|
|
|
"I hired Esiaba at Ohio University when I was
the Director there...he was a remarkable, energetic force,
who had to overcome so much in his life to be cut short in
his prime. He was that rare breed - the artist/scholar, very
well read, engaged in the most challenging theory, yet a
rhythmical and very humanistic artist."
- Professor Paul Castagno.
University of North Carolina, Wilmington |
|
Esiaba Irobi’s “The Battle of Harlem”
(Pre-notes and Footnotes)***
By
Pius Adesanmi
The play on the title of Joseph Brodsky’s essay, “Footnote
to a Poem”, is deliberate. The reader, familiar with the
compelling maximalism of Brodsky’s essayistic style,
immediately suspects that there must be more to the essay
than the title reveals. For as critic, Brodsky is incapable
of the economy and the concision of the footnote. Once in
the essay, the reader’s suspicion is confirmed: “Footnote to
a Poem” is one of the most arresting examples of the Western
tradition of reading a single poem. This hermeneutic
practice, a sort of camera-focused, panopticist unpacking of
one poem, with emphasis not only on its aesthetic and
artistic qualities but also on its circumambient intertexts,
precedents, politics, and overall ideological frame, is what
Brodsky brings to bear on fellow Russian Marina Tsvetaeva’s
poem, “Novogodnee”. It is through this process of sustained
critical ‘discoursing’, which French criticism invented
after the era of the Philosophes and called “analyse de
texte”, that a poem gains the necessary visibility which
ultimately transforms it to what I have referred to
elsewhere as an “anthem-poem”.[1] The critic, Harry Garuba,
has coined the term “manifesto poem”[2] for the same
phenomenon. The fame of some of Europe’s most formidable
modernists derives equally from their anthem-poems and their
oeuvre. The so-called Les Décadents in France offer viable
examples: each of the poems in Charles Baudelaire’s black
venus series (Poems 22 to 39) is almost as famous as The
Flowers of Evil, the collection in which they appear;
Stéphane Mallarmé’s “A Throw of the Dice” and Paul
Verlaine’s “Amour” are anthem-poems as famous as any of the
respective authors’ collections.
Africa has given the world a respectable number of
anthem-poems, most of which were produced by the ferment of
Négritude, cultural nationalism, and anticolonialism in the
first half of the 20th century. Indeed, some of the first
and second generation poets of that period are known more
for their anthem-poems than for their collections. More than
any collection, “The Meaning of Africa” is Abioseh Nicol’s
claim to fame. David Rubadiri has hardly any presence beyond
his classic anthem-poem, “Stanley Meets Mutesa”. Wole
Soyinka’s “Abiku” and “Telephone Conversation” dwarf Idanre
and Other Poems in audience reach and appeal. Niyi
Osundare’s “Poetry Is” has become a mantra. The rare
Anglophone African literary mind in my generation, who
overcomes characteristic Anglophonic provincialism and
bothers about what is available in translation from the
Francophone side of the literary divide, may readily
identify “Naked woman, black woman” and “Africa, my Africa”
as lines from Léopold Sédar Senghor’s “Black Woman” and
David Diop’s “Africa” respectively but may be completely
ignorant of the title of the respective collections in which
the poems feature. Lusophone poets like Agostinho Neto are
hardly known beyond their anthem-poems in the rest of the
continent.
Consequently, what Africa’s anthem-poems lack is the
rigorous and sustainedanalyse de texte atmosphere in which
their Western counterparts thrive. The criticism of African
poetry in the academy – and informed discussions of it
outside of the academy – is seemingly entrapped in a
panoramic ontology. A Brodsky may devote entire essays to a
single anthem-poem by an author, a Jean-Paul Sartre, an
André Breton or a Guillaume Appollinaire may offer
penetrating dissertations on a single poem in such
prestigious sites asLes Temps Modernes or L’Esprit, it is
difficult to imagine an eminent African intellectual who
would propose a sustained reading of Odia Ofeimun’s
beautiful poem, “Giagbone”, to the editors of Research in
African Literatures. At their most generous, blind peer
reviewers would advise such an intrepid critic to “add more
materials from the poet and resubmit for consideration”. In
Africa, we either read an oeuvre or at least a collection,
parsing and citing poems randomly and chaotically along the
line. If one forgives its needlessly abstruse, unsuccessful,
and insipid Lacanian/Freudian theoreticism, Obiwu’s recent
reading of Chinua Achebe’s poetry is timely.[3] But even
that exercise offers a great deal of panoramic glossing of
Achebe’s poems. Domestic newspaper reviewers of poetry in
Nigeria – Uduma Kalu, Toni Kan, Layiwola Adeniji, Nduka
Otiono, Chux Ohai, Maxim Uzoatu, and Mike Jimoh are
especially guilty of this panoramic methodology – I have
never encountered a sustained reading of a single poem in
their pages: they review only collections. Thus, a pantheon
of anthem-poems lies fallow, awaiting a Brodsky-like
critical engagement. Third generation anthem-poems like Olu
Oguibe’s “I am Bound to this Land by Blood”, Ogaga Ifowodo’s
“Homeland”, Amatoristero Ede’s “Not in Love” and
“Globetrotter”, Nduka Otiono’s “Rhapsody of a Lunatic”, Lola
Shoneyin’s “Song of the River Bird” and Chiedu Ezeanah’s
“Endsong” cycle are loud victims of the lack of a viable
critical tradition on anthem-poems.
One anthem-poem that recommends itself as a compulsory point
of departure for any modest attempt at overcoming this
limitation is Esiaba Irobi’s “The Battle of Harlem”. Any
poetic evocation of Harlem deserves more than a passing
glance because of the imbrication of that time-space in the
motif of early 20th century Black artistic, cultural,
political, and ideological internationalism. The praxes of
this internationalism included the various Pan-Africanist
congresses, the Black Paris of Surrealism, Négritude, and
Présence Africaine, and the Congresses of Black Writers and
Artists in Paris and Rome. Although Brent Hayes Edwards’s
fine book, The Practice of Diaspora, focuses mainly on Black
Paris, the attention he pays to Harlem as the inflatus of
Black Internationalism further underscores the significance
and topicality of Irobi’s poetic intervention. The very
nature of Harlem as a lieu de mémoire (site of memory) - to
borrow Pierre Nora’s felicitous expression, makes it
impossible to read “The Battle of Harlem” as an isolated
text. Irobi himself makes this clear by successfully weaving
into the poem a self-conscious armada of Black intertexts
and cultural-historical figures: Houston Baker, Ralph
Ellison’s Invisible Man, and Ben Okri’s Stars of the New
Curfew.
However, it is in two intertexts of the Francophonic
Harlemite tradition that one finds the beginnings of the
historical tensions and contradictions which reach an
unnerving bathos in Irobi’s “The Battle of Harlem”.
Négritude’s debt to the Harlem Renaissance is common
knowledge. Most Négritude poets made the inescapable
trans-Atlantic voyage and Harlem became a veritable Muse for
poetry written in the tongue of Molière. Senghor’s “New
York” and the Haitian, Jean Brierre’s “I’ve Come Back,
Harlem” are easily the best in this tradition. Written in a
free flowing verse reminiscent of Aimé Césaire’s style in
the Notebook of a Return to the Nativeland, Brierre’s poem
is an historical canvass in which an ostensibly Haitian
poet-persona addresses an African American brother, taking
him down memory lane to the Middle Passage, the arrival in
the Americas, the parting of ways and, most painfully, the
tragedy of Babel:
We have unlearned our African dialect,
You sing in English of my dream and my pain
My ancient sorrows dance to the rhythm of your blues
And I tell of your anguish in the language of France.
But the Haitian got his freedom before the Harlemite:
“centuries, in time, have changed their numbers/San Domingo,
breaking the chains, the leather bands”. This new-found
freedom transports the Haitian to Harlem: to see his old
brother and renew the fraternity that fell apart at the time
of separation:
I’ve come back, Harlem. This flag is yours,
For the pact of pride, of glory and of suffering
Was contracted for yesterday and for tomorrow:
Today I ripped apart the shrouds of silence.
Harlem as a site of psychological succour and security is
also central to Senghor’s “New York”. More than Brierre, it
is in Senghor’s poem that we begin to catch a whiff of what
is to come in Irobi’s offering several decades later: the
presence of cold, dehumanized, materialist capitalism. In
line with the standard Négritude procedure of constructing
Manichean binaries between white and black, the roaming
poet-persona in “New York” first encounters the white, cruel
capitalist streets of Manhattan where he sees only:
Skyscrapers whose steely muscle
and bronzed stony skin challenge cyclones…
No blossoming child’s laughter, his hand in my cool one
No maternal breast, nyloned legs…
No tender word in the absence of lips,
nothing but artificial hearts paid for at
high prices
And then, the poet goes home to Harlem in the familiar
retour aux sources (return to source) pattern of Négritude
philosophy:
I have seen in Harlem, humming with sounds, ceremonious
colors and flamboyant scents…
Harlem! Harlem! This is what I’ve seen – Harlem! Harlem!
A green breeze of wheat springing from pavements plowed by
barefoot
dancers waving silken rumps and spearhead breast, ballets of
waterlilies and fabulous masks.
In line with Négritude essentialism of the Black African
Ur-text, Senghor almost begins to see the millet fields and
the masks of his native Joal in Harlem! Suffice it to say
that the victory which transforms Harlem to a site of
respite, Black pride, and communion for Senghor and Brierre
is pyrrhic: the cold capitalism of primitive accumulation,
which Senghor naively separates from Harlem and confines to
Manhattan in order to operate his formulaic binary,
reappears with a vengeance by the time Irobi enters the
scene…
If one was tempted to consider the idea of battle as a
metaphorical rendering in “The Battle of Harlem”, Irobi
punctures that illusion with an opening stanza that
immediately deploys history at the service of art:
I am standing here on top of Mount Morris Park
Like the captain of a defeated army, watching
My people, black people, people of African descent,
Losing the battle of Harlem, watching them
Evacuated one by one, like wounded, bleeding
Soldiers, bleeding in limb and mouth and memory,
Like that stubborn couple in that great eviction scene
In Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man, the great masterpiece
Of our history, the history of the invisibles of the USA
Some familiarity with the history of Harlem is necessary to
grasp the dynamics at work here. The place now referred to
as Mount Morris Park was indeed a real battleground, first
between Dutch colonists who established the town of “Nieuw
Haarlem”, and the Native Americans they swept away. Then,
during the American War of Independence, the place’s
strategic location close to the Harlem River occasioned
skirmishes between the Patriots and the British. In essence
the poet-persona’s location at the opening of the poem was
already a real battle ground of European greed during the
conquest and “pacification” of the Americas. This historical
battle provides the background to the contemporary battle
which Irobi records: the unleashing of the primitive
accumulation instincts of global monopolist capitalism whose
arrowhead is Senghor’s Manhattan!
Irobi’s theme, therefore, is sufficiently familiar. For the
battle of Harlem is also the battle of Maroko in Irobi’s
homeland; it was the battle of Sophiatown in South Africa
and still is the battle of Johannesburg; it is the battle of
Mumbai; it is the battle of history, culture, and memory
against profit. Anytime a rundown, disinherited
neighbourhood demonstrates the potential to become “chic”,
like the Che Guevara of Ogaga Ifowodo’s poem, “You are Chic
Now, Che”, primitive accumulation must set in, clear what
French Interior Minister, Nicholas Sarkozy has called “la
racaille”[4] (scum), in order to make the place
investor-friendly. But that is as far as Irobi’s romance
with the familiar goes. In his preface to the 1947 edition
of Césaire’s Notebook, André Breton holds that the hallmark
of truly great poetry lies in its ability to take the
familiar and divest it of every trace of its familiarity:
the much-vaunted defamiliarization of postmodernist
critique. Irobi achieves this not necessarily with his
stimulating grasp of the historical material he treats but
with the power of his imagery, the seductive concatenation
of effects on the senses – visual and aural – as well as the
lyricism that powers his imagination. These qualities come
out in the second stanza where the violence of eviction
builds up and meshes with the image of the huge metal ball
used for demolition. The violence itself is attenuated by
the half-serious, half-bitter, a little self-mocking tone of
the narrating voice. Nevertheless, the poem does not lose
sight or the possible consequences of the victory of
capitalism in Harlem:
Every living trace of us, our black faces and asses,
Our smell and color will be erased and painted over
With white emulsion paint and efficient roller brushes.
We will watch entire neighbourhoods crushed
To dust, and with the crash of each building, come
Crumbling into dust, every scrap of the memory
Of our grandparents, parents, our childhoods, schools,
Parks, benches, corners, cornershops, nightclubs,
How we grew up, the lives that we lived here in Harlem
The music we made, the paintings, the poetry, the dances.
Irobi’s acknowledgement of the role of race in the story of
Harlem invites the inevitable backcloth of the Ellison
intertext. But Irobi is too cosmopolitan a poet, too
comfortably ensconced in the overlapping strands of
postmodern identity narratives to be satisfied with the loss
of race and memory as the only consequence of the defeat of
the Black soul in the battle of Harlem. Other layers of
exclusion are grafted onto the persona of the poem’s
addressee and dedicatee: John-Martin Green:
So, John-Martin Green, you may have to move again,
You the thrice removed. You may have to leave Harlem
To the high and Mighty. Why? Because you can no longer
Afford the rent! Besides, who wants to be black sushi
For white sharks on this island cruised and rolled
Over endlessly by the teeth and laughter of the waves,
The violent signatures of the unrelenting foam.
So, you must move again. You the thrice removed.
Removed from Africa by your own kith and kin,
Removed from South Carolina where your ancestors
Invented the ring shout amidst bales of cotton balls,
Removed from the Bronx where your father was a barber
Your mother a great singer. Already, the barber's shop
Where you learnt to sing, is gone. You will again be
Removed to somewhere in New York City,
Exactly where I cannot say for now, the rent will tell.
Irobi displays his sophisticated grasp of the double
entendre technique with the narrativization of John-Martin
Green. The name and the personality signify at multiple
levels. The tragedy of John–Martin Green does not devolve
singularly from the clearing operations of the army of
Donald Trump. It does not devolve solely from the erasure of
such symbologies of black history and socialization as “the
ring shout”, “cotton balls”, and the “barber’s shop”. The
“white sharks” moving in on this potential “Black sushi”
are, in the officially sanctioned narratives of their
identity, crusading, evangelical, Christian fundamentalists
whose capitalism is powered by soporific invocations of
heterosexual family values, “our way of life” in US-speak.
Trouble is that the real life John-Martin Green is one of
the leaders of the New York Black Men’s Xchange, an
Afrocentric, activist, Black gay men’s group, who reject the
label “queer” as an imposition of white, hegemonic gay
discourse and prefer the designation SGL – Same Gender
Loving. In essence, when the capitalists invade Harlem with
their heterosexual Christianity, John-Martin Green’s
marginalised sexuality – disguised by the poem’s double
entendre - will also have to move along with his history,
race, and culture.
“The Battle of Harlem” is, in my opinion, a major event in
the context of Black countermodernist textualities. An event
whose status as “dissident epistemology” (Benita Parry)
derives from its deconstruction of the dominant American
narrative of History cannot escape the bogey of American
identity mythmaking: patriotism. Irobi puts irony and
sarcasm to judicious use in his exploration of the
instrumentalization of American minorities by the master
narrative of patriotism:
This is your lot, John Martin Green, you who loved
Your country so much you wore its green fatigues
And gray camouflages and crouched in ambush
Like a wounded panther against foreign enemies
In Vietnam and here at home, against your compatriot's
bayonets, you will be removed again. Into the final
pages of history of the invisible in this great country,
God's own country, America, the great, America?
The beautiful! So, join me now, John Martin Green,
Join us also Houston Baker, you who taught me
How to sing like a sorcerer's owl. Join us, master,
As we sing the great anthem: The Star Spangled Banner,
While above our heads, bald eagles, bold and brave,
Drop their scented dung on our roofs and skulls
And stand on our porches with their majestic talons
And peer into our faces as if ready, if we are willing,
For them to scoop out with their curved beaks,
Our eyeballs, pupils, irises, the whites and all.
A successful combination of climax and dénouement in the
same stanza is not a frequent occurrence and this is further
testimony to Irobi’s craft. In this powerful moment of the
resolution of poetic tension, John-Martin Green, Houston
Baker, and the poet-persona are interpellated into the
ironic space of patriotism from where they contemplate their
defeat and the tragedy of their history. The image of “bald
eagles” and “talons” is especially apposite in delivering
the potential coup de grace and is reminiscent of David
Diop’s deployment of similar imagery of “vultures” and
“talons” in his poem, “The Vultures”. However, unlike the
situation in Diop’s poem where the captured Africans were so
completely routed by “foreigners who did not seem human”,
Irobi enters a crucial caveat which denies the invaders of
Harlem the last word: total defeat will happen only “if we
are willing”.
Apart from the occasional lapse into prosaic
literalness in stanzas two and four, which takes nothing
away from the overall accomplishment of the poem, some
comments on how this complex poem further rejects
familiarity by problematizing questions of identity and
nation-ness are in order. The speaking “I” in the poem
resists any simplistic classification as it constantly
defies a stable frame of reference. Its constant oscillation
between adjectives and pronouns of self-inclusion and
distantiation in relation to the “souls of black folk”
imposes a weighty double consciousness on the poem. But this
is not W.E.B Du Bois’s double consciousness. Irobi’s problem
– if the dilemma of the poet-persona is anything to go by –
is not how to be negro and American at the same time but how
to be a Nigerian/Biafran speaking as “us”, “we”, and “our”
within the signifying range of the African American
narrative. For instance, the “I” who places itself
symbolically and proprietorally “on top of Mount Morris
Park”, appropriates Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man, and talks
about OUR (my emphasis) history in the first stanza runs
into trouble in stanza six with the plunge into the history
of the American south. At this point, the history of
John-Martin Green becomes difficult for a non-African
American to articulate; hence the “I” distances itself and
begins to speak of “your ancestors”. The problem is easily
identifiable: an African may appropriate Invisible Man and
its textual ideology; it is much more difficult to
appropriate the experience of the “cotton balls” of South
Carolina and the barber’s shop as a site of socialization.
The monkey and the gorilla may claim oneness, goes the
African proverb, but monkey is monkey and gorilla, gorilla.
But Irobi already anticipates this problem; hence the
poet-persona’s self-fashioning as a “migrant heart” trained
by Houston Baker. In essence, Irobi resolves the problem of
double consciousness here through what one may call the
phatic communion of ideology – an expressed subscription to
the ideology of a shared history, shared experiences, shared
emotions. The phatic communion of ideology is what enabled
Frantz Fanon to speak as “nous, Algériens” (We, Algerians)
even before renouncing his French citizenship. It is the
same ideology that resolves the tensions of bifurcated
subjectivity in Esiaba Irobi’s masterpiece.
Notes
[1] See Pius Adesanmi, “Nigeria’s Third Generation Poetry,
Canonization, and the North American Academy: Random
Reflections.” Sentinel Poetry Quarterly 3 (January 2005):
43-50.
[2] See his robust essay, “Explorations in Animist
Materialism: Notes on Reading/Writing African Literature,
Culture, and Society.” Public Culture 15.2 (2003): 261-285.
[3] See Obiwu, “Achebe’s Poetic Drive”. Sentinel Poetry
Quarterly 5 (September 2005): 23-48. I have argued in the
past with Obiwu over the usefulness or otherwise of Lacan
(and also Freud and Jung) in the context of African(ist)
hermeneutic practices. I remain persuaded that his Lacanian
hallucination on Achebe – sometimes we hear of Lacanian
readings of Igbo facial marks! - is an expensive,
Euromodernist distraction. Before Obiwu, Sunday Anozie
charted two divergent critical trajectories in African
literatures. One part of his career was spent on
meretricious structuralist readings of the African text; the
other part, unfortunately inaccessible to Anglophone
readers, was the sociological critical dimension he adopted
in his Sociologie du roman africain. While his sociological
paradigm worked, his structuralism is, at best, an ossified
museum piece. Obiwu’s misguided Lacanianism is, fortunately,
traveling in the direction of this museum.
[4] In the context of the recent riots in France.
Works Cited
Brodsky, Joseph. Less Than One: Selected Essays. New York:
Farrar Strauss Giroux, 1986.
Césaire, Aimé. Notebook of a Return to the Native Land.
Middletown, Conn.:
Wesleyan University Press, 2001.
Edwards, Brent Hayes. The Practice of Diaspora. Cambridge,
Mass: Harvard University Press, 2003.
Ellison, Ralph. Invisible Man. New York : Random House, 2002
Ifowodo, Ogaga. Homeland and Other Poems. Ibadan: Kraft
Books, 1998.
-------------------. Madiba. Trenton: Africa World Press,
2003.
Irobi, Esiaba. “The Battle of Harlem”.
http://www.nnoromazuonye.com/irobi_files/page0004.htm**
Kankara, Victoria Sylvia. Hymns and Hymens. Yenagoa:
Treasure Books, 2005.
Okri, Ben. Stars of the New Curfew. London: Secker &
Warburg, 1988.
Oguibe, Olu: A Gathering Fear. Bayreuth: Boomerang Press,
1992.
Otiono, Nduka. Voices from the Rainbow. Lagos: Oracle Books,
1997.
Shoneyin, Lola. Song of a Riverbird. Ibadan: Ovalonion
House, 2002.
Soyinka, Wole. Idanre and Other Poems. New York: Hill &
Wang, 1968.
* The listed anthem-poems by Wole Soyinka, David Rubadiri,
Abioseh Nicol, Léopold Sédar Senghor, and David Diop can be
found in various anthologies especially Donatus Nwoga’s West
African Verse (London: Longmans, 1967), Wole Soyinka’s Poems
of Black Africa (London: Secker and Warburg, 1975), and
Clive Wake’s and John Reed’sNew Book of African Verse
(London: Heinemann, 1984).
**The webpage is now defunct.
***This essay was first published in Sentinel Poetry
Quarterly #6, December 2005
Top |
|
|