Sociopolitical phenomena such as corruption, political instability, (domestic) violence, cultural fragmentation, and the Nigerian Civil War (1967–1970) have been central themes of Nigerian narratives. Important as these are, they tend to touch on the periphery of the major issue at stake, which is the vector of persecution underlying the Nigerian tradition in general and in modern Igbo Nigerian narratives in particular, novels and short stories written in English which capture, wholly or in part, the Igbo cosmology and experience in their discursive formations. The present study of such modern Igbo Nigerian narratives as Okpewho’s The Last Duty (1976), Iyayi’s Heroes (1986), Adichie’s Half of a Yellow Sun (2007), and other novels and short stories applies René Girard’s theory of the pharmakos (Greek for scapegoat) to this background of persecution, particularly as it subtends the condition of the Igbo in postcolonial Nigeria in the early years of independence.

Critics have argued that the African literary artist [traditional or modern] carries out some kind of function. This includes teaching his audience through his work, having qualified as the keeper of his society's mores. Yet no critic has closely interrogated this stance and the constitution of the space of representation and teaching; what he really teaches; the shades of opinion that make him seem a recorder of his society's mores; and other sundry lacunae. This article proceeds by problematising such terms as artist, society, mores and teaching, on one hand, and by invoking such theoretical concepts of literature enunciated by critics, from Aristotle to Akwanya, on the other, in order to dismantle the argument that the artist teaches. It also argues that the notion of function, either teaching or recording of mores, privileges unity of message. The sense of unity is later exploded via exploring the chaotic meaning in Nigerian literature from traditional to modern works. In addition, this work demonstrates that the artist is a victim of the fleeting space of in-betweenness in which his craft is formed and to which he owes allegiance. Rather than record the mores of a society, at most, society merely affords him a place through its language for the purpose of mediating 'reality' at a second remove. From the explorations of the above varied concerns, this work concludes that either the artist is a bad teacher, or is someone from whom the ability to teach or record his society's mores breaks free.

Chinua Achebe’s Arrow of God has been adjudged by critics as a tragic work with Ezeulu as its tragic hero. However, none of these studies has paid detailed attention to the framing of Ezeulu in the historical context of his age. How he appears when compared to a classical Greek tragic hero has also been ignored. A major context giving rise to Ezeulu becoming a tragic hero is the period leading to the synthesis of two contrary histories, juxtaposed discourses and the collision of opposites and contraries in the sociocultural and political sphere of the villages of Umuaro and Okperi. This circumstance is captured by the narrator as ‘an augury of the world’s ruin’, by Nwaka as ‘the white man turned us upside down’ and by Ezeulu as ‘the world is spoilt and there is no longer head or tail in anything that is done’. Allen, an earlier District Commissioner in Things Fall Apart, but textually implicated in Arrow of God, terms it ‘great situations’. The above historical context requires more than mastery and acknowledgement by the tragic figure, in the absence of which he, a self-professed knowledgeable person, becomes a victim of what he failed to take into account. Consequently, he is set aside as a specimen for history and other men. This article will use Hegel’s and Aristotle’s theories of history and of tragedy, respectively, to explicate the above. It concludes that the tragic hero of Chinua Achebe’s Arrow of God is substantially the victim of the clash between Umuaro’s history and Hegel’s History.’n Teken van die wêreld se ondergang en die skepping van die tragiese held in Chinua Achebe se Arrow of God. Chinua Achebe se boek, Arrow of God, word deur kritici beskryf as ’n tragedie met die karakter Ezeulu as held. Niemand het egter noukeurige aandag geskenk aan hoe Ezeulu inpas in die gapings van botsende geskiedenisse soos vergestalt in die mens ten opsigte van hulle optredes, houdings, vrese en begeertes nie. Hoe hy voorkom in teenstelling met ’n klassieke Griekse tragiese held, is ook geïgnoreer. ’n Belangrike onderlinge verband wat aanleiding gee tot Ezeulu se status as tragiese held is die tydperk wat lei tot die samevoeging van twee verskillende geskiedenise naas diskoerse en die botsing van teenoorgesteldes in die sosiokulturele en politieke sfeer van die dorpies Umuaro en Okperi. Hierdie omstandighede is deur die verteller uitgebeeld as ’n teken van die wêreld se ondergang: deur Nwaka as: ‘the white man turned us upside down’ en deur Ezeulu as ‘the world is spoilt and there is no longer head or tail in anything that is done’. Allen, ’n vorige distrikskommissaris in Things Fall Apart, wat aansluit by Arrow van God, noem dit ‘great situations’. Bogenoemde historiese konteks vereis meer as die bemeestering en erkenning deur die tragiese figuur, ’n selfverklaarde kundige persoon, in die afwesigheid daarvan dat hy ’n slagoffer word van wat hy versuim het om in ag te neem. Gevolglik word hy tersyde gestel as ’n voorbeeld vir die geskiedenis en ander mans. In hierdie artikel sal Hegel en Aristoteles se teorieë van die geskiedenis en van ’n tragedie, onderskeidelik, gebruik word om bogenoemde uiteen te sit. Die gevolgtrekking is dat die tragedie held van Chinua Achebe se Arrow of God wesenlik die slagoffer van die botsing tussen die geskiedenis van Umuaro en Hegel is.

No abstract

No abstract