Dramatising Violence in the Niger Delta: Lessons from Ahmed Yerima’s Little Drops



Yüklə 76,19 Kb.
tarix05.02.2018
ölçüsü76,19 Kb.
#24575

Dramatising Violence in the Niger Delta: Lessons from Ahmed Yerima’s Little Drops

LAWAL, NURUDEEN ADESHINA1

The Directorate of Remedial Studies,

Osun State University,

Ikire Campus.

Ikire,


Osun State,

Nigeria.


E-mail: adeshina201564@gmail.com


Abstract

Contemporary Nigerian dramatists have been concerned with various crises bedevilling the postcolonial Nigerian state. From socio-political debacles, ethno-religious conflicts to economic doldrums, they interrogate the contradictions and imbalances in the society through their works. Following this tradition of social commitment of Nigerian (African) literature, many Nigerian writers through diverse ideological persuasions and aesthetic modes have explored the oil crisis to express their visions. This paper examines the oil crisis in Ahmed Yerima’s Little Drops as it concerns the issue of violence and its consequences on the (ordinary) people in the region. The study also explores the elements of performance used in depicting this motif. Contrary to the assumption that the crisis represents the interests of the common people, the study observes that Yerima shows that the recurring violence in the area is borne out of egoistic interests among the contending forces in the region. It illuminates the negative impacts of the use of violence in the crisis on the people and the communities in the region. It contends that the crisis, rather than ameliorating the suffering of the downtrodden majority, inflicts physical and psychological pains on them with recurring preventable deaths.

In its conclusion, the study contends that Yerima’s Little Drops is an important play in the discourse of the oil crisis in the Niger Delta region. Rather than violence, the play offers dialogue, inclusive representation and good governance among others as panaceas to the crisis.
Keywords: Niger Delta, Oil, Violence, Ahmed Yerima

Introduction

Since the beginning of oil exploration in commercial quantities at Oloibiri in the Niger Delta region in 1956, most people of the region have paradoxically been victims of socio-economic and environmental degradation and neglect. Fuelled by the hanging of Ken Saro-Wiwa and other eight Ogoni activists in 1995 by the military regime of General Sani Abacha, the oil crisis has given birth to several militant groups which emerged from the region. These groups have always staged violent protests against what they perceived as socio-economic and environmental degradation and neglect emanating from oil exploration by multi-national oil companies. Writing on the development of the armed struggle in the oil crisis, Odoemene((2011:126)) observes that:

…the 1990s ... coincided with the emergence of different ... groups such as the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND), Niger Delta People’s Salvation Front (NDPVF), the Egbesu Boys, Martyrs Brigade, the Coalition of Militant Action in the Niger Delta, Niger Delta People’s Salvation Front, Niger Delta Vigilante (NDV), Joint Revolutionary Council and Militant Camps Across the Niger Delta, amongst other less prominent ones. These groups were responsible for violent attacks against petro-businesses and destruction of pipelines belonging to the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC)...This resulted in the loss of lives and property. The state’s response to this development has been with further repression rather than dialogue and constructive management of conflicts.

Some scholars such as Ojaide (2006), Darah (2008) and Feghabo (2012) have attributed the spate of violence in the region to the nature and character of the Nigerian state which privileges the people from the three major ethnic groups (Hausa, Yoruba and Igbo) in terms of resource distribution and accumulation. Hence, the activities of the various militant groups are viewed as a collective struggle for the basic rights of the people in the region.

While there may be some validity in the scholars’ claim, the wanton violence that characterises the activities of militant groups which often claim lives of ordinary people (for whom they often allege they are fighting) have shown that greed, egoism and power struggle among the militant groups and their sponsors are among the major factors that are responsible for recurring armed struggle in the region. This notion is corroborated by Reno (2006:34) who contends that, “in all conflicts, motives of personal gain and political grievance are inter-mingled.”

This chapter examines dimensions and effects of violence in the oil crisis as depicted in Yerima’s Little Drops. Whose interest does the armed struggle in the region serve to protect? What is the attitude of the playwright towards violence in the oil crisis? In what ways has the playwright decentred the ethnocentric notion which “collectivises” the people of the region as the oppressed? How does he employ performance elements to interrogate violence that has become the recurrent feature in the region? These are some of issues addressed in this chapter.



Synopsis of Little Drops

The play begins at a clearing space in front of Memekize’s shed by the river bank. Sounds of gunshots are heard from a distance. This suggests that all is not well in the land. Amidst the turmoil, Memekize, an agile seventy-year old widow, is on the alert as she is busy roasting water yam. Soon, Mukume, running for her life, finds a respite at Memekize’s home by the river bank. She narrates her ordeal in the hands of militant boys: she has been raped by the militant boys who invade the hotel where she and her husband are celebrating their honeymoon. Abandoning her to her fate, Ovievie, her husband, escapes through the window.

In a similar vein, Azue, the young queen with her baby, running from the violence of Joint Task Force soldiers and the militant boys, also finds a temporary refuge at Memekize’s home by the riverbank. She also recounts how the militant boys cruelly kill the King, burn down the palace and the shrines. The king in the hands of the militant boys “died like an animal at the shrines. The eyes at his headless body still twitched with life and his stomach rising and falling as blood gushed out from his headless neck”(79).

Like Azue and Mukume, Bonuwo also seeks respite at Memekize’s home by the river in a bid to save her life from raging violence of the militants and the soldiers. The river bank, it seems, is the only available safe place for the defenceless women in the region. Like an oasis in the desert, the riverbank provides a kind of security for women against violence orchestrated by menfolk. The militant boys and the soldiers, also in the orgy of violence, kill forty-one students. Bonuwo recounts that the forty-one students are bombed to death. According to her, “not one soul ... not one child was spared [...] forty-one of them...all dead” (103).




Interrogating Violence in the Niger Delta Oil Crisis

Little Drops raises a number of pertinent issues about the morality and rationale of the militants’ struggle on the one hand and the wanton maiming and killing of ordinary people on the other. One of such issues is sexual abuse of women by the militants which has become rampant in the oil crisis. How does rape become part of a “revolutionary” struggle? The question becomes more pertinent when the audience comes to realise that the rapists are the same men who claim to be fighting for freedom of the oppressed people of the Niger Delta. Mukume laments that she is raped by the militant youths who invade the hotel where she is celebrating her honeymoon. A typical African woman who keeps her virginity to her wedding night only to have it broken by militants, Mukume is not only visited with physical injuries, but she is subjected to psychological torture. She bemoans her experience in the hands of the militants:

MUKUME: Down there...where my virtue once

lived. Tell me, Mother, will I ever be the same again I...we just got married, four days ago. Ovievie, my husband, has only just given me this ring and vow to treasure and please me till death do us apart (She begins to cry.) He always said my body was his temple. And I was his goddess. But see what they have done to his temple. They have trampled upon my virtue, turned my passage to marshy swampy ground, and my soul lost, full of shame (73-4)
Apart from physical and psychological injuries, Mukume’s rape has some serious implications. One of these is that the women in the region are under a serious threat. They are no longer safe. This is even more evident given the fact that Ovievie, the man she calls her lover, abandons her to his rival militant boys who ruthlessly rape her. Mukume laments that “[...] I don’t even know what I have in my womb now. What I took from those dirty wild men” (75). With Mukume’s rape, Yerima shows how the militants use the oil crisis to abuse women sexually. This also points to the fact that the militants’ violent struggle is not for the liberation of the women.

Another consequence of the violence on women is shown in the fact that Azue does not only become a widow, she also loses her only child. To save her life, she has to seek respite at Memekize’s shed by the river. She bears the brunt of the violence caused by the King’s corruption and the militants’ lust for vengeance. Yerima further interrogates this waste of innocent lives of school children who are killed in the armed struggle. This is captured through Bonuwo:

BONUWO:The roof of my classroom was blown open. Huge smoke

and heavy small of charred skin and burnt flash, not one soul ... Not one child was spared. All we saw were cut off limbs, little trunks, cut off heads, with their hair still burning ... Ayiba ... forty-one of them ... all dead. And when the parents came and met me alive, they took stones, shoes any other sharp objects they could lay their hands on, and chased me out of town (96).


With reference to the Biafran War, Yerima further questions the wanton violence perpetuated by the militants. For the women and their children in the Niger Delta, the tragedy of the civil war dovetails into the oil war, and there seems not to be any respite for them because they remain the victims of both wars. They are neither consulted nor considered by men who claim to speak for them. Yerima depicts this marginalisation of women through Memekize. She recounts how her husband and two sons are wasted in the civil war:

MEME: All my blood. My husband and two sons. They all

perished the same day. During the Biafra War. A shell. It tore them to pieces. I never pick one complete. I found a head there ... a limb here ... a toe ... finger . . . manacled trunks. In the rain, I picked each piece until I had each wooden box full. With my hands ... I dug each grave ... and buried them (88).
The playwright also criticises marginalisation of women in the society. For example, the King who is later beheaded by his protégés, the militants, sends his three wives who suffer with him packing because all they have for him are female children. Ironically, men also fall victim of their evil design too. This is the case of the King who sells his conscience and abandons his leadership responsibilities for financial gains. Azue recounts the King’s dishonesty which earns him brutal death from the militants:

AZUE: First, the boys came and drank and ate. They dance and chanted his praise. They left driving like a wild animal. Then came the government boys. Again they drank and ate with him. Leaving bags of money in the palace. Unknown to the king, he was being watched by his driver who was the informant of the boys. They came back, and there was confusion. They caught off the head of the king right in front of his family (78).

Beyond personal tragedy, however, the murder of the King and the Prince portends a bleak future for the kingdom. It represents a communal tragedy. The oil crisis would be compounded by a search for another candidate who would take the mantle of leadership. Intrigues and power-play are more likely to attend the search. It is doubtful whether the crises will be easily resolved. Hence, the kingdom and its people are faced with more complicated socio-economic and political crises.

Apart from the issues of gender, the war, in the long run, does not benefit the militants and their sponsors. For instance, Kuru invades the riverbank where he meets the women and threatens them with death. He is determined to kill them. Without minding Memekize’s old age, Kuru orders her to be tied up in spite of the appeal from Bonuwo and Azue. However, Kuru is later humbled by his violence. Having sustained gun injuries, he slumps to the ground. He appeals to the women whom he threatens to kill to save his life. Here, Yerima submits that the oil crisis is a war of self-destruction because those behind it are also victims of the terror they inflict on the common people.

Similarly, there is general insecurity of lives and property. The society has been turned to a human abattoir by the militants and the soldiers. Both the innocent poor and the honest well-to-do who have no hands in the crisis are denied peace. Even the new baby that is born during the war bears the pains of violence because it faces a doomed present and a bleak future.

The violence also destroys cultural and religious institutions of the community. For example, Azue informs the audience that the palace and the six shrines are burnt down by the militants. Aside its economic implications, the destruction of the palace and the shrines has serious cultural and spiritual consequences on the community. One implication of this is that the community is faced with cultural and spiritual atrophy. The gods are likely to turn their back on the people. Because the monuments represent communal identity and culture, the society is also confronted with cultural and identity crises.

There is also the revision of the concept of heroism in the play. Yerima shows that the contending forces [the militants, the chiefs, the soldiers, the oil companies, etc.] in the crisis do not represent the interest of the ordinary people in the region. All the contenders represent themselves and their personal interests. For example, Ovievie engages in the war for his personal ends. Kuru narrates Ovievie’s self-seeking interest in the crisis to the women:

KURU: He [...] led some boys to attack a cargo ship, and after the operation, he ran with the money, and he was marked to die (111).

In another instance, Ovievie himself confesses to his selfish interest in the crisis:

OVIEVIE: [...] I thought I had it all worked out. I thought my life was in my hands. I thought I would emerge a hero if I joined the boys...(101)

Ovievie’s statement above captures one main factor which gives impetus to the crisis. Using the crisis as a cover-up, youths like Ovievie in the region take to violence owing to their desire for material wealth, fame and power.

In this crisis, how has Yerima represented the Nigerian State and its agents? Is the playwright glorifying “the gods” in the oil crisis? Does he exonerate the State or its agents from the brutality inflicted on the ordinary people? What alternative view has Yerima canvassed as a way out of the problem? These questions become pertinent considering the argument of a Marxist critic like Uwasomba who contends that the bourgeois inclination of Yerima [...] “makes him place much premium on the high and mighty, than on the ordinary people, who are supposed to be the most important elements in the society”( 2007: 68-9).

In Little Drops, Yerima shows that the Joint Task Force soldiers who are meant to maintain peace are also agents of violence. Without minding the lives of the innocent people who they are meant to protect, they engage the militants in armed struggle. To the playwright, this nature of “security measure” where violence is deployed to curtail violence leads to endless casualties. Through Azue, the playwright depicts the soldiers as agents of violence in the region.

MEME [...] The government men ... what did they do?

AZUE: They came too late. By the time they arrived, the

king was dead and half the palace was already burning. They only met some of the boys who had stayed behind to steal what they could find from the palace. They did not bother to shoot at them when they heard that the king was dead, and some boys were still in the palace, they just simply blew what was left standing to the smithereens. The king’s body and all (79).

With Azue’s account above, Yerima indicts the State and the security agents. He shows that the soldiers are not different from the militant youths. The blowing up of the palace with the King’s body represents another dimension of violence in the crisis. Not only do the soldiers oppress the living, they also deny the dead a peaceful rest.

Yerima also alludes to State violence through Memekize’s account of the murder of her husband and two sons in the Biafra war. The playwright contends that the oil crisis, like the civil war, is a struggle for supremacy among the elites. Like the civil war, the oil crisis is a proverbial struggle among various elephants whereby the grasses, the ordinary people, are always the victims. Just as Osime in Iyayi’s Heroes sees the civil war as “an investment in blood and destruction by those at the helm of affairs with expectation of profit” (1986: 64), Memekize submits that the oil crisis is an engagement in violence for selfish economic interests of the elites:

(Loud sounds of shells and explosion)

MEME: Only the gods know what they are fighting for this time.

We shall see in the end, just like the first war where I lost

everything, it will end being for the interest of [...] few again. So much blood...so much bodies...so much talk, and very little good to show for it. When shall they ever learn? (76)


Memekize’s lamentation above is not only directed at the local hegemony within the region, but also at the elite in general.

Similarly, the playwright does not exonerate the agents of the Nigerian State in the poor state of development in the region. The neglect of the area also fuels the crisis. Not only are the majority of people alienated from the benefit of the oil, they also bear the brunt of environmental degradation caused by oil exploration in the region. Hence, the youth, the majority of whom are unemployed (and unemployable) are lured into militancy as a means of survival.

In another vein, Yerima shows that some multi-national oil companies in the region are not innocent in the crisis. The playwright indicts them for their role in fuelling the crisis. They employs a “divide and rule tactic” among the people of the region. In most cases, money meant for developmental projects and other opportunities are offered to selected Chiefs and politicians while the people marginalised.

While each law is made without due consultation with the ordinary people in the region, their “big men (Chiefs, politicians, local businessmen and militant leaders) are covered with tea drinking that they forget the true cause of the people”(112). They also divert funds meant for developmental projects to their private use. Consequently, the multi-national companies and the agents of the Nigerian State succeed in oppressing and alienating the people largely because “the big men” in the region conspire with the external forces to enslave their people.

Yerima, however, takes an exception to violence in resolving the oil crisis. Hence, the playwright advocates dialogue and an inclusive representation of ordinary people in wealth distribution.

KURU: The people must be part of the division of wealth.

MEMEKIZE: Faith and commitment, that is what you

need. You must have trust among yourselves. Then decide what you want for our future...have faith in your decision, and when you are committed to it, it will be easy to achieve everlasting peace (133).


Although Little Drops can be regarded as a tragic play, it is also a celebration of the resilience and courage of women in the face of violence. Yerima depicts women as harbingers of love and peace. Their courage and love for peace is exemplified by their ability to forgive their enemies even when they have the chance to revenge. Memekize, Bonuwo, Azue and Mukume demonstrate these qualities. Because of her love for her murdered husband and two sons, Memekize lives by the riverbank where she buries them. She refuses to forsake them even in their death. Without minding his earlier harassment and death threat, the four women also take pity on Kuru by helping him remove the bullet lodged in his thigh. Similarly, Azue, who later discovers that Kuru is among the militants who behead her husband, forces Kuru to swear for peace with the same knife he uses to slit her husband’s throat. By rescuing Kuru from the jaws of death and forcing him to swear for peace, Yerima shows that, in spite of oppression inflicted on them, the women and all ordinary people are the real heroes of the oil crisis.

In terms of structure, the play is not divided into acts and scenes. This is a subversion of classical and neoclassical dramatic structure which is often divided into conventional acts and scenes. However, the playwright appropriates a device of classical tragedy. In classical tragedy, physical violence is not always enacted on stage. Rather, it is reported by the character who witnesses it. In Little Drops, for instance, all major conflicts happen offstage apart from Kuru’s riotous entry into the riverbank. They are reported through each character who witnesses them. To this end, conflicts in the play tend to be psychological. For instance, Memekize laments the gruesome killing of her husband and two sons during the Biafra war. The spirit of her husband refuses to rest in peace all because he is killed before his time in the senseless war.

Azue and Bonuwo also express the psychological torture inflicted on them by the militants. While the former recounts the killing of her husband by the militants and the death of her son, the latter who is also a school teacher narrates the massacre of forty-one students in the arm struggle between the militants and the soldiers. These instances illustrate the psychological torture experienced by the ordinary people in the oil crisis.

Lighting and sound effects are crucial devices in shaping meaning in Little Drops. The playwright uses these elements not only to enhance visibility, but also to capture the tension and violence that characterise the state. With the use of lighting and sound effects in the play, the audience feels the insecurity that pervades the region as result of the violence in the oil crisis. For instance, the scary atmosphere is depicted at the beginning of the play as follows:



Dark stage. Sound of gunshots from afar. It is cleared space by the riverbank. A swampy forest surrounds the stage, there is small shed which is home to Memekize up centre stage. The illusion is that the auditorium is the sea. Once in a while, the sound of the sea billowing into the bank is heard. When lights come on, MEMEKIZE, an agile woman of seventy wearing trousers and blouse, is roasting water yam. She is frightened but tries to remain calm, as she continues to watch out for any danger. Then she hears the sound of someone breathing and running. She wears a hood, and a big leather jacket. She looks like a tough militant in the dim lights on the stage (67).

The above captures an atmosphere of war. The dark stage creates a sense of fear while the dim lights give the old woman a scary appearance. The sounds of gunshots indicate on-going violence. Also, the sound of the bellowing river suggests the riverine area of the crisis. These elements also accentuate the suspense as the audience is eager to know the reason for the tense mood.

In terms of setting, the play begins and ends at Memekize’s shed by the riverbank. To save themselves from violence, the four women —Memekize, Azue, Mukume and Bonuwo— find a respite by the riverbank. For the common people to have some peace, it appears that they have to remain on the periphery (the riverbank). Even on the periphery, militants like Kuru still attempt to oppress them. Thus, Yerima’s use of the riverbank as the setting in the play is apt for it signifies the displacement of the ordinary people by the elites. Oppressed and pushed to the riverbank, the masses now live like hermits in their own land.

Characters in the play can be broadly divided into two categories: members of hegemony (which include the militants and the soldiers) and the ordinary people (the four women). Through characterisation of the four women, Memekize, Mukume Azue, and Bonuwo, the playwright makes a conscious effort to capture the consequences of violence on the ordinary people on the one hand and to celebrate the resilience, courage and love of the women on the other. All the four women are victims of war. Apart from being a victim of war, Memekeze, like Mama in Hard Ground and the Bishop in The Bishop and the Soul, exhibits certain religious syncreticism. Memekize invokes “Benikurukuru”, the sea goddess and also calls on Jesus at the same time. She shows a kind of religious contradictions which are features of postcolonial societies. Tension and anxiety also give rise to these contradictions.

In the play, Kuru and Ovievie are the only militants who are visible. Ovievie represents an uncaring and deceptive husband. Although he is a member of a militant group, he pretends to Mukume that he is innocent of the crisis. Also, when members of rival group come for him at the hotel where he and Mukume are celebrating their honeymoon, he escapes through the window and abandons Mukume in the hands of the militants to her fate. He engages in the war all because he desires to become a “hero”. Similarly, Kuru, a fierce militant, invades the riverbank to harass and threaten the women with death. However, his masculine power fails him and he is later rescued by the same “weaker vessels” he once terrorises with his weapons. The echoes of the corrupt King who sells his conscience for money also reverberate. In the end, he is consumed by his greed and hypocrisy. There is also the heavy presence of Joint Military Task soldiers who, instead of protecting the defenceless people, engage the militant boys in a do-or-die arm struggle.

Yerima’s representation of characters in terms of costumes and make-up in the play is apt. For instance, when the Prince dies, Azue paints her face and hands in mud. In addition to this, she is covered with an old black wrapper. The significance of the costume and the make up in Ijaw culture is that she is bereaved. She is mourning the death of the baby Prince. Another instance of appropriate use of costume is seen in the character of Memekize. Memekize, like a militant, wears trousers, a hood and a big leather jacket. The old woman dresses in this manner as a response to the insecurity and brutality that have overtaken the region. This is the reason why Mukume is afraid of her when she runs to the riverbank. The stage direction at the beginning of the play attests to this fact:



[...] she wears a hood, and a big leather jacket. She looks like tough militant in the dim light on the stage (67).

The significance of the Memekize’s costume could be explored beyond its literal level. Here, Yerima shows the possibility of using evil for good ends. While the militants wear hoods and black jackets to maim and kill, Memekize wears the same costume to protect herself and others who are victims of war. It also shows militancy as man’s preoccupation. Bonuwo, a school teacher, is also dressed in “a skirt suit which is dirty, a pair of glasses and a roughened unkempt wig” (90). This costume is quite appropriate for a school teacher seeking refuge amidst violence. Hence, the use of costume in the play reflects the reality of “dis-eased” peace in the region.

Similarly, the use of stage props in the play also foregrounds war, death and massive destruction that characterise the oil crisis. Guns, bullets and daggers have replaced bread. The proliferation of these tools of war in place of life sustenance elements depicts the region’s state of anarchy. When Kuru storms the riverbank to harass the defenceless women, the audience is informed that he has up to three guns on himself. He also carries a dagger. His interest is far from protecting the ordinary people. Rather, his aim is to unleash terror on them. In addition to the fact that he has used his guns to kill innocent people, his dagger is also symbolic. That the dagger is used to slit the King’s throat is a pointer to this fact. Such instruments of war and their bearers are a threat to the region’s peace. However, furious militants, like Kuru, bear certain burden in bringing peace to the land. Their destructive potentials nonetheless, such weapons and their bearers are not totally evil when they are positively used for the good of humanity. For instance, the dagger which Kuru uses to slit the King’s throat is also the same dagger Memekize uses to remove the bullet lodged in Kuru’s thigh. Thus, Kuru’s life is saved with the destructive instrument he uses in murdering others. The same dagger also functions as a tool of forging peace in the war-torn region. This is evident in the play when Kuru, on Azue’s request, uses the knife to swear that he will embrace and bring peace to the region.

What crystallises from the above elucidation is another possibility of using evil for good ends. Extended beyond the dagger, oil which is the main cause of violence in the Niger Delta also possesses this duality. Oil can be a resource for socio-political and economic development as it is in countries like Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates. It can also be a destructive and destabilising resource as it is in the Niger Delta region. Here, the playwright’s message is instructive. Man in space and time is always the problem. Where selfless leadership and inclusive representation are in place, the society will be better for it.

The language of the play depicts Ijaw background, one of the major ethnic groups in the Niger Delta region. Yerima makes use of selective lexical fidelity through which he deliberately leaves indigenous words untranslated in the dialogue. For instance, all the four women—Memekize, Mukume, Azue and Bonuwo—use the word “Ayiba” in their dialogue. Apart from the fact that it captures their faith in the supreme being, this deliberate retention of native language (“Ayiba”) in the play is borne out of the playwright’s postcolonial engagement to subvert the “Master’s language” to foreground cultural difference and give voice to the ordinary people.

Similarly, the language is infused with proverbs, figurative expressions and idioms. These are explored by the playwright in order to indigenise the English Language as African playwrights such as Soyinka, Osofisan, Ama Ata Aidoo do. For instance, Azue, suspicious of Memekize and Mukume, says:

AZUE: This one belongs to the sacred gods. Mine is not for

you to have for dinner, mothers of the night (84).


Azue’s reference to “mothers of the night” connotes witches. This metaphor indicates the cultural belief of the Ijaw in the supernatural forces. To douse her suspicion, Mukume also responds through a proverb:

MUKUME: [...] ours is only the concern of mothers, my queen. The stick that hurts the eyes hurts the nose, cheeks and all (83).

Apart from accentuating meanings, the use of proverbs, figurative expressions and idioms in the play indigenise the English language to reflect the Ijaw cultural milieu.

Another device used in the play is irony. The playwright employs both dramatic irony and situational irony to depict the contradictions of violence in the oil crisis. Dramatic irony is an element which makes the meaning of a situation to be understood by the audience, but not by the characters in the play while situational irony is a trope that involves discrepancy between what is expected and what occurs. An instance of dramatic irony is seen in the beginning of the play when Mukume who runs to the riverbank for safety considers Memekeze as one of the militant boys because of the old woman’s scary dress. Frightened, Mukume appeals to Memekize to spare her life:

MEME: Freeze! Not one move or you

die! (Frightened, MUKUMEfreezes.) Now don’t turn, kneel down slowly! Raise up your hands. Slowly, or I will blow your brain out. Slowly! I say raise up your hands


MUKUME: I beg you. I will do whatever

you want. Please don’t kill me. I am too young to die! (67)


Another instance of this technique is seen at the riverbank when Azue regards Mukume and Memekize as witches. For fear of the Prince being killed, she refuses to give the baby Prince to the two women until he bleeds to death:

MEME: [...] The prince must eat. He must drink something

warm. Let me have him, my queen (Moves closer to her)
AZUE: Not one more step (Moves away from them.) Has it

come to this? Huum, has it?


MUKUME: Has what...Your Highness?
AZUE: This one [the baby Prince] belongs to the sacred

gods. Mine is not for you to have for dinner mothers of the night. Haa haa...I should have known, two strange women amidst these shootings and killings, with lit fire ...cooking nothing in particular ... begging me to have my poor child.

MUKUME: (Angry.) Mothers of the night? We? What a stupid thought (83-4).
These instances above depict a general insecurity and distrust that pervade the region because of the violence in the oil crisis.

The situational irony in the play reveals a number of contradictory interests, greed and betrayal that are involved in the oil crisis. For instance, the audience is told by Azue that the militant boys behead the king, burn down the palace and the shrines. This is a situational irony. According to tradition, the King is expected to be revered by the entire community and he (the King), in turn, is supposed to be committed to the welfare of his people. Also, the youths are supposed to be agents of cultural propagation. However, the reverse is the case. The King plays a double-standard game to enrich himself. He conspires not only with militants in their vandalism, but he also mingles with oil companies, politicians and the military at the expense of the community. Hence, he dies like a condemned robber. Also, the youths, consumed by material lust, destroy the cultural and religious monuments of the community. Instead of functioning as a vanguard of positive change, people like Kuru and Ovievie turn themselves into agents of vandalism and rape. Their warped orientation also poses some leadership problems to the community in the nearest future because, as the saying goes, “the youths of today are the leaders of tomorrow”.

Another instance of situational irony in the play is seen in the relationship between Mukume and Ovievie. A husband and a wife are expected to be loyal to each other. They are also required to protect each other from danger. However, Ovievie abandons his newly-wedded wife, Mukume, to her own fate when his fellow militants invade their honeymoon in “Life Is Sweet Hotel”. In fact, the name of the hotel also suggests a kind of situational irony because if truly life is sweet, especially in the oil rich region, Mukume is not supposed to be a victim of the militants’ brutality on the night of her honeymoon in “Life is Sweet Hotel”.

The technique of total theatre is also explored by the playwright. One element of this technique in the play is Ijaw praise poetry. Amidst the turmoil, Bonuwo still sings the praise of the young queen:

BONUWO: (...rises to her knees as she sings the praise chant of the queen. The other women kneel)

A thousand blessings to my queen

Mother of the land...

One whose skin radiates the wealth of the riverside

Queen of the Coast

Daughter of Banikurukuru

Walk tall among other queens

For you are blessed.

You are the yolk of the golden egg

The life that shines in the heart of the king

Iyiiii! Iyiiii! Iyiiii! (94)

The panegyrics above captures the character, function and personality of the King’s wife. Although women are marginalised in the land, the King’s wife is regarded as “the mother of the land”, “yolk of the golden egg” and “the life that shines in the heart of the king”. All these metaphors used in describing the queen signify her preeminent status in the society. They also show that the king owes “his existence” to the queen.

Invocation is another aspect of praise poetry in the play. To heal Mukume, Memekize does not only call on the Christian god, but she also invokes Banikurukuru, Goddess of the sea:

MEME: (She goes into the shed and comes out with a bowl. She walks to the edge of the stage as if by the riverbank, clears the water, and takes some water, she raises the bowl. She chants.)

Banikurukuru!

Goddess of the sea

I take from you to heal your own

Heal her (70).


The above instance shows festival and religious atmosphere in traditional Ijaw society. The playwright also uses dirge when the young Prince dies. This is indicated in the stage direction:

Memekize runs into the shed, and comes out with an old black wrapper. She opens it up and covers Azue. Bonuwo takes the little bottle of gin, takes a swig. She passes the bottle round to the other women except Azue, who stands transfixed. Bonuwo begins to lead a slow dirge, she dances as sings. The others join. Azue does not dance but sways [...] (107)
The use of folk tale and song of abuse is also evident in the play. Bonuwo’s frog story serves to remind the elite who sponsor violence and war about the transient nature of power. The song in the story is an abuse targeted at all war mongers in the Niger Delta region in particular and Nigeria in general.

Yerima also makes use of flight as a technique of self-retrieval. A technique of subtle protest, flight is a movement of the oppressed people and war victims from a violence-prone area to a safe place. The technique is employed to profess life in place of death which violence and war bring to people. This technique is evident in Soyinka’s The Swamp Dwellers. For instance, Igwezu takes a flight away from conservatism of his homeland. Clark also uses the same technique in The Wives’ Revolt. In Little Drops, Yerima uses this technique as a tool of self-retrieval. To retrieve themselves, their freedom and peace, Mukume, Azue and Bonuwo take a flight from the scene of war. The flight of the three women serves as a protest on the one hand and as self-retrieval on the other. By moving away from the war area, the women are saying they are not parties to violence in the oil crisis. This also shows that the struggle does not represent them or their interests.



Concluding Remarks

The inauguration of amnesty programme for the Niger Delta militant youths by the Federal Government of Nigeria on the 6th August, 2009 is a significant event in the Niger Delta oil crisis. While the programme has not totally resolved the crisis, it has brought some respite to the people of the region. This is evident in the relative “peace” that is currently being enjoyed in the region.

Through various dramatic techniques such as plot-structure, setting, costume, lighting, stage properties, characterisation, language, irony and elements of African total theatre, Yerima has successfully explored various dimensions of violence that attend the oil crisis in Little Drops. The playwright shows that the crisis is characterised by violence as a result of personal interests among the contending forces. To this end, the ordinary people and the entire community remain the victims. Similarly, the militants who claim to represent the oppressed citizens in the crisis employ violence to advance their personal interests. Yerima has also demonstrated that the state and the multi-national oil companies operating in the region cannot be exonerated from the recurring violence. This, however, is made possible with the collaboration of elite in region. Consequently, violence in the crisis is predominately informed by leadership failure, corruption, greed and acquisitive predilection that are rampant in the region and in the nation at large. Hence, the playwright shows that dialogue, inclusive representation, youth empowerment, sincerity of purpose and good governance are crucial in resolving the crisis in order to restore peace to the region.

Primary Texts

Yerima, Ahmed. Hard Ground. In Three Plays, 7-62. Ibadan: Kraft Books Limited, 2011.

------------------. Little Drops. In Three Plays, 63-116. Ibadan: Kraft Books Limited, 2011.
Secondary Texts
Adeoti, Gbemisola. Muse and Mimesis: Critical Perspectives on Yerima’s Drama. Ibadan:

Spectrum Books Limited, 2007.

------------. Voices Offstage: Nigerian Dramatists on Drama and Politics. Ibadan: Kraft
Books Limited, 2009.
Darah, G.G. “Revolutionary Pressures in Niger Delta Literatures.” A Keynote Address at the

Annual Convention of the Society of Nigerian Theatre Artistes, University of Benin, May 15, 2008.

-------------. “How Nigeria Undeveloped the Niger Delta.” A Public Lecture, Delta State

University, May 26, 2008.

Fegbabo, Charles Cliff. “Politics of Alienation, Revolutionary Imperative and Eco-Activism in

the Novels of Tanure Ojaide and Vincent Egbuson.” Unpublished postgraduate seminar paper, University of Ibadan, 2012.

Iyayi, Festus. Heroes. London: Longman, 1986.

Odoemene, Akachi. “Social Consequences of Environmental Change in the Niger Delta of

Nigeria.” In Journal of Sustainable Development, 4, 2 (2011): 123-133.

Ojaide, Tanure. The Activist. Lagos: Farafina, 2006.

Osofisan, Femi. Aringindin and the Nightwatchmen. Ibadan: Heinemann, 1992.

Reno, W. “Insurgencies in the Shadow of State Collapse.” In Violence, Political Culture and



Development in Africa. Edited by Kaarsholm, P., 24-48. Oxford: James Currey,

2006.

Soyinka, Wole. The Swamp Dwellers. In Collected Plays 1. London: Oxford University

Press, 1973.



Uwasomba, Chijioke. “Ideology, Politics and Power in The Silent Gods.” In Muse and Mimesis:

Critical Perspectives on Ahmed Yerima’s Drama. Edited by Gbemisola Adeoti, 68-9. Ibadan: Spectrum Books Limited, 2007.



1Lawal, Nurudeen Adeshina is an independent researcher. He holds a Bachelor of Arts (Ed.) in English Education from the University of Uyo, Uyo, and a Master of Arts in Literature in English from Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife. He is currently an adjunct lecturer at the Directorate of General Studies, Osun State University, Ikire Campus, Ikire, Osun State, Nigeria.

Yüklə 76,19 Kb.

Dostları ilə paylaş:




Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©genderi.org 2024
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə