Iwunze Davidson Chimezie
English Language and Literature Department, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria
Corresponding Author: Iwunze D. C. E-mail: davidsoniwunze@gmail.com
Abstract
Since its emergence on the literary scene, Isidore Okpewho’s The Last Duty (1976) has engaged many critical discourses from both African and non-African critics. These literary critics have examined the novel from diverse theoretical leanings in order to expose the upsetting conflicts that differentiate the turbulences intrinsic in wars. These theoretical methods have markedly helped to explain some of the opinions and situations which pervade the novel. However, it seems that Okpewho’s critics are yet to survey satisfactorily into the anguished psyche of the major character, Mr Mukoro Oshevire, which is singularized by liminality. In narrowing this gap, this article contends that Okpewho’s The Last Duty (1976) is steeped in psychological dislocations that trapped the protagonist at margins of insanity which inhibits his reintegration back into the society he lived before the war. Employing Kali Tal’s trauma theory of liminality through which this article is interrogated, the paper reveals that some persons who encounter trauma during the war find it difficult to resume their normal lifestyle they lived before the war. They are stuck at the borders of humanity, thereby making their reintegration into the society a herculean task both to themselves and the entire community.
Keywords:Liminality, trauma,turbulences, Isidore Okpewho, The Last Duty.
Introduction
Among the countless novels that revisit the history of the Nigerian civil war, Isidore Okpewho’s The Last Duty (1976) stands out. It engages an exceptional narrative given the fact that the novel underscored the traumatic plight of the ordinary people caught up in the conflict. The attainment of political freedom from the colonial empires, flings the fragmented societies like Nigeria into a sovereign state without the consideration of the multiplicity of its socio-political and religious realities. Consequently, the colonial course in Nigeria’s socio-political terrain paved way for divisive politics, corruption, rigging of elections, favouritism, ethnicity and many more vices that have entangled the polity. That the aftermath of these vices resulted in the outbreak of a civil war is an eloquent demonstration that the colonial enterprise was a deep scar on the facial construction of the African states.
Even at the wake of colonial master’s exit from direct governance within the shores of Africa and the subsequent handover of power to the natives, the disenchantment that trailed the post-independence era is quite traumatic. Kwame Appiah (1992) has argued that “the apparent ease of colonial administration generated in the inheritors of the postcolonial nation the illusion that control of the state would allow them to pursue easily their much more ambitious objectives” (165). However, such ambitious objectives were not far-fetched from the manifestation of greed for power, materialism, corruption, nepotism, and embezzlement of state funds among others that have enveloped the African states especially Nigeria. Taking for instance, Chinua Achebe’s Man of the People (1965) which prophetically reveals the inevitability of a coup as a result of political tensions in the newly independent state. The novel does not only decry the disillusionment in that era but also unveils the confrontations of ethnicity, federalism, nepotism, corruption that pervades the Nigerian nation as subsequent events were to confirm this. However, these political obstructions culminated into a bloody civil war that lasted for thirty months. The conflict reveals the daily onslaught of trauma realities and eccentric challenges that characterized wars.
Given the fact that there have been many literary productions and critical engagements about war narratives in Nigeria, most of these works rely on theories like Historicism, Marxism, and Post-colonialism among others to explore and interpret the impact of traumatic experiences in the psyche of the affected survivors. The aforementioned theories, of course are not sufficient to critically expose the post-traumatic experience that characterized these victims. This is so, because, wars deal with realities that are devoid of human coloration, deception, or cosmetic embellishments; it exposes the real state of affairs. Moreover, wars affect the survivors long after the conflicts. In other words, wars produce liminal characters. And these liminal characters find it difficult to resume their “normal” lives after the war. For these reasons, I strongly believe that the critical theory to understand these horrific situations in Isidore Okpewho’s The Last Duty seems to be Trauma theory of liminality.
Liminality and the Narrative of Turbulences
Several studies show that trauma is a medical term referring to a wound or external bodily injury, or a mental injury, triggered by emotional distress. By implication, “Trauma overwhelms our abilities to cope and adjust, calling into question the most basic assumptions that organize our experiences of ourselves, relationships, the world and human conditions itself” (Kyeong, 2004, p.4). To Kali Tal (1996), “Trauma is enacted in a liminal state, outside the bounds of ‘normal’ human experience, and the subject is radically ungrouped. Accurate representation of trauma can never be achieved without recreating the event since, by its very definition trauma lies beyond the bounds of ‘normal’ conception” (p.15). This condition underscores that traumatic experiences linger unsettled. The victims continue to see themselves re-experiencing the excruciating events which have interrupted their ‘normal’ lives and find it difficult to return to their pre-liminal state.
The work of Eric J. Leed on World War 1 greatly influenced Tal’s employment of the word “Liminality” Whereas, the application of liminality as a pedagogic theoretical configuration started in the field of social anthropology with Arnold Van Gennep in the early twentieth century and continued with Victor Turner in the 1960s and 1970s. The French ethnographer and folklorist Arnold Van Gennep engaged the word ‘liminal’ in his book, The Rites of Passage (1908), in the background of tribal rituals by means of which he wanted to investigate life-crisis rituals and ceremonies of passage. He structures rites of passage into three phases: rites of separation, which detached an individual or a group of individuals from his or their familiarized place; liminal rites, which symbolically assign the character of the ‘passenger’ as one who is between states, places, transitions, or conditions; and finally rites of incorporation (post liminal rites), which welcome the individual back into the group. Underscoring on this three-fold structure, which is “separation (séparation), transition (marge), and incorporation (agrégation)”, Van Gennep employs the term “liminal (or threshold)” (Van Gennep, p.21). In order to explain the character of the transition phase within the life crisis rituals, Van Gennep adopts the word ‘limen’ to highlight the in-between status of the ritual subject during the transition period. ‘Limen’ is a Latin word for boundary. It refers more figuratively to “a transitory, in-between state or space, which is differentiated by indeterminacy, ambiguity, hybridity, possible for subversion and change. Elaborating on this three-fold pattern in her analysis of traumatized victims, Tal exposes that a war survivor is seen as an individual going through a rite of passage which normally is divided into pre-liminal, liminal and post liminal stages. The individual has undergone the first stage by going from his normal life into the traumatic experience, but is not capable of completing the cycle of moving from the liminal (traumatic experience) back to his normal life.
The Nigeria/Biafra war, however, is by no means one of those cruel battles in Africa that recreated the psychological and physical wellbeing of those involved. Some of these victims are not only traumatized psychologically but they are also thoroughly shaped beyond their imagination. Consequently, these experiences make them liminal characters because they are unable to return to their “normal” lives after such traumatic encounters.
Suggestively, what could be attributed to the grave nature of trauma especially the ones defined by wars and conflicts are the fact that they are man-made. Krystal (1995) reveals that “Survivors of the Holocaust still suffer from a feeling of shame over the idea that they did not fight back enough… whatever one is ashamed of has to be lovingly accepted as part of one’s life that was unavoidable” (pp.86-87). This unavoidable event- the Holocaust as well as wars- ironically is avoidable! That the victims have feelings of shame, guilt and annoyance could well be justified. Wars are generally captured as conflicts that reflect man’s violence against fellow man. A feeling of countless miseries, pains and sufferings always follow such events. That the victims have feelings of shame, guilt and annoyance could well be justified. On the other hand, facing trauma arising from natural disasters could be easily tolerated. This is because, the cause of the disaster is not man made. The victims would be pacified by the fact that a higher force than them created the problem. Therefore their survival – no matter the severity of its condition – could as well be accepted with gratitude. Such occurrences as “natural accidents” would be tolerated. Erickson (1995) posits that:
among the normal outcomes of study on natural catastrophes… is that a rapid and rationally incomprehensible upsurge of good sensation showers over survivors not long after the incident itself. For one dread moment they assumed that the world had come to an end, that they had been ‘left naked and alone in a terrifying wilderness of ruins’ … they are celebrating the recovery of the community they momentarily thought dead, and, in a way, they are celebrating their own rebirth ” (p.189).
Nevertheless, the wars that subjected Nigerians to untold miseries reenact the severity of trauma that was unnaturally created. Wars are generally captured as conflicts that reflect man’s violence against fellow man. A feeling of countless miseries, pains and sufferings always follow such events.
The above scenario dominates the narrative structure of Isidore Okpewho’s The Last Duty, which is divided into three parts that represent the traumatic and psychological experiences of ordinary people caught in the devastation of a civil war. The novel focuses on the psychological dilemma of certain members of Zonda citizens especially during the war. It captures particularly, the family of Mr. Mukoro Oshevire whose absence as a result of his detention in prison throws his family into a distressing trauma that eventually eclipsed his life. Okpewho’s use of different narratorial voices is in tandem with trauma literary texts since the various voices capture the same incidents from different sources; reinforcing as well as challenging those incidents. To Palmer (2008) “Okpewho was, in fact, about the first African novelist to use the technique of shifting narrative perspectives that has now become quite common in the African novel…” (p.43). Many critical works have proven that Okpewho’s narrative of the civil war underscores many facets of Nigerian history that exhibits the crisis of individual’s traumatic survival. According to Felman (1995) “The story of survival is, in fact, the incredible narration of the survival of the story, at the crossroads between life and death”. (p.47). However, Okpewho’s narrative basically reveals the untold stories and agonies that characterized ordinary people in war situations.
Mr. Mukoro Oshevire is the protagonist whose experiences expose the disorientation and confusion that characterized a liminal victim and its attendant consequences. His imprisonment could be seen as the “moment of separation” into a liminal space. Even though he is in prison almost throughout the war period, an internal war is waging in his life especially the welfare of his wife and his only child. After releasing him from the prison, his ordeal (war) continues until he loses his life. His ordeals begin almost the same time as the Federal troops overrun their town. He is accused of collaborating with the rebels and, is subsequently thrown into prison leaving his young wife and their one-year old child into the unknown hands of fate. His adversary and business competitor, Chief Toje, reveals how he leveled accusations that led to Oshevire’s imprisonment “That is why I have not hesitated to recommend a citizen here for detention on charges of collaboration with the rebels and then suborned another citizen to draw up details at the indictment… Mukoro Oshevire stood in my way” (p.5).
Seizing the opportunity the civil war created, chief Toje promptly cashes into it by framing up his business colleague not only to surpass him in their business by the time he comes out of prison but also to denigrate him by having sex with his wife. Having suffered physically and psychologically in the prison where his integrity and that of his wife were constantly challenged, he comes out only to discover that, indeed, things are no longer the same. While in prison, a fellow inmate named Agbeyegbe, in a fierce exchange of words, had mocked him for still holding forte for his embattled wife’s fidelity. Abgayegbe queries:
… why hasn’t your wife come to see you? Have you not seen others wives and children coming to see them? … Let me tell him! For maybe he doesn’t know, or he is pretending. Wife! You think there is anything they would stop at- I mean the people who put you here? They’d stop at nothing, including your wife. And here you are thinking about her, when she has not even sent a word through anybody, let alone come to see you herself (p.155).
The implication of this mockery, however, is not only intended to remind Mr. Oshevire of his present horrible situation but obviously to further traumatize his already battered psyche. A man, who has been languishing in prison for no fault of his, had had his own share of agony. Expectedly, he ponders over the ridicule trying to placate whatever remained of his wounded psyche:
Of course, if Agbeyegbe implied that Aku was letting herself be used, then he was talking nonsense. I know what women are, but I also know my woman. My only worry as far as that is concerned, is that if anyone sought to visit any dishonour upon her, she might try to do a desperate thing, perhaps not even short of taking her own life (p.156).
Ironically, desperate circumstances are capable of twisting one’s conviction to do otherwise what ordinarily one could not have imagined under normal situation. Typical of wars, there are myriad compromises that trail individuals especially the women folk. The honourable ones find themselves drowned in the murky waters of unfaithfulness in order to ensure the survival of their lives and loved ones. Oshevire’s conviction of his wife’s fidelity could be traced to the onset of the Federal troop’s occupation of Urukpe when other Simbians fled for their lives. But, his wife risked her life by not running away. As a result, Oshevire applauds her as “A very jewel of a wife. A matchless queen, whose courage and nobility, demand only equal demonstration of fortitude from me now as always-particularly now, as I await my verdict knowing full well the odds against me.” (p. 208).
However, based on the above glorious picture painted of a noble woman with the unwavering trust placed on her, the tremendous catastrophe that befell her husband is indeed quite provoking and deeply traumatic. The excitement of coming back home from the ordeals of a prison life together with the feeling of joy and apprehension that characterized such homecoming is not enough to overwhelm the painful but adverse atmosphere that pervaded his return. Tension has started getting over him as he is led into the military barracks, the temporary home to his wife and child after that fateful incident between Toje and Odibo. His wife sprawls before his feet crying vigorously as soon as she sets her eyes on him. Initially, he thought it was as a result of their long separation. But, afterwards he finds out that there is more to it. Aku’s tears are tears of sorrow not necessarily tears of joy following their reunion. According to Ali “… an infant would have known that when that woman wept so long and disconsolately on the ground at the feet of her man, it was not so much from joy of reunion as out of a remembered shame” (p.235). Instead of bringing memories of lost affection and love of their relationship, Oshevire’s presence becomes an emblematic of the trauma that has gripped her life. These haunting memories, however, find expression in her excessive lamentation. Her trauma becomes compounded given the fact that the period of her downfall and her husband’s return nearly coincided, regrettably a little patience could have made all the difference!
The mistaken silence of Mr. Oshevire and his expressionless face are what motivated Ali without restraint in his narrative about what transpired among Toje, Odibo and Aku’s triangular love affair. Silence as one of the symptoms of a traumatized self, is experienced by Oshevire when he got the hint of what had happened in his absence. To Laub (1995) “none finds peace in silence even when it is their choice to remain silent. (p.64). It speaks of disappointment, agony, sorrow, and shame. Such a trauma is too heavy for the heart to bear and makes the mouth speechless. When the entire story is finally relayed, he still kept quiet. Ali confesses:
All through my talk he just sat there blankly, not even looking at me. I gave him as much of the background as I knew and vouchsafed as much information as either decency or concern for his feelings would allow. But, he never said a word, nor did change the expression on his face one bit (p.234).
Oshevire’s continued silence from the barracks through to their own house nearly presses Aku to the margins of insanity. She keeps praying silently that her husband should at least say a word to her no matter the consequences. Whereas the man is not sure of his ability to endure such a story from his wife! He contemplates “I have not got the courage to ask my wife to tell me what happened- the story may be too much for me bear” (p.238). Tal (1996) reveals that the survivor “finds it hard to talk because the insight his traumatic knowledge has given him about life in general has no position at home. Therefore, he decides to stay at the border of the society since he could no longer take his previous place”. (p.31).
Though, Ali construes it as a trait of a “real man” (p.235). Ironically, if Oshevire had engaged his wife in discussions, his trauma could have been ameliorated to an extent. He could have heard what led his wife into such an act. After all, the wife has not cheated on him before. This could have become a “turning point” in their battered lives! It has been observed that a trauma victim finds it difficult to narrate his or her predicament or rather the events that caused the trauma. All the same, when such a person is able to voice out his or her trauma story, there is usually a hope of healing. Van Der kolk and Van Der hart (1955) describe this kind of traumatic situation of Oshevire as “speechless terror” that is the failure to organize the memory in words and symbols (p.172). Oshevire’s feeling of terror and shock makes it impossible for him to talk, let alone demand an explanation from his wife. His situation is in tandem with Tal’s (1996) description of a trauma survivor as “… confused, bewildered, frustrated, silenced, or anguished” (p.51). Even when Oshevire considers justifying his wife’s shameful conduct, his traumatized mind goes back to the psychological wound. He has lost confidence in his wife. To Kai (1995), “The experience of trauma, at its worst, can mean not only a loss of confidence in the self, but a loss of confidence in the surrounding tissue of family and community” (p.198). Oshevire ponders deeply:
But… there is something else in all this. If there are any honest men left in this town, they should know that the dishonour brought upon my wife- on my household- was unjust. But then the stain remains! The smear is there… and what kind of a life will I be living in this town with my family, when we know that our days are hunted by an indelible shame? … that every finger, every sneer, and every mockery is directed at you? (p. 238).
All these hunted memories are what clearly define Oshevire’s wounded psyche as well as the community’s decision to ostracize his family. Since, according to them the woman’s presence continues to put them at risk. Tal (1996) articulates:
If a trauma victim perceives herself as suffering alone, and has no sense of belonging to a community…, she will remain silent, imagining that her pain has no relevance to the larger society. She will likely come to believe that she has, in some way, brought her suffering upon herself. The internalization of blame for the evils that befell one is difficult to escape even when the notion of community exists; it is all but impossible to avoid when one feels no connection with a community… (p.125).
The community that supposes to offer succor to Oshevire and his family considering their plight simply rejected them. All these psychic events overwhelm Oshevire as he displays traces of insanity. In the words of his wife:
He has neither taken off his clothes nor even touched the food that I cooked for him. It is well past midnight now, and he has been sitting on that chair in the parlour. I dare not talk to him, for how can I tell what that would earn me? He has not said a single word since we left the army barracks. (p.239).
Up until this time, the man has not said a word. This apparently reveals the extent of his traumatic depth. Caruth (1995) underscores that “… silence is the only proper response but then most of us…feel that not to speak is impossible. To speak is impossible, and not to speak is impossible” (p.154). Similarly, Felman’s (1995) aptly captures his condition as “‘set apart’, ‘obsessed’, ‘at a loss’, ‘disoriented’ ” (p.162). He is unable to come to terms with the reality that his wife had become, in his absence, a mistress to two men. The thought that a child could have been planted into her womb further heightens his disorientation:
But if she has allowed herself to be put to such unworthy use by two men, whatever the predicament that she found herself in, what else is there but a strong likelihood that right now she is bearing within her bosom the seed of such vile communion? And what man would choose to be alive to face every day the ill-conceived fruit of shame? No… No…. (p.238).
Unable to bear these events of shame, according to Aku he “got up and locked all the doors and windows in the house, and proceeded to empty a full gallon of kerosene on parts of the house… and all I can do is to lie on this bed, alone and all too painfully awake, and count every moment that passes in fear” (p.239). What Oshevire experiences is in tandem with Krystal’s (1995) observation that “One feels anger, guilt, or shame whenever one is unable (refuses) to accept the necessity and unavoidability of what happened.” (p.87). Oshevire refuses to accept what had happened to his wife. To Tal (1996), the victim enters “the liminal state and becomes a man without a community”. (p.152). His release from the prison could have marked his return to his “normal” life in the society. Unfortunately, his return from prison heightens his disorientation. He eventually leaves with his entire family to unknown destination not until he is certain that the house is on fire. These strange but traumatic responses from Oshevire are what Egendorf (1996) quoted by Tal calls “the new strategies we concoct after being shocked into realizing that life doesn’t play by our own rules. When we can no longer pretend that life confirms our favored identity, we take on a negative version. ”. The silence that pervades Oshevire’s posttraumatic encounter parallels Griffin’s thoughts quoted by Tal (1996):
Silences. Not the silences between notes of music, or the silences of sleeping animal, or the calm of glassy surfaced river witnessing the outstretched wings of a heron. Not the silence of an emptied mind. But this other silence. That silence which can feel like a scream, in which there is not peace. The grim silence between two lovers who are quarrelling. The painful silence of the one with tears in her tears who will not cry. (p.233).
It is noteworthy that the above excerpt tells of “The grim silence between two lovers who are quarrelling”. Most of the time lovers who are quarreling work towards reconciliation but in the case of Oshevire and his wife, there seem to be no sign of reconciliation.
From the eyes of his little boy, Oghenevo, the horrible picture of Mr. Oshevire’s death is relayed:
my mother stops again, holding me tight and breathing and shaking very hard. And still my father does not stop.
Stop there! shouts another voice, from afar. I think the voice is shouting at my father.
mukoro! My mother screams, mukoro! and she is about to run again towards my father. but the man coming out from the bush shouts don’t move! i can see him faintly now… suddenly i hear the sound of gunshots from the direction of the other voice. Kr-r-r-r, kr-r-r-r, two times. and sound of something dropping. (p.242-3).
What is not too clear from this incident is whether Oshevire stubbornly walked into his death or not. Klein (2014) observes that “whether out of pride, stubbornness, or self-imposed deafness, he keeps walking” (p.115). But, given his traumatized psyche there is a strong indication that life has lost its meaning to him. Common to trauma cases, is the victim’s apparent loss of interest in life and that could have happened to him in view of his plight. Krystal (1995) calls it “loss of vitality” (p.86). While Van Der kolk and Van Der hart (1995, p.176) reveal that “… traumatized person may initially respond with suicide attempts or other self- destructive behaviour”. In fact, the words of Tal (1996) become relevant in relation to Oshevire’s death “Many survivors simply succumb to their inability to escape the traumatic landscape and choose to die rather than endure” (p.114). Though, Ola (1983) and Obiechina (1993) have argued in different fronts, they seem to blame Oshevire for his tragic end. Ola accuses him of his inability “to take cognizance of human frailty. He therefore refuses to forgive his wife” (Pp. 67-68). While Obiechina concurs that Oshevire “fails to take into account the nature of the temptations to which Aku is exposed and the pressures that break her in her loneliness” (p.270). Palmer’s (2008) comparison of Oshevire’s fate with Gikonyo in Ngugi’s (1967) A Grain of Wheat is quite illuminating because Gikonyo pulled through his own predicament with maturity. In spite of the wife’s pregnancy and the subsequent giving of birth to a child from another man, he still accommodated her at last. But, Oshevire could not bear the trauma at all. Having endured the mental incarceration in the prison, he could not seem to stand the shame of his wife’s sexual escapades, thereby submitting to disorientation and death subsequently.
Oshevire’s death reveals his inability to return to his “normal” life. Having left the prison walls in the hope of resuming his normal life with his family, he discovers that his wife’s sexual predicaments have become a betrayal too traumatic to bear. He could not return to the society freely because his wife had been ostracized. According to Tal (1996) narration is a step towards becoming post-liminal, ‘towards rewriting the traumatic events that severed their connections to the rest of society’ she further notes ‘non-survivor audience cannot “retake” a journey through an encounter they have never visited, and cannot “re-experience” a “tragic shattering” of old myths (p.147). Unfortunately, Oshevire refuses to open up to anybody. His pent up anger and confusion find expression in death. His tragic end simply reenacts the mental distress that bedeviled a traumatized mind. This, however, should elicit one’s sympathy given the fact that any man in his predicament is likely to be unsettled even if for a while. Having vouched for his wife’s fidelity which emphasized his absolute trust in her, he could not just bear the fact that two men died fighting for her. He is overwhelmed by sorrows of the mind in accordance with Lifton (1995) assertion quoted by Caruth that “the mind is severed from its own psychic forms, there’s an impairment in the symbolization process itself” (p.134). Oshevire’s death simply reveals his inability to return to his “normal” life. Having left the prison walls in the hope of resuming his normal life with his family, he discovers that his wife’s sexual predicaments have become a betrayal too traumatic to bear. He could not return to the society freely because his wife had been ostracized. To Tal (1996) narration is a step towards becoming post-liminal, ‘towards rewriting the traumatic events that severed their connections to the rest of society’ she further notes ‘non-survivor audience cannot “retake” a journey through an encounter they have never visited, and cannot “re-experience” a “tragic shattering” of old myths (p.147). Unfortunately, Oshevire refuses to open up to anybody. His pent up anger and confusion find expression in death.
It is quite unfortunate that Oshevire did not seek help which may have contributed to his healing. He refuses to talk after learning of his wife’s unfaithfulness. His post-traumatic experience becomes liminal as he gets “withdrawn”. According to Figley (1996) quoted by Tal, a trauma victim should be treated until he/she is healed:
[A] Trauma victim is a person who, in the process of recovering and working through the traumatic experiences struggles to make sense out of the memories of the traumatic event. Recovery is to eventually accept them and be able to face the possibility that something else like it may happen again. A trauma survivor is one who has successfully worked through and made peace with his or her traumatic memories (p.145).
From the above explanation between a victim and a survivor, it is apparent that Oshevire fitted into the mold of a victim who refused to be “worked through” therefore making it impossible for him to have “peace”. Tal (1996) captures it succinctly “… the crucial components of ‘recovery’ are the decision to relinquish anger and to accept the status quo. Making ‘peace’ is learning to accept the world as it is. The successfully ‘cured’ posttraumatic stress patient is no revolutionary” (p.145).
Conclusion
It could be apparently argued that the above analyses of the novel through the critical lens of liminality vis-à-vis posttraumatic experiences of Oshevire are fully realized. Oshevire’s liminal condition starts from the moment he is imprisoned without cause. It lingers throughout the narrative until he is finally killed. He is unable to transcend into post-liminal space. His wife’s sexual escapades in his absence are quite traumatic for him to endure. Manifesting in his bizarre choice of remaining silent, the liminality of his condition becomes apparent. His inability to “purge” his battered emotion by “opening up” becomes his tragic choice that led to his demise. Tal’s (1996) contention seems revealing about Oshevire’s condition “[verbal] expression… is frequently a step on the journey towards becoming postliminal, towards rewriting the traumatic events that severed their connections to the rest of society” (p.122). He is too traumatized to be involved in any kind of verbal expression other than grave silence. He neither questions nor narrates the traumatic event that severed him from the connections of the society. Unfortunately, his wife is ostracized by the society and the same society abandons him to his plight.
References
Achebe, C. (1965). A man of the people. London, Heinemann.
Appiah, K. (1992). In my father’s house: Africa in the philosophy of culture. New York, Oxford University Press.
Bessel V. D. K. & Onno V. D. H. (1995). The intrusive past: The flexibility of memory and the engraving of trauma. In C. Caruth (Ed.), Trauma: Explorations in Memory. Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press. Pp. 158-182.
Caruth, C. (1995). Recapturing the past: Introduction. Trauma: Explorations in memory. In C. Caruth (Ed.), Trauma: Explorations in Memory. Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press. Pp. 151-157.
Felman, S. (1995). Education and crisis in the vicissitudes of teaching. In C. Caruth (Ed.), Trauma: Explorations in memory. Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press. Pp. 13-60.
Kai, E. (1995). Notes on trauma and community. In Cathy Caruth (Ed.), Trauma: Explorations in Memory. Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press. Pp. 183-199.
Klien, L. D. (2014). Manhood in Isidore Okpewho’s The last duty: Authenticity or accountability”. In E. Emenyonu (Ed). African Literature Today 32.HEBEN Publisher’s Plc. Pp. 20-32.
Krystal, H. (1995). Trauma and aging: A thirty-year follow up. In C. Caruth (Ed.), Trauma: Explorations in Memory. Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press. Pp. 76-99.
Kyeong, H. (2004). Trauma, Narrative, and the Marginal Self in Selected Contemporary American Novels. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Florida.
Laub, D. (1995). Truth and testimony: The process and one struggle. In C. Caruth (Ed.), Trauma: Explorations in Memory. Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press. Pp.61-75.
Okpewho, I. (1976). The last duty. London, Longman.
Palmer, E. (2008). Of war and women, oppression and optimism: New essays on the African novel. New Jersey, African World Press, Inc.
Tal, K. (1996). Worlds of hurt: Reading the literature of trauma. Cambridge, University Press.
Van, G.(1960). The rites of passage. Translated by Monika B. Vizedom and Gabrielle I. Caffee. London, Routledge and kegan paul. Retrieved from https://books.google.