REVOLUTIONARY VISION IN OSOFIAN’S PLAYS



            The plays of Osofisan focus on the political social and economic forces which determine the individuals life. Like all class societies, the conflict as his plays depict is the conflict of human dignity and power. Man in this view is a victim of history within the framework of the social –political structure which oppresses him.  His view of this system is that freedom is possible but by collective strength and consciousness. It is the philosophy that that men critics argue firms his modernist radical ideology. For example, Olu Obfemi in his work posits that Osofisan “advocates
a socialist ethical perspective for his society” (121). In his view Osofisan believes that by creating political consciousness through mass mobilization revolution will follow. Muhammad Bhadmus in his view argues that Osofisan employs the popular theatre as a reaclion  against the traditional or liberal humanist drama in which the gods determine the fate of the heroes as depicted in such characters as sophocles’ Oedipus and soyinka’s Elesin Oba. He therefore categorized Osofisan as a modernist radical dramatist who argue for an alternative drama. In his view, Osofisan theatre, in its use of the human medium as characterization, “presupposes the individual as the centerpiece of perception and world view” (62).
            In response to the above critical assertions, Osofisan in his works shows that the search for an alternative revolutionary motif marks his departure from mimesis and the beginning of his maturation as a modernist radical dramatist. However, his works that are politically engaging and combative could teach resistance and compassion. These ideas of course are features that characterize radical dramatists. Therefore, his works involve the audience raising in their minds questions that their answerer surely will result in positive change in the society. His viewpoint. In the chattering and the song as well as Esu and the vagabond minslvels, Osofisan successfully combines history and myth to achieve a revolutionary change. He thereby illustrates Obafemi’s assertion,
            “Osofisan appropriates the historical past for his social vision” (1982”122) His use of history and myth becomes more constructive, objective and believable as he carefully demonstrates in the two plays under study.
            The plays of Osofisan are devoted to the development of a common theme. The recurrent theme expressed in Osofisan’s theatre concerns itself with the restructuring of the socio-political society to ensure equal opportunities for all. Hence, his theatre devotes its theme to the problem of the masses and proffer solutions. In this regard, he examines the causes of societal malaise, rouses his audience into critical awareness of the prevailing social decadence and move them into taking appropriate action. This concretization of Osofisan’s spectator according to Gbuleka (76) is done at the expense of entertainment. Like Brecht, Osofisan’s theatre is eminently practices. He can also be described as an efficient manipulator of his audience towards a creation of a democratic social order. This is the highlight of the chattering and they song. This ideology of Osofisan is the most distinguishing characteristics of the modernist radical drama. Obafemi recognizing this view noted:

… man’s problems originate from man and not from
the metaphysical realm or from gods. Only man, then can,
by himself find solutions to his problems… (1988:57)
The above assertion accounts for the instances in his plays which prompt the people to take up arms to undertake a complete overhaul of the political and economic structure that oppresses them. Thus, his plays are a careful re-awakening of the ignorant masses to the socio-economic realities of their time. 3:1
            The plot of the chattering and the song according to Gbilekka is ‘elliptic’. However, the play-within- a play brings out the central dramatic scene of the play. The images, song dance and dialogue reveal the background of the play. It is a recreation of the history of Oyo empire where-the rebellious Bastonen Gaha who overthrew their Alafin and sets up a reign of terror, killing all the princes of Oyo except Abiodun who grew up to challenge and overthrew this despot. The foreground action of the play is the love-hate in angle between Soutri, Yajin and Mokan. Yajin was mokan’s fiancĂ©e but she fell in love with Soutri whom she finds restless and radical than Mokan. Mokan becomes jealous of this new relationship and decides to join the secret service so as to avenge his course. 
            Meanwhile Sortri becomes observed with the autocratic government and thinks of a possible solution to this menace. He joins politics and is drafted into the ‘farmers’ movement’ and becomes their song maker. On the other hand Mokan refuses to be part of the movement but plans organist the movement, to achieve this, he pretends to be friendly until the occasion of the eve of their matrimony provided itself. In the play-within-a play, Mokan plays the palace guard so as to feather his goal of distorting the activities of the ’Farmers’ movement’, heje, the leader of the movement plays laloyei the sebel. However, Mokan who is unaware of the activities of leje arrests Soutri and Yajin for subversive activities on the eve of their wedding. The play ends on the optimistic note that the revolution will surely be a success despite the arrest. Soutri tells.
Mokan:          There’s nothing you can do to stop the birds from singing. Mokan, the revolution is already on wing, you cannot halt it! (47) .
In this regard, the playwright believes that the play aloes not end because the revolution is gust beginning. The play therefore is a rehearsal for the revolution.
            In the prologue, the need for change is emphasized by the paratactic and cannibalistic images that expose how the powerful oppress on the poor masses. The fish falls prey to the frog as the hen falls to the hawks. Similarly too the stag devours the doe. These images are a metaphor for the oppressors and further suggestion of an unjust society. Leje the protagonist who further play as latoye in the play-within-the play highlights the sufferings of the poor to the guards when he is arraigned before Abiodun, the Alafin. He tells Abiodun thus :”When you put a man in chains,… you free his tongue! (30) . in view of this proverb, Leje (Latoye) makes his speech which proves to be the only thing the oppressed guards played the musicians who represent the parasites needed to start off the revolution. When he is threatened with death he reminds the Alafin thus:
Yes, you will kill me. But your hands cannot reach the seeds
I have already sown, and they are on  fertile soil. Soon, sooner
than you think, they will alone will burst into flower and their
scent alone will choice you. (37) 

Leje goes further to create awareness by his speech for freedom.
… Sewers, listen to me! I am going to release you, but only
after you release your minds. No one can do that for you
but yourselves. Think! Think! With me! For it is that alone that
will free you of your shades. Look around you. Look into your
past, look into your future. What do you see?. Always the same
unending tale of oppression of poverty, hungeri squalor and
disease! Why? Ah, you and your people you are the soil on
which the Alafin’s tree is nourished, tended until it is overlade with
fruit! And yet, when you stretch out your hands, there are no fruits
for you! Why? Only your limbs are gaunt with work and want,
only your faces are wrinkled and hollow with sweating and not
getting! Alatin and his men are fed and flourishing, but they
continue to steal your kinds. They are rich, their salaries swell
from the burden of your taxes! Their stores are bursting, your
children beg on the streets. I am begging you, please fly out
of your narrow nests. Come follow me, raise a song to freedom! Now!

This speech no doubt appealed to their senses and rush towards Alafin and his wife. Their immediation response shows that political awareness is just what is needed to bring out a democratic order in the society. Leje the leader of the ‘Farmers’ movement’ also makes them realize that collective action is what is required to attain to a desired change. Leje in a discussion which  is at once a courting exercise as well as the political indoctrination of funlola, the artist of the irong tower, explains the futility of the search by the police for revolutionary heroes- Leje, s\Soutri and Yajin, whom they could silence:
Funlola:         You are the one wanted by the police?
Leje:               The police are ignorant. What is a single man in a revolution, it will run its course, with or without those who served to spark it off. History will remember us.
Funlola:         So why do you want me?
Leje:               The movement needs all capable people. The whole world, you see, is a farm. And all hand must toil born to cultivate it and to eat out of its fruit (53).
Leje thus posits that revolution is according to Herber Marcuse a seminal, biological necessity. Hence, once it is started must run its course.
Share on Google Plus

Declaimer - MARTINS LIBRARY

The publications and/or documents on this website are provided for general information purposes only. Your use of any of these sample documents is subjected to your own decision NB: Join our Social Media Network on Google Plus | Facebook | Twitter | Linkedin

READ RECENT UPDATES HERE