi, Cyprian. Jagua Nana. London: Panther, 1963. Print.

Flora, Nwapa. Women are Different. Enugu: Tana Press, 1990. Print.

Nnolim, Charles E. Issues in African Literature. Lagos: Malthouse, 2010. Print.

MEET THE CRITIC

Ubaji Isiaka Abubakar Eazy is a literary critic, poet, literary reviewer, short story writer, poet, and copy editor. He is the Chief Editor at literarycriticsandwriters.simdif.com

COMING HOME ON A TRAIN

Ma,
Your son comes home
And he comes on a train!

Those years of living
Living near the train station
The train's horn was our clock;
It told us what time it was
I remember hawking plantains on the streets
And returning home at nights
And when I no more could find the way
The way to my gloomy home,
I follow the train tracks
I could always trust them to lead me home
Home was where mama lay fatigued in bed
Home was where there never was enough to eat
Home was that place the sun of happiness never appeared.
I remember how you always wanted to
Take me out on a journey
A journey on a train
A journey we never could afford
Even though we wondered where the train
Tracks began and where they ended.

Today, your son returns home
And he returns home on a train
But you are no longer alive to welcome him.

MEET THE POET:

Ubaji Isiaka Abubakar Eazy holds a BA in English Language and Literary Studies. He is a fine poet whose poems and short stories have been published in both national and international journals and numerous literary blogs. He is the CHIEF EDITOR of "Literary Critics And Writers". You can reach him on +2347063369010 (Abubakar Ishaq Eazy on Facebook).