Afrocentric Approaches to African American Drama

http://jbs.sagepub.com/Journal of Black Studies

http://jbs.sagepub.com/content/24/1/88The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/002193479302400106

1993 24: 88Journal of Black StudiesNilgun Anadolu OkurAmerican Drama

Afrocentricity as a Generative Idea in the Study of African

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Journal of Black StudiesAdditional services and information for

http://jbs.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://jbs.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://jbs.sagepub.com/content/24/1/88.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This?

- Sep 1, 1993Version of Record >>

at TEMPLE UNIV on November 29, 2014jbs.sagepub.comDownloaded from at TEMPLE UNIV on November 29, 2014jbs.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://jbs.sagepub.com/

http://jbs.sagepub.com/content/24/1/88

http://www.sagepublications.com

http://jbs.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://jbs.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://jbs.sagepub.com/content/24/1/88.refs.html

http://jbs.sagepub.com/content/24/1/88.full.pdf

http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml



88

AFROCENTRICITY AS AGENERATIVE IDEA IN THE STUDYOF AFRICAN AMERICAN DRAMA

NILGUN ANADOLU OKURTemple University

Molefi Kete Asante has established a theoretical perspective thatrecognizes the centrality of African ideals and ideas as startingplaces for the analysis and synthesis of African phenomenon(Asante, 1987). Using the term Afrocentricity, Asante presents it asa critical theory and method which serves as a generative concept.First introduced in his now classic book, Afrocentricity, the theoryhas gained prominence in all academic circles.By 1988 Temple University had started the first doctoral pro-

gram in African American Studies. Nearly 40 graduate studentsentered to study from an Afrocentric perspective the nature of theAfrican world’s culture and history. The fact that more than 400people applied to the department for graduate studies in the first 2years indicates a growing interest in the intellectual idea articulatedby Asante. Moreover, an increasing demand within the AfricanAmerican community for higher education and university degrees,as well as graduate study, seems to bring about other developmentsand new theories of social change as in the case of the Afrocentricperspective.

Afrocentricity developed as a paradigm based on work since the1960s. Black Studies programs-which really gained departmentalstatus-most often provided the link to an Afrocentric paradigmbut they are not necessarily viewed as the direct precursor of Afro-centricity today. The key figures in the early Black Studies move-ment were scholars such as Nathan Hare, Vincent Harding, James

JOURNAL OF BLACK STUDIES, Vol. 24 No 1, September 1993 88-108m 1993 Sage Publications, Inc.

at TEMPLE UNIV on November 29, 2014jbs.sagepub.comDownloaded from


89

Stewart, Wade Nobles, William Nelson, Sonia Sanchez, TalmadgeAnderson, Molefi K. Asante, James Turner, Linda Myers, andMaulena Karenga. However, the most important contribution toAfrocentric theory is made in the major works of Asante who viewsAfrocentricity as the continuation of a tradition that runs back toMarcus Garvey, W.E.B. Du Bois, Frantz Fanon, Elijah Muhammad,and Malcom X. Asante has formulated Afrocentricity in his threeimportant works, respectively, Afrocentricity (1988), The Afrocen-tric Idea (1987), and Kemet, Afrocentricity and Knowledge ( 1990).

It is the purpose of this essay to examine Asante’s theories in

light of the field of drama. Although he has lately written on&dquo;Afrocentricity and the Critique of Drama,&dquo; I shall concentrate onthe implications for drama in his earlier works. This is not to saythat his later works are not useful to this discussion but rather thathis article in the Western Journal of Black Studies (1990) on dramais more a critical work than a theoretical one. To adequately assesshis contribution to our understanding of African American theater,I will juxtapose some Eurocentric ideas to his work and thenhopefully conclude with a harmonious synthesis in the Asanteanmanner.

&dquo;AFROLOGY&dquo; OR &dquo;AFRICALOGY&dquo;

Afrology is defmed as the study of concepts, issues, behaviorswith particular bases in the African world, either on the continentof Africa (continental), or on other lands where Africans are nowsettled (diasporan). Afrology or Africalogy is an inclusive disci-pline ; it brings together creative, political, and geographic dimen-sions of Africans or African-based cultures. Black Studies, AfricanStudies, and African American Studies are essentially Afrologicalstudies, that is, persons within departments or programs with suchnames are usually engaged in the Afrocentric study of concepts,issues, and behaviors in the African world. Indeed, Asante says,&dquo;Afrology is the crystallization of notions and methods of Africansocial scientists and humanists.&dquo; He continues, &dquo;Afrology is notmerely the study of black people, but an approach, a methodological



90

and functional perspective. The method which makes Afrologicalstudy distinct is Afrocentricity&dquo; (Asante, 1988, pp. 59-60).

Not all African American historians, critics, and sociologistswho have made excellent studies are Afrologists, because it is&dquo;neither a matter of color, nor theme that determines one’s expertiseas an Afrologist. It is the Afrocentric method which makes Afrologi-cal study&dquo; (Asante, 1988, p. 60). On the other hand, not anyonestudying Africans can be considered an Afrologist; for instance, &dquo;ablack person studying English literature may be a scholar, but notan Afrologist by the virtue of his scholarship. If he studies Englishliterature Afrocentrically, he becomes an Afrologist&dquo; (Asante, 1988).An Afrologist must possess three basic qualities: competence,

clarity of perspective, and understanding of the subject. There aretwo theoretical propositions upon which Afrology is founded:

1. Afrology is primarily ’!for Africa,&dquo; that is, it aims to create acollective will from the creative, political, and geographic dimen-sions of Black people from various parts of the world.

2. Second, the Afrologist, by virtue of his perspective, participates inthe development of new concepts and directions. An Afrologistis a person capable of understanding many points of view becausehe values diversity of opinion rather than sameness of opinions(Asante, 1988). A good example that illustrates this view is pointedto by Asante himself in his work Afrocentricity :

Whereas a white communication scholar may define a speech&dquo;an uninterrupted spoken discourse given before an audi-ence,&dquo; an afrologist looking at the same object, a speech,would possible derive a different definition ... and say thata speech is a highly interrupted spoken discourse ... becausehe knows that in the black cultural audiences the speakers areinterrupted by shouts of &dquo;amen,&dquo; &dquo;hallelujah,&dquo; and &dquo;right on.&dquo;Further the afrologist would demonstrate that these interjec-tions are not interruptions at all but affirmations and that thespeech cannot be complete without the interchange of vocalexpressions. Antiphony becomes central to the black commu-nicative process. (Asante, 1988, 62-63)

Thus an Afrologist who is Afrocentric is first expected to know,recognize, and formulate the characteristics of his own culture and



91

later, by virtue of his Afrocentric perspective, other cultures andviewpoints. Hopefully, by then, conventional education systemswill include more &dquo;pluralistic perspectives&dquo; and shed their Euro-centric hegemony.

As a discipline Afrology is permanently realized in the Americanacademia and seems to multiply gradually in progressive universi-ties both in Africa and the Americas. For instance, in the 1993-94academic year it is reported that Temple University’s Ph.D. pro-gram in African American Studies will have more than 200 graduatestudents.

&dquo;AFRO-AMERICA&dquo;

By &dquo;Afro-America&dquo; the Afrocentrist means the &dquo;domicile of

people of African descent in the Americas.&dquo; Besides the UnitedStates, Brazil, Venezuela, Columbia, Ecuador, Peru, Mexico, Cen-tral America, and the West Indies are included in Afro-America, thepopulation of Brazil is more than 50% African and the United Stateshas nearly 15% African Americans.

AFROCENTRICITY AND &dquo;REDEFINITION&dquo;

Afrocentricity calls for a &dquo;redefinition&dquo; or &dquo;elimination&dquo; of cer-tain terms that connote racism or prejudice. Most of these termsare derived from Asante’s work titled Afrocentricity (Asante,1988,p. 46):

non-White coloredtribe Negrominority Bushman

pygmy African dialects

jungle sub-Saharanchief native

African slaves Black Africa

primitive

I personally believe terms like &dquo;slave narrative,&dquo; &dquo;third world peo-ple,&dquo; &dquo;third world countries,&dquo; &dquo;the Dark continent&dquo; or &dquo;universally



92

accepted&dquo; need redefinition as well because language can interferewith thoughts in the effort to gain essential ground.

&dquo;EUROCENTRIC&dquo;

In previous works I have used &dquo;Eurocentric&dquo; to define European-oriented Western perspective in opposition to the term &dquo;Afrocent-ric&dquo; that places Africa and African-related issues at its center. Inever intend to question validity of any Eurocentric tradition withinits own context. Rather my aim is to emphasize that, although nei-ther the Eurocentric view nor the Afrocentric view represents theoverall view of reality (because each can perceive only one part ofreality), Eurocentric aspirations often tend to be promoted as &dquo;uni-versal&dquo; and &dquo;world-defining.&dquo; Therefore, it is important to explainAfrocentricity, which does not have similar aspirations, but ratherseeks pluralism without hierarchy.

For instance, Leslie Fiedler emphasized in Love and Death inthe American Novel that romance was a central theme in literature

(Fiedler, 1966). The author might have been familiar with theclassics of American, British, and most European literature. Yet hisvision obviously excludes the rest of the world literature, particu-larly African and Asian literature, as well as Middle Eastern andTurkish literature, in which romance is generally treated as a varietyor a subtheme.

Charles Larson, who was teaching an English literature coursein Nigeria in the 1970s, had encountered the difficulty of gropingfor words to explain the work of Thomas Hardy to his Africanstudents. Larson’s students did not understand the idea of kissingin the Victorian novel. Larson concluded that kissing and descrip-tion of kissing have not found counterparts in the African novel-not by then, at least. He wrote, &dquo;Usually when we try to force theconcept of universality on someone who is not western, I think weare implying that our own culture should be standard of measure-ment&dquo; (Larson, 1973, pp. 463-467).

Fiedler’s assertion on &dquo;love story&dquo; sounds as &dquo;universal&dquo; as

another Eurocentric reasoning that is imposed on world literature.Because there are some cultural areas where the love story-in the



93

sense described in Western literature-is either nonexistent ordifferent in its own cultural context. Meanwhile, one counterargu-ment maintains that there are no major African novels where theplot progresses because of a hero’s attempt to attract a mate (Asante,1987).Ngugi Wa Thiong’o, the Kenyan novelist and playwright, in a

critical analysis of African education system reveals how Eurocen-tric objectives were operated in African schools for quite a longtime. He says:

The syllabus of the English Department meant a study of the historyof English literature from Shakespeare, Spencer, and Milton toJames Joyce and T. S. Eliot, I. A. Richards and the inevitable F. R.Leavis. Matthew Arnold’s quest for the sweetness and light of ahellenized English middle class; T. S. Eliot’s high culture of anAnglo-Catholic feudal tradition, suspiciously close to the culture ofthe &dquo;high table&dquo; and to the racial doctrines of those born to rule; theLeavisite selected &dquo;Great Tradition of English Literature&dquo; and hisinsistence on the moral significance of literature; these great threedominated our daily essays. How many seminars we spent on de-tecting this moral significance in every paragraph, in every word,even in Shakespeare’s commas and fullstops? ... In drama Aeschylus,Sophocles and Aristotle or Ibsen, Chekhov, Strindberg and Synge,though quaint and strange in their very unEnglishness ... even atits most human and universal, necessarily reflected the Europeanexperience of history.

African children who encountered literature in colonial schoolsand universities were thus experiencing the world as defined andreflected in the European experience of history. Their entire way oflooking at the world, even the world of the immediate environment,as Eurocentric. Europe was the center of the universe. The earthmoved around the European intellectual scholarly axis. (Thiong’o,1986, p. 93)

Thiong’o concluded that in post-World War II days economiccontrol of the African people in Kenya was thus effected throughpolitics and culture. In 1968 there was a big debate about the changeof syllabus in the Literature Department at the University of Nairobiwhere Thiong’o taught. Not until 1973, when the majority of thestaff members appointed were Africans was the syllabus reorga-



94

nized to reflect new perspectives in the line of Thiong’o’s view-point :

We want to establish the centrality of Africa in the department....Education is a means of knowledge about ourselves. Therefore,after we have examined ourselves, we radiate outwards and dis-cover peoples and worlds around us. With Africa at the center ofthings, not existing as an appendix or a satellite of other countriesand literatures, things must be seen from the African perspective.(Thiong’o, 1969, p. 150)

Thiong’o rejected the European education system mostly becausehe believed imposition of foreign languages on Africans further theoppression of the people because their chances for mental liberationbecome remote (Thiong’o, 1983). In fact, the same is true whenEuro-American tradition is to be evaluated in the light of African,Asian, or other critical traditions. Yet I want to emphasize in thiscontext that in shaping a meaningful analysis of African Americandrama and literature Asante’s method is derived from the AfricanAmerican context itself. Afrocentricity is a comparatively youngperspective in the arena of critical methods, yet it is a definitive andpromising one in the quest for a medium to correct misunderstand-ings and reconcile differences.

EFFECT OF VALUE JUDGMENTSON ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

OF AFRICAN AMERICAN DRAMA

To draw attention to the fundamental differences that existbetween the inherent qualities of African American dramatic tradi-tion and the dramatic tradition of the West, I assess the initial modelsin both traditions.

Aristotle (384-322 B.C.), sometimes described by Westerners as&dquo;the master of all who know&dquo; (Asante, 1987, p. 8), is known to havean enormous impact on the development of Western science andliterature, at least until the 17th century in Europe. Although littleof his work belongs to literature, the influence of the Poetics, which



95

he intended as an analysis of Greek tragedy (together with comicand epic), was long felt even after his era because his follow-ers made it &dquo;a canon of right composition with which to condemnas heretics any playwrights who violated its laws&dquo; (Warnock &

Anderson, 1950, p. 28). Aristotle viewed tragedy as an imitation ofan action that is &dquo;probable, that might happen.&dquo; Tragedy aimed, inhis assessment, to call forth the emotions of pity and fear by aspectacle that imitated tragic reality and thus purge the spectator ofhis accumulation of these upsetting emotions. This purging effectin tragedy was Aristotle’s famous doctrine of catharsis. Union ofaction (or a single plot) with its climax embedded in a &dquo;beginning,a middle, and end&dquo; unity of time and place as classical doctrineswere derived from his Poetics too. Aristotle defined the proper herofor tragedy as an essentially good man with a tragic fault that causeshis downfall.

Eventually, quite a few definitions were directly absorbed by theaesthetic realms of the following eras to set the standards towardthe development of Western tradition in drama and theater. Throughthis gradual accumulation there developed a tradition in terms ofartistic creation in drama that tends to test most creations againstAristotelian standards rather than other paradigms that were setsimultaneously. Indeed, Aristotle’s impact on Western critical per-spectives appears to be so profound that some critics still trace it inmodern drama:

His definition of the proper hero for tragedy ... is readily appliedto Shakespeare’s heroes as well as to Oedipus and is still substan-tially true of tragic characters in modern drama. Indeed, despite thedifferent theater that inspired Aristotle’s treatise, it is surprising toobserve how much of his advice is still illustrated in the drama ofour day, not through conscious imitation but merely as sound prac-tice in reaching an audience. (Warnock & Anderson, 1950, p. 286)

Aristotle’s position was revered also in the development ofphilosophy. He always occupied a privileged position as the majorphilosophical authority behind European cultural outlook from the13th century until Nietzsche at the end of the 19th century (Driver,1980). In the 19th century the impact of rising scientific knowledge,



96

industrialism, the evolution theory of Charles Darwin, and thestrong realistic quality in literature, as well as in other forms of art,left little space for &dquo;a poet to describe a thing that might happen&dquo;;instead it dictated to him to &dquo;record&dquo; (Warnock & Anderson, 1950,p. 286). Yet Aristotle’s model still found expression in many re-spects but largely in dramatic formulations. In 1922 Eugene O’Neillwas to voice his affmity with Greek masters when he outlined hissense of the tragic, objecting that:

People talk of the tragedy [in his plays] and call it &dquo;sordid,&dquo;&dquo;depressing,&dquo; &dquo;pessimistic&dquo;-the words usually applied to anythingof a tragic nature. But tragedy, I think, has the meaning the Greeksgave it. To them it brought exaltation, an urge toward life and evermore life. It raised them to deeper spiritual understandings andreleased them from the petty greed of everyday existence. Whenthey saw a tragedy on the stage they felt their own hopeless hopesennobled in art.... Any victory we may win (he insisted) is neverthe one we dreamed of winning. (Bigsby, 1982, p. 43)

O’Neill generally held the vision of Greek tradition in his mind asthe essence of creative mode and he claimed his objective as a writerwas &dquo;to see the transfiguring nobility of tragedy, in as near the Greeksense as one can grasp it, in seemingly the most ignoble, debasedlines&dquo; (Bigsby, 1982, p. 45). O’Neill was so highly convinced thattheater should be modeled after Greeks, he could assert as late asin 1925, &dquo;where the theatre is concerned, one must have a dream,and a Greek dream in tragedy is the noblest ever!&dquo; (Bigsby, 1982).

Examples provided explain there is a Greek heritage in Euro-American dramatic tradition as well. Yet what I meant in &dquo;The Crit-

ical Tradition&dquo; with &dquo;linear progression&dquo; was to refer to Aristotle’sstrict formulations on plot, character, and language as &dquo;involving asingle dimension.&dquo; For instance, he attributed primary importanceto action, that is, Plot, which he also called Fable. Aristotle con-cluded : &dquo;It is the action, that is the end and purpose of tragedy... atragedy is impossible without action; but there may be one with-out Character&dquo; (Warnock & Anderson, 1950, p. 290). Thus inAristotle’s view characters ranked only second in importance, andthe third place he gave to &dquo;Thought,&dquo; whereas Language (which he



97

called &dquo;Diction of the personages&dquo;) was only the fourth in terms ofimportance. Music, which he called &dquo;Melody&dquo; was &dquo;the greatest ofthe pleasurable accessories&dquo; and &dquo;Spectacle, the least artistic of allthe parts&dquo; ranked as the fifth and sixth dimensions in his under-standing of drama. Aristotle provided numerous definitions withinPoetics, much of which do not comply or seem probable in modemdrama or art. For example, his definition of beauty in art is quiterestricted: &dquo;To be beautiful, a living creature, and every whole madeup of parts, must not only present a certain order in its arrangementof parts, but also be of a certain definite magnitude&dquo; (Warnock &

Anderson, 1950, p. 291).On the other hand, with reference to dramatic concepts as &dquo;unity

of action,&dquo; which he insisted on-and &dquo;unity of time and place,&dquo;which were inferred on him later on-Aristotle’s position seems torepresent a limited viewpoint to the expectations of a modemaudience as it is equally the same in the hierarchical presentationof plot, character, and language. Yet it must be remembered that artcommunicates the values of its culture (Molette & Molette, 1986).In 300 B.C. the religious character of a Greek play dictated stylized,rather than realistic, production. Because violent action was not tobe shown on the stage, plays were to consist of brief plots with fewcharacters and single action. In short, the limitations and variationswere superimposed by the conventions and the value estimates ofGreek culture. As Molette and Molette (1986, p. 10) argue, &dquo;art is

limited by the values of its culture to communication modes andmessages that are acceptable to the values of that culture.&dquo;

In this context it is proper to assert that African American drama

too grows out of African American culture and its historical legacy.To project valid insights into the artistic creations of African Amer-ican culture some exposure to its aesthetic foundations seems vital.

Therefore, the following section is devoted to an analysis andinterpretation of African American sensibilities that play essentialroles (along with other elements) in the formation of African Amer-ican drama’s unique texture. Meanwhile, it is important to note thatthis aims not to draw conclusions upon the differences between

Eurocentric and Afrocentric perspectives but rather to validate thenecessity of an Afrocentric viewpoint as a critical method that re-



98

quires total immersion into the roots of African American culturalexperience.

&dquo;SOUL AND BODY,&dquo; &dquo;ART AND LIFE,&dquo;&dquo;CIRCULAR VS. LINEAR&dquo;: AFRICAN AMERICANSENSIBILITIES TOWARD AN UNDERSTANDINGOF AFRICAN AMERICAN DRAMATIC TRADITION

African Americans in the United States have always maintainedspiritual connections with Africa and Africans. African manifesta-tions are so deeply engraved into African American culture that itis of primary importance to explain the traditional African world-view before any analysis of African American cultural and literarycharacteristics.

SOUL AND BODY

The concept &dquo;soul&dquo; is fundamental to the understanding of thephenomenon of African American experience. Dona Richards hasexplained soul as &dquo;the poetic expression which in one word encap-sulates the complexity and depth of the African-American ethos&dquo;(Richards, 1985, p. 224). Leonard Barrett asserts: &dquo;Soul signifiesthe moral and emotional fiber of the Black man.&dquo; The potency ofthis quality makes it a force which, he says, demonstrates &dquo;strength,power, intense effort and will to live.&dquo; As Leonard Barrett puts it:

Soul-force is that power of the Black man which turns sorrow into

joy, crying into laughter, defeat into victory. It is patience whilesuffering, determination while frustrated and hope while in despair.It derives its impetus from the ancestral heritage of Africa, itsrefinement from the bondage of slavery, and its continuing vitalityfrom the conflict of the present. (Barrett, 1974, 224)

In the words of two African American critics, &dquo;soul-force&dquo; thenbecomes &dquo;the basic ingredient of black survival&dquo; (Barrett, 1974).On a philosophical level, soul indicates a conception of human

nature, and this understanding of soul opposes the rationalistic



99

epistemology of the Western metaphysics that maintains the es-sence of man’s being becomes &dquo;thought&dquo; in isolation from otherfunctions, sensations, and responses. Indeed, rationalization, objec-tification, and the conception of nature as a mechanism, every partof which follows exact and logical formulas, endured in Westernintellectual tradition for quite a long time. Descartes (1596-1650),who included one of the most famous statements into philoso-phy by &dquo;cogito, ergo sum&dquo; (&dquo;I think, therefore I am&dquo;), explains thatman is distinguished from other animals by possessing an immortalsoul. Descartes also claims that soul or mind exists only for (thatis, is only perceived by) the understanding. He refers to heart as a&dquo;warm organ,&dquo; and explains how, from this warm organ, all themotions and passions of the body can be explained by mechanics(Bronowski & Mazliah, 1960, p. 228). Descartes established asharp dualism between mind and matter; he rejected man’s passionsas irritational intrusions, and distrusted the imagination as a sourceof delusions.

Descartes’ scientific worldview, and his introduction of rational-ism-of logically deriving effects from causes-into philosophy,does not wholly explain African intellectual and aesthetic traditionthat highly values human response, emotional involvement, andidentification in human beings’ relationship to the universe. In thiscontext, Richards (1985) insists, &dquo;it is precisely that quality ofhuman response to which the concept ’soul’ refers.&dquo; Moreover, itis that ability of the human being to feel, which is, in terms of theAfrican worldview, essentially human. Yet Richards remarks that&dquo;this ability to ’feel’ is not set in contradistinction to thought; ratherthe two~hought and feeling-are understood to be inextricableand to be necessary for an accurate perception of reality&dquo; (Richards,1985, p. 225).

In fact, in the African view, soul represents the essence of a hu-man being; it is this aspect that is perceived as determining qualityin African drama and literature, art and aesthetics, and music anddance that also expresses the individual’s harmonious existencewith her or his immediate environment and from there to a largecircle, that is, the universe. For the African &dquo;universe&dquo; is conceivedas a unified spiritual totality and African critics refer to it as



100

cosmos-meaning that all being is organically interrelated andinterdependent. As Richards puts it:

The essence of the African cosmos is spiritual reality; that is itsfundamental nature, its primary essence. But realities are not con-ceived as being in irreconcilable opposition, as they are in the West,and spirit is not separate from matter. Both spiritual and materialbeing are necessary in order for there to be a meaningful reality.While spiritual being gives force and energy to matter, materialbeing gives form to spirit. Enlightenment and the acquisition ofwisdom and knowledge depends to a significant degree on beingable to apprehend spirit in matter. This crucial difference in Euro-pean and African thought helps to explain the specialness of AfricanAmerican spirituality. (Richards, 1985, p. 210).

After briefly summarizing how &dquo;soul and body&dquo; or &dquo;spirit andmatter&dquo; are entwined as a harmonious unit in African American

culture, it is proper to set about for an explanation of the idea of artand creative process in African American culture.

ART AND LIFE

Harmony, the determining mode of African worldview, findsexpression in almost all aspects of African American experience.Art and creative process, too, is harmonized through interaction ofform and content in African American perspective. Asante, who isprimarily a theoretician on communication, approaches creativityfrom the viewpoint of communication and expresses the unifica-tion of form and content as follows: &dquo;Since form and content are

activity, force unifies what is called form and content in creativeexpression ... the creative production is ’an experience.’

&dquo; Asantecontends:

The creative production is &dquo;an experience&dquo; or a happening occur-ring within and outside the speaker’s soul. Thus, unlike the Euro-American, the African seeks the totality of an experience, conceptor system. Traditional African society looked for unity of the wholerather than specifics of the whole; such a concentration, which alsoemphasized synthesis more than analysis, contributed to commu-



101

nity stability because considerations in the whole were more pro-ductive than consideration in detail. (Asante, 1987, p. 79)

The unifying power and sanctity of creative process, and trans-ferring the work that is created to the community whether in art,rhetoric, literature, drama, or music is fundamental to African expe-rience and cultural aesthetics so much that many creators have lefttheir works unsigned, because they believe the creation is alreadyadorned with a sign. As Kariamu Welsh-Asante put it:

The mark of the artist is in her/his creativity, not in time, nor inher/his person.... The signature of the African artist is inherent inthe creation and the spiritual or divine creator deserves and is givencredit. It is understood that the artist is a conduit and therefore not

responsible for the greatness of the work. This does not mean thatthe artist is irresponsible, in fact, the responsibility is awesome.Acceptance of the responsibility as a conduit is where the appreci-ation is acknowledged and the completion of the task is when theapplause is given (1985, pp. 73-74).

The creative process itself is thus attributed the highest credentialsin African art, and its emphasis on audience participation in termsof transferring a message or appreciation of a piece of sculpture orparticipation in a group dancing highlights another quality of Afri-can art, that is, African art tends to be functional, not l’art pour l’art.The section below analyzes &dquo;functionality&dquo; in terms of the inherentrelationships between the work, the creator, and cosmology.

The reason it is functional, as explained by Robert PlantArmstrong, is that the work is &dquo;constituted in a primordial and in-transigent fashion, of basic cultural psychic conditions-not sym-bols of those conditions but specific enactments, but presentationsof those very conditions&dquo; (Armstrong, 1975, p. 24). African human-ism, which renounces art for art’s sake, proclaims the sanctity ofart for life’s sake. On the other hand, African American humanismexpresses itself as a concept of the universe in which spiritualrealities can be perceived and as a belief in spiritual forces thatinterrelate all beings and affect people in their daily lives (Richards,1985). In this context, functionality refers to the object (sculpture,



102

music, drama, poem, dance, speech) that possesses a meaningwithin the communicator’s and audience’s worldview. Asante con-tends this meaning is constructed from the social, political, andreligious moments in the society’s history (Asante, 1987).

As stated above, art in African American aesthetics is conceivedas a function; its realization depends on the collective drive of apeople for harmony within the self, among fellow human beings,and with nature. Whereas the modem world captured the conceptof &dquo;beat&dquo; from African rhythms that entered the vocabulary ofpopular dance and music, it was-and still is-originally practicedas in &dquo;beat on a drum&dquo; and &dquo;dance to lift the spirit,&dquo; serving tospecific ends in African tradition. African American experience too,as to the continuation of African tradition in the diaspora, dwellson the same phenomenon. In sum, in African American tradition itis conceived as a basic premise that harmony lies in unity of art andlife through oneness of soul and body. Harmony that radiates fromthe self reaches to the community and thus transcendence intowholeness occurs in terms of African American existence.

The concept of unity and completeness is also implied by AfricanAmerican aestheticians in the recurrence of circles or circular formsas opposed to linear forms in art. The final section of this essay isdevoted to an analysis of circular versus linear as an attribute ofAfrican American sensibility.

CIRCULAR VS. LINEAR

One of the basic arguments in Afrocentric criticism rests on the

prevalence of circular rather than linear qualities in terms of form,shape, and structure in African art. This premise is significant interms of evaluating and interpreting certain axioms that are repre-sentative of the underlying characteristics of African Americanaesthetics.

Two early proponents of this premise in African Americanaesthetics are Welsh-Asante (1985) and Richards (1985). Welsh-Asante points out that in most African dances there emerges acurvilinear quality that appears as the antithesis of Western dance,which has heavy reliance on symmetrical, proportional, and profile-



103

oriented form (Welsh-Asante, 1985). She contends that the circularquality of the African artists’ world is apparent through the symbolsas it is in the daily language that is being used:

&dquo;Let the circle be unbroken&dquo; or &dquo;let us complete the circle&dquo; is a creedin the African world. There is &dquo;power&dquo; in the circle, the curve, theround, supernatural power if you will.... Curvilinear qualities ofdance, art and music round, curve and carve out images that aresimilar and resemble aspects of African society and mythology, ifonly in essence. (Welsh-Asante, 1985, p. 76)

Welsh-Asante develops her argument on the circular quality withseveral examples from African sculpture and painting, as well.However, it is basically in African dance that she captures the es-sence of circular characteristics:

The Watusi (a group of African people) in their long sculpturedmovements carve out half-moons in space and toss their elegantheads, making small circles in the sky. For the dancer, it may bemostly hand movement as in the &dquo;Adowa&dquo; (an African ritual dance),or it may be the &dquo;Gum-boot&dquo; dance of the Zulu (an African ethnicgroup) in which the foot stamping focuses the eyes on the energiesand messages being sent through the ground and up again as thecontact sends sound and dust back to the dancer. The structure is

always related to experience, message, theme and feeling. (Welsh-Asante, 1985, p. 76)

As mentioned above circles or curved lines that occur frequentlyin African art in various forms reveal yet another sensibility inAfrican philosophy, that is, the underlying value attributed to theidea of unity, whole, and wholeness. This idea can be illustratedwith a brief reference to African theology. In African belief systems&dquo;spiritual realities are timeless; they are not limited by categoriesof time and space&dquo; (Richards, 1985). The dead ones are not separatefrom the living; the babies represent the timeless regeneration ofman. Spirit and matter are strongly entwined and their relationshipcompletes the circle; the unity is thus achieved. For example, in aritualistic ceremony portions of food are set out for people who arenot there. A carver who cuts a branch makes a sacrifice to the spirit



104

of the tree from which he cuts. The interrelationship and interde-pendence of spirit and matter manifests itself in the effort to give,to honor, and to rebuild for &dquo;there is one spiritual unity which joinsus all,&dquo; asserts Richards:

Through its association with spirit, matter becomes ontologicallyrelated to the eternal. Sacred time is not perceived linearly, butcyclically, and so categories and perceptions of the past, present,and future are eliminated.... What is called past, present and futurein lineal terms, are not separated but are joined together in aphenomenal and spatial unity. (Richards, 1985, p. 212).

Dominance of circle and circular forms is observed in differentvariations within African art. Yet the scope of this essay is limitedto a more general outlook that imposes certain restrictions. How-ever, as opposed to frequent allusions to curved forms in Africanart, there seems to exist little trust for linear forms or the straightline on which Descartes developed his theory on geometrical forms.Descartes thought there was great &dquo;power&dquo; in a single line, thereforehe said a straight line is an equation of the first degree, whereas aconic section is an equation of the second degree (Bronowski &

Mazliah, 1960).Although Descartes’ theories do not explain the later develop-

ments in Western scientific thought, they point at the preponderanceof &dquo;line&dquo; as a symbol for a specific time period in Western intellec-tual tradition. This may provide, in part, the explanation for a con-temporary view that argues that there are afro-circular and euro-linear values at work in social relations between Blacks and Whitesin America (Burgest, 1982). The exponent of this view, David R.Burgest, has asserted that these two views manifest two differentperspectives, a non-Western and a Western perspective, which areinfluential in one’s interaction with his or her community and theuniverse. Asante, on the other hand, in his work which develops theAfrocentric idea, takes Burgest’s view a step further and claims that&dquo;a euro-linear view seeks to predict and to control; an afro-circularview seeks to interpret and understand&dquo; (Asante, 1987, p. 18).

Asante’s view is too broad a generalization to interpret the wholenature of human conduct. Yet it appears to respond efficiently to a



105

basic claim in the organics of African American drama, that is, it ishumanistic and community oriented. Therefore, it becomes possi-ble to formulate the essence of African American drama in a tri-

angular structure. In this formula there emerges an African perspec-tive on which both Asante and Burgest profess views. The soulrepresents the spiritual and emotional aspects of the person. Thebody represents the flesh, the material form of the person. The selfis the combination of these aspects that is ultimately presented tothe community as a unified self. Asante argues that this triangularform represents something more concretely African on the pathwayto evaluate African American drama, rather than a linear form

shaped, for instance, in the image of a box (M. K. Asante, personalcommunication, 1989). Although the triangle is linear, Asanteclaims that its pyramidal form is a more authentic representation ofthe African response, that is, from the base of the soul and body tothe self and correspondingly to the community.

It is not a mere coincidence that the self and community inter-action holds a distinct position within the aesthetic framework ofAfrican American drama. Molette and Molette’s (1986) argumenton functions of African American drama validates this basic

scheme. According to Molette and Molette (1986), whose workBlack Theatre: Premise and Presentation lay the groundwork foran Afrocentric approach, African American drama presents threeobjectives: a sense of community, a useful purpose, and spiritualinvolvement. All these factors serve as vital exponents when the

play is conceived as the glorification of the sense of unity, whole-ness, and completeness. For instance, applause, physical contact,the affirmation of togetherness through the use of verbal responsesbetween actors and audience, and active participation (which is a



106

typical African American response) serve to heighten the sense ofcommunity in a certain presentation. Second, useful purpose isachieved when actors and audience join together for the perfor-mance. The self reaches to the community to revere, to criticize,and to create a future effect in celebration of being together as acommunal act. Eventually, spiritual involvement, sometimes re-ferred to as emotional involvement, represents the gist of AfricanAmerican drama.

Soul on the other hand is a highly valued concept in AfricanAmerican culture. &dquo;Soulful behavior&dquo; is emotionally or spirituallymotivated rather than rationally or objectively. Therefore, it is the&dquo;event,&dquo; the total impact of the presentation rather than its compo-nents of plot, character, theme, or language, that requires emphasis.Whereas Aristotle pointed at the linear development of drama interms of structure, in African American drama aesthetic prioritiesplace a higher value on texture in forms of dialogue, music, andspectacle (Molette & Molette, 1986). The overall effect of the pre-sentation is always of primary importance, therefore, the compo-nents are considered to be of secondary importance.On the other hand, Molette and Molette (1986) argue, structure

in Eurocentric drama is often analyzed from the script rather thanfrom the presentation. For instance, it is pointed out that in thistradition the term &dquo;dialogue&dquo; is often used in script analysis todescribe the cognitive meaning conveyed by the written word. Yetas discussed earlier, in African traditional drama and in AfricanAmerican drama too, it is not so much what words are chosen as

the manner in which those words are presented. The questionimplied is how well the presentation is made rather than the theme,the plot, and the character.

This essay has attempted to reveal that the fundamental princi-ple in understanding African American drama rests on viewing itas a means of total creation that derives its power from the inter-

action of a human being with the self, the community, and thecosmos. Thus it is proper to state that Eurocentric negations thatintend to include African American drama within the scope of

Euro-American dramatic tradition are doomed to finalize either in



107

limited or biased conclusions. Instead, to maintain a comprehensiveview of African American drama, it should be perceived as a distinctentity that comes from its own cultural milieu and is not simply asubset of American drama. Only then one can talk about the AfricanAmerican drama from a holistic standpoint attributing all the rightsthat it rightfully deserves.

REFERENCES

Armstrong, R. P. (1975). Wellspring: On the myth and source of culture. Berkeley: Universityof California Press.

Asante, M. K. (1987). The Afrocentric idea. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Asante, M. K. (1988). Afrocentricity. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.Asante, M. K. (1990). Kemet, Afrocentricity and knowledge. Trenton, NJ: Africa World

Press.

Asante, M. K. (1990). Afrocentricy and the critique of drama. The Western Journal of BlackStudies, 14(2), 136-141.

Asante, M. K., & Welsh-Asante, K. (Eds.). (1985). African culture: The rhythms of unity.Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Barrett, L. (1974). Soul-force: African heritage. In M. K. Asante & K. Welsh-Asante (Eds.),African culture: The rhythms of unity. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Bigsby, C. W. E. (1982). A critical introduction to twentieth century American drama, 1.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brownowski, J., & Mazliah, B. (1960). The Western intellectual tradition. New York: Har-

per & Row.

Burgest, D. R. (1982). Social work practices of minorities. Metuchen, New Jersey: Scarecrow.Driver, T. F. (1980). Romantic quest and modern query: A history of the modern theatre.

New York: Delacome.

Fiedler, L. (1966). Love and death in the American novel. Chelsea, MI: Scarborough.Langer, S. (1953). Feeling and form. New York: Scribner.Larson, C. R. (1973). Heroic ethnocentricism: The idea of universality in literature. Ameri-

can Scholar, 42, 463-467.Molette, C. W., & Molette, B. J. (1986). Black theatre: Premise and presentation. Bristol,

IN: Wyndham Hall.Richards, D. (1985) The implications of African American spiritual. In M. K. Asante &

K. Welsh-Asante (Eds.), African culture: The rhythms of unity (pp. 207-233). Westport,CT: Greenwood.

Thiong’o Wa, N. (1969). Homecoming. London: n/p.Thiong’o Wa, N. (1986). Decolonizing the mind: The politics of language in African liter-

ature. London: James Curry Ltd.Warnock, R., & Anderson, G. K. (1950). The world in literature. New York: Scott, Foresman.



108

Welsh-Asante, K. (1985). Commonalities in African dance: An aesthetic foundation. InM. K. Asante & K. Welsh-Asante (Eds.), African culture: The rhythms of unity. Westport,CT: Greenwood.

Nilgun Anadolu Okur is Associate Professor in the Department of African AmericanStudies at Temple University. Previously, she taught at Ege University in Izmir,Turkey.



Afrocentric Approaches to African American Drama

Documents

Transcript of Afrocentric Approaches to African American Drama