Quote(s) from GOD’s BITs of WOOD
By:Ousmane Sembene
Thies The Apprentices
“They even pushed their luck so far as to attack the police station. Some of the older people did not approve of this latest manifestation of the ‘crew’s’ activities, and there were even parents who forbade their sons to go out on the expeditions, with the result that General Magette’s army was reduced to seven soldiers. Others, however, could no help thinking that every window that broke, every light that went out, helped to establish a kind of balance: They were no longer alone in carrying the burden of the strike,” (161).
The struggle for the parents, families, communities, and Africans as a whole, also included the children. Again there is an emphasis on women by Sembene as seen in other works emphasizing their push to freedom, power (in society), and self reliance (independence). However, the sons and daughters also did their part to enforce the strike as a whole by not allowing peace and rest during the imposition of colonization. The injustices dealing with low wages, racism, and culture disruptions affected everyone (sons & daughters) challenging the identities and strength of Africans (specifically West Africa). In the quote above the specifics includes a different method of fighting back for justice. The method entailed slingshots aiming for cars, windows, shops, etc of the European “invaders,” that brought about struggle and oppression in a foreign land.
There was an opposition on behalf of some parents regarding the night activities taken over by their sons and daughters. “Others, however, could not help thinking that every window that broke, every light that went out, helped establish a kind of balance,“ (161). However, there were still those other parents/people that apparently did not oppose such actions as they ultimately meant unionization in/and fighting back during the strike. There was an even greater emphasis after the boys were shot by a white man. The balance felt was the support of unionization of families (specifically women and children) as a whole in encountering different ways of fighting back during the strike. The burden of the strike involved sons and daughters that were also affected by the low wages, racism, and cultural disruptions (tradition vs. colonization).
“As for the Europeans, the feeling of constraint and uneasiness they had known for weeks he gave place to panic. The patrols on the streets were reinforced, but, in spite of this, fear was an unwelcome guest in every house in the quarter. It was not so much the stones or the little balls of lead themselves as the thought of those black bodies slipping through the shadows that transformed every home into a fortress as soon as darkness came. Native servants were sent home, and men and women went to bed with weapons at their sides. At the slightest sound, nervous fingers reached out for the trigger of a pistol or the stock of the rifle,” (161).
The methods of fighting back on behalf of sons and daughters weren’t just merely slingshots and balls of lead. The impact was greater in the overall picture as there was a call for unity on behalf of the strikers and their families in their struggle against European business owners (as well as any other racist aspects). The strike called for unity as the setbacks were limiting social, cultural, and economical life for Africans everywhere. The different places mentioned in the book take place in West Africa (French Africa), however, the bigger message is for Africans as a whole, all over Africa in unity and independence in freeing themselves of forced colonization. The nightly activities of “little lead balls,” made clear to the Europeans the unfairness of their injustice by also experiencing sleepless nights.
6 comments:
Bryan Spencer
Hey Ana,
The family was one of the most vulnerable structures in the book. The strike became almost a necessity, a very necessary act not only for the detriorated fighters. It was the resolve of the women and the people, using their wits, courageously using any weapon they could to achieve success. Though the family is constantly fighting to gain equality, there is a sense of unity that arises from the strike that propels the oppressed of Senegal to stand up and challenge heir fate.
Though the people are experiencing such trying times, the family structure is themed in Sembene's approach to his literature and film. The passage you chose really identifies with the moral values of the book. There are truly many methods to obtain peace and his particular passage really magnifies the possibility to make the impossible, possible.
Hi Anna,
This is an interesting passage in the book as it shows the multifaceted feelings of the families of the strikers towards the colonial railroad company. What a difficult position to be in as a parent experiencing the devastation of the strike on their families, yet trying to teach their children to be good people at the same time. Do you teach them to stand up against the colonizer, fight back, or do nothing? Apparently, Sembene suggests that it is the older generation who think doing nothing is the right thing: "the older people did not approve." The younger people felt supported by Magette's army.
It is interesting that the young "army" uses slingshots to do the subversive damage to property. Not really destroying lives, but making a statement by damaging symbols of capitalism such as cars, windows, shops etc. with this small primitive tool, and also rendering so much fear that it "was an unwelcome guest in every house in the quarter. It was…the thought of those black bodies slipping through the shadows that transformed every home into a fortress as soon as darkness came." It was this psychological fear of the unseen destroyer that rattled their cages. Perhaps they were afraid of this unseen force because they understood all to well that violence is often an invisible force–like long working hours in difficult conditions for little pay.
As Wendy and Bryan already mentioned, the entire family structure was affected by the strike. The women fought by scavenging for food, men fought by not going to work, and some of the children fought by forming this “army.” I am very glad that you picked this passage since it highlights the innocence of the children. We did not see a child pick a gun and kill anyone. Instead, what we got was children relying on tools they were familiar with. Moreover, like you mentioned, it was not so much the physical, tangible, damage of the army’s action that was important, but rather the implied indirect disobedience of it all that mattered. They were saying, “We have had enough” without hurting anyone physically. But, they were haunting the minds of the French people, since, as Sembene writes, “At the slightest sound, nervous fingers reached out for the trigger of a pistol or the stock of the rifle.” These little children have frightened the French people, twisted their brains enough to make them paranoid. So, like their mothers and fathers, these children did what they could. And, no pun intended, everything counts when you're trying to make a point. :)
Hi Ana
You have quite a bit going on in your paragraph about balance.
I agree with the human need for balance, especially after such atrocities as these people face. Do you think that the killing of the young boys was just the final straw? Or do you think that the strikers would have needed a sense of revenge anyway?
Also, it is interesting that only one Westerner (Isnard's wife)dies. Do you see a balance there? She dies at the end, signifying a redemptive quality. And she is the only one to take her own life, which would seem to show the shallowness of her convictions and her inability to accept change. Does this count for all the Westerners, not just her? Does this death balance out the countless others caused by hunger and violence? I would argue no, but it does stress that, contrary to the idiom, nothing is fair in war.
-Anna
Your writing about this passage and Wendy's comment blew my mind away. I wrote about Fa Keita and he represents what you stated: a peaceful and older mentality of doing nothing. And if one thinks about it is tuff to teach that method when so much injustice is surrounding the younger generations. I believe their philosophy of doing nothing is the right thing; because in some weird way I assume that by doing nothing they believe they will hopefully stop future oppressors. The children in this novel just like the children in 100 Days are the real victims and the innocent who are being ruined in this awful injustice. What an amazing passage! This whole novel is incredible and is interesting to see so many different views.
As many of the works we have seen during this class period there has been depiction of family as a whole working together. Children are forced to do things in this book that we would never allow or imagine our children to do in today's society. As the African culture is based on community, not only family but also neighbors in the village. People help each other out. When the boys have nothing to do but to walk around they realize that maybe they can be of use to their family and the ongoing strike. The fact that they are well aware of what is going on around them makes me sometimes wonder whether these boys are as young as they really are since it is easy to forget. While the men are gone and the women are trying the best they can to manage to keep up the household the boys decide that they will take things into their own hands. They are praised and called the men when they bring food to the family, a role that their fathers are supposed to carry out. As the events of the "terrorizing" of the European housings occur, making grown men and women tremble of fear really show how with so little did they put more fear in people than what the soldiers had done to the strikers. Using the slingshots vs. guns makes me think of the ongoing war in Israel and how many of us just laugh at the fact that stones vs guns what is that going to do? Well the mental fear that is brought out does more than the physical. When the boys are shot is when we once again realize that the soldiers are nothing but small boys with great hearts. And when the families went around "displaying" the bodies showed more strength than if the families would have gone for vengeance. The "scared" people in this book were never the strikers but the Europeans and the people against the strikers. This says a lot about what the small "things" can induce in a society.
Post a Comment