Chinua Achebe

What is Veeky Forumss problem with 'Things fall apart'?

I just finished it and I can't understand the hate the book gets.

>African civilization shown to be completely backwards and fucked up
>missionaries' fault for trying to change things

Not trying to start /pol/ shit I genuinely can't understand how this is supposed to be anti colonial. The main character is an asshole and it's not tragic at all how he dies.

"An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad's Heart of Darkness" by Achebe is literally the stupidest thing I have ever read

he argues Conrad was racist for not portraying Africans as main characters or speaking in Conrad's work, despite the fact than Conrad deliberately portrayed them as such in order to show the extent of their dehumanization
he's so fucking stupid he can't tell the difference between an author's opinions and the opinions of his characters

I never got the feeling the author blamed the missionaries. I saw it more as just an unsentimental 'recollection' of what happened, not trying to justify anything or put the blame on anyone. I think that's one of the major reasons why I found the book enjoyable.

How is that relevant to my question? Have you read 'Things fall apart'? If you have and didn't like it, why?

You are meant to sympathize with somebody who lived in the world according to the only way they knew how, a completely restrictive one based on his performance as a man, in a culture which was supplanted by a new Christian way of things that were impossible for him to adapt to. Okonkwo struggled so much to live in the world as the man his father expected him to be, and then everything went an changed, and he was the only one who couldn't seem to deal. It's very sad.

>how is that relevant to my question
well you see sweetheart, "An Image of Africa" was written by CHINUA ACHEBE, the author of "Things Fall Apart"?
maybe if you weren't a complete fucking moron you would have noticed that

his point was that he wants to talk about things fall apart, not some essay he wrote. stop sperging out.

>his point was that he wants to talk about something else
he should be grateful I even responded to his thread about a nigger

>shown to be completely backwards and fucked up

on what grounds? they lived in a patriarchal civilization that prided masculinity for the most part, but Okonkwo, out of spite for his father was simply hypermasculine and took it too far. He is not a reflection of the culture of his people, part of the point in fact is that HE fucked things up. Where did you get this "completely backwards and fucked up" notion from?

>missionaries fault for trying to change things

Really? Do you genuinely consider colonization as "trying to change things" or is this bait? Yes a good amount of the natives took kindly to the missionaries and realistically it'll always be that way with these sorts of things. But that does not mean that the missionaries were genuinely considerate of what would benefit these people. They gauged these benefits from their own perspective and assumed that it would make them happier. Arguing that the missionaries were "just trying to change things"(for the better as you imply) leads to an argument like "black people enjoyed being slaves what are you talking about!" in its shamelessly self-centered view of what people enjoy and benefits them.

Yes the main character is an asshole but understandably so. His father was a beta in a patriarchal society. Not to mention Okonkwo never any sort of counseling or medicine to help with his anger issues. He's an asshole but he's just a fucked up human being. His people were perfectly fine before the missionaries came. Please site any examples where you can prove that they are "backwards and fucked up".

I've read Heart of Darkness and disagree with Achebe's views on it, but I still found 'Things fall apart' a good book. And I'm curious as to why people on Veeky Forums seemingly keep bashing it?

>nigger
I guess that answers my question.

Raises many others, though.

>raises other questions
like what

We unfortunately share the board with uninformed racialists who, having not read any books from Africa, assume all African books are bad.

That said the only transcendent part of TFA is the last chapter.

The need for racialist posturing on a Taiwanese Cartography Forum when there is another board built specifically for that.

What happened? Did a black man spook you when you were a child? Where did things go sideways?

Those sorts of questions I guess.

>saying nigger is racist
My black friends say it's ok.

Sorry I should've emphasized that they lived in a patriarch civilization NOT UNLIKE THAT OF EUROPEAN COUNTRIES. When Okonkwo is violent he is chastised for it several times. Clearly his people do not condone the destructive aspects of his character. So why should this entire community be considered savage because of the actions of one man which they condemn?

>That said the only transcendent part of TFA is the last chapter.

I don't agree. I actually found the last chapter the most boring. Or maybe I didn't want it to end. I don't know. But I did enjoy the entire build-up.

what does "racialism" mean

The missionaries weren't portrayed as evil that was the character's opinion. The novel showed how flawed the African culture was on purpose to show it wasn't simply black and white.

are the "sequels" worth reading?

I've always been very insecure about my homosexuality and take out my anger on minorities

Racialism is the belief in scientific justification of racism (or race in general I believe)

I.E: IQ is tied to race and black people have the lowest IQ therefore we should debase and degrade them in society.

Well I can't argue with those fine numbers.

I guess I'll have to take your word for it, hands being tied and all.

nignognignog

I disagree. I believe the missionaries weren't portrayed as OVERTLY evil because that is the nature of colonization/missionaries. They genuinely believed they were doing something good for these people. They didn't necessarily mean much harm in their actions. And I took that to show their own delusion. Okonkwo's people were clearly doing fine before the missionaries came. Yes they had their mishaps but so does literally every civilization. Nothing that was brought to them by the missionaries was of necessity to their prosperity as a people. They were portrayed as nice guys because that's how this shit worked. If they came in screaming and yelling then no one would've joined them. They come in talking about the love of God and all this sweet shit of course they'll get people on their team. But does that mean that they did not have insidious intentions (or rather intentions that were not congenial to Okonkwo's people) in their heart, no.

It is very Western to believe that countries void of European influence are in need of it. The reality is, that the world does not wish to revolve around the white man. It is the white man that wishes this and attempts to make it so. Under the guise that he is doing the world a "favor".

That makes sense. I wasn't thinking about it from the perspective of the African author, but instead mine.

>murders baby twins to get rid of bad spirits
>murders his adopted son who calls him Father
>both of these things are endorsed by the society he lives in
>gets buttmad when his son rejects it all and becomes a dirty Christian
>commits suicide
Damn Europeans, why couldn't they just understand the beauty of Igbo Culture?

>implying equally barbaric atrocities had not been committed by European countries prior to their arrival in Africa

You're missing the point user. It's not that these people were perfect it's that the Europeans were no better than them, they simply had different methods and systems but ultimately had the same capacity for savagery. This being said, on what grounds can we argue that the white version of being a piece of shit is better than the black? I truly do not understand.

>Europeans have a history of genocide far more expansive than Africans
>The Africans are the only people on earth who are capable of atrocious actions.

Uhh

I get it. You're racist, but you can't just pretend like the book was glorifying Igbo culture because that just isn't true. It doesn't paint them as a pure culture of heroes devoid of flaws why the fuck do you think it shows the murder of the twins you fucking retard?

>they simply had different methods and systems but ultimately had the same capacity for savagery.

That's not true though, Europeans gradually became more humane and civilized. There's a reason the Geneva Convention was signed in Geneva and not Bongo Bongo land.

>author is black
dropped

>black people have the lowest IQ therefore we should debase and degrade them
why shouldn't this be the case?

Because IQ's shift over time, and I don't want to live in a society where a man's worth is determined by his IQ. History is full of disgusting things having been done by brilliant minds.

The abbreviation you're looking for is "e.g." not "i.e."

A different user here, both are used.

It's a shame you wanted to act like a pseud then get fucked. Fat retard.

They don't mean the same thing and they're not interchangeable.

Yeah and I.E. is the proper one in this situation. Retard.

>IQ is tied to race and black people have the lowest IQ therefore we should debase and degrade them in society.

This is not the only form of racialism. This is an example of racialism. I'm sorry friend but you're a bit out of your depth here.

"In example" is what was meant, but you are right.

Ironically enough your example proves my point. A treatie signed immediately after what is considered one of the greatest examples of inhumanity in all history: World War II. And who were the catalyst? Europeans.

Look, I'm not trying to convince you that black people are perfect angels. But to imply that white people have some higher moral capacity when history constantly shows otherwise is absurd.

In the 1920s black Wall Street was bombed and burned to the ground purely because black people were funding their own businesses and not relying on the white man for their prosperity. Is this also a testament to the white man's civility? Never mind the several hundred years of slavery that bore decades of conditioned racism and animosity towards our own countrymen. There are countless instances to be find in the history of Europeans/White Americans to testify to their barbarity. And this is not a case that I use to debase them as people. It is pretty simple to understand that if man simply knew better and understood the truth about how connected we all truly are, they would not do such horrible things. I simply believe we ought to at least be real with each other. White people do fucked up shit. Black people do fucked up shit. Everyone does. And all we can really do is love each other in the end.

> Western to believe that countries void of European influence are in need of it. The reality is, that the world does not wish to revolve around the white man
If that wasn't the case then they wouldn't be trying to flood into Europe right now

What are other examples? It was my mistake for trying to define something I only have cursory knowledge (read some stuff online) of. Sorry.

We felt a profound sense of collective remorse and punished the Germans harshly. They are still paying reparations to this day. I'd love to see an example of something similar happening in a non-white society. The Turks and Japanese are completely unrepentant about their wartime atrocities.

That is not a desire for European influence it's a desire for refuge from their own terrible situations. They don't care that they're European they just care that they'd (presumably) be safer.

And I'm no history major but I think it's fair to assume that there is a rationale to what lead these countries to treat each other so awfully. Why judge them for it anyway? Compassion would lead to more understanding.

But try to think about it this way. White people in America believed integration would benefit black people because they felt that black people felt left out of white spaces.

Yet reading essays and quotes of black people at the time, it is clear that black people did not have any desire (apart from what was conditioned in them) to be white. But simply wanted the same securities and resources they had.

It's not about wanting to be white it's simply wanting to be safe and free.

Blacks do have a history of genocide even in spite of the fact that their written history consists only of limited European accounts and barely known records.

The racial classification of Europeans.

First off, I think african culture and traditions are fine as long as they stay in fucking Africa. That said, this is what I got from the book:

Achebe tells a nostalgic story of his country's past-into-present. The missionaries are not written to be uniformly and indiscriminately evil. I remember he separates quite clearly the first, smart, compromising, humble and non-violent missionary from the arrogant and almost dictatorial second preacher. There is a general undertone of mistrust and dislike for the white people who bring change, not because it's inherently good or bad change, simply because change is not wanted(at least by the author). You can tell by the fact that none of the characters portrayed as wise and intelligent are fond of the change, though most of them "accept" it.
Besides, although I never agreed with the points of view of the african characters 99% of the time, I understood their thinking and the reasoning behind their actions. That's the mark of a good writer.
I personally found it enjoyable and quite well written.

this all the more reason to like the book. The author manages to write a solid, insightful book BECAUSE he is capable of detaching himself from his ideas, which i personally find repulsive and plain wrong. A good writer isn't necessarily a good thinker.

The reason white countries are safe and free is because of our culture and institutions.

Their own terrible situation that come from the conditions created by non European people. Those resources and security are the end result of behaving like Europeans. Igbos could not act like Igbos in 1800 and expect to have the comforts of European life.

I think it's more likely because your people weren't colonised and denigrated until their capacity for barbarity was heightened. I dont think judgement is ever fair. But it is especially not fair towards countries who's history involves being balefully infringed upon by others. We do not know how they would've turned out had they not gotten fucked in the ass by so many countries over time. But I say this purely in regards to modern day Africa.

My issue with a lot of Veeky Forums culture is this sort of judgement that ends at "they did something bad so they're bad" rather than asking what lead to these bad things happening and how we can learn to be more compassionate as a means to help us be more understanding and close to others.

The Igbo people were not particularly barbaric. They were shown to do some awful things in that story but nothing worse than Europeans had done as well. And as I've said before: we literally cannot know how these countries would've turned out on their own because they got fucked in the ass by Europe.

And this isn't to say that all of the black man's animosity comes from the whites. But that it was certainly accentuated by their involvement and met with an agenda to suggest it's JUST the black folk fucking up on their own accord.

I don't know who's baiting who at this point.

whom*

>My issue with a lot of Veeky Forums culture is this sort of judgement that ends at "they did something bad so they're bad" rather than asking what lead to these bad things happening and how we can learn to be more compassionate as a means to help us be more understanding and close to others.

That's an interesting statement, I wonder if you would be that even-handed with Nazi war criminals.

Whom'st

Of course man. Listen, I'm just gonna outright say I'm a spiritual person and I love God. And I genuinely believe that people only do awful things because they forget that we all are One and a part of Him. Humans love each other. We really do, inherently, we all have the same capacity for love (with the exception of the mentally ill) and we just forget it a lot. We forget so much and it leads us to commit these horrible acts. But why should we judge one another for falling off the righteous path in this world of illusions that makes it so easy? We have so much to learn from being compassionate I truly do believe this.

I think I'm gonna puke.

Are there actually morons here bitching about how it 'glorifies' Igbo culture? The whole first three quarters of the book is about how it made Okonkwo into a monster. It was harsh to the Christians for colonizing and being insensitive and pompous but you're literally just looking for shit to get mad about if you think the point of the book was 'everything was perfect til white people'. It's just an interesting, sad story that takes place in an interesting setting. There's some lessons and messages in it but it's hardly about how indigenous African culture was so much better than European culture.

Yeah yeah sincerity and love is gross and cringy whatever man. You'll figure a lot of shit out as you go on and you'll see exactly what i'm talking about. That'll be cool when that happens.

This

>I simply believe we ought to at least be real with each other.
>And all we can really do is love each other in the end.
My man.

I liked it a lot. But I think the obvious reason is because Veeky Forums hates black people

>it's not tragic at all how he dies.
literally autism
you must be totally devoid of empathy or understanding if you don't find a universal tragedy to his suicide

>black friend
I garauntee you he looks like this