We did the activity in class the other day: think of the storyteller (if there is one) in your family. Think of the context of that story. Recraft the story in your mind. And now think of the purpose that story served in your life as the listener, and further, what purpose the telling of it served in the life of the storyteller. And now think of how the hearing of it was different than reading a novel. It was quite different, wasn't it? The story was told in a familiar setting - that of family or friends - and you knew something about the people talking, and they too knew your background. You have a shared history. And of course, the story was as interesting - or perhaps even more interesting - than the last novel you read... mostly because the story is personal. It is about people you care about (not that novels are not personal and you don't end up caring about the characters).
But would you classify these oral stories as literature - as something that should be taught in classrooms? As something that should have weight in the grand canon of literature?
Peter Wasamba thinks so. As I mentioned in my last post, Wasamba (who is professor of oral literature at the University of Nairobi) believes that oral literature is not only a valid literary form, but also can be an aide in promoting reconciliation, as well as ensure land preservation in Africa, and perhaps ultimately, the world. And I also spoke of his thoughts on this matter in the last post, which for me, were very convincing.
But let's just take up the topic of oral literature in general. When I was listening to Wasamba's lectures, I started thinking about the art of theatre. I wrote about this before in a very early post, but do we ever think of theatre as literature? The play had to come from words, from a script, and that script would most definitely be found in the category of literature. And that story was most likely penned by an individual (not a collective source). Oral literature, on the other hand, can come from either one source or a collected source, and can take on mythic or legendary qualities as it is passed down. But eventually, if it is told enough, it is written down.
So my question is, does oral literature only become literature once it is written down? Or is there an inherent literary quality in these stories, as they have the potential to be put down on paper for the whole world to see? For if there is a potential to these unwritten stories, then it follows that these stories and their storytellers are potential literary authors. And that further means that oral literature is a valid form of study in classrooms. But in this case, you really can only "study" oral literature once it has been written down. Does that mean that the written story can no longer be titled "oral literature" and must just be termed "literature"? Or do these stories retain any part of their orality?
I read a book in a Personal Narratives class here, and it was a collection of stories from an African American family. All the stories had been passed on for generations, and some had taken on mythic proportions. But the book was a legitimate form for us to study, and the purpose of the assignment was to have us discover the genre of family folklore. It was a meaningful assignment to me, and it made me realize how much I want to know, remember, and eventually write down the history of my family. After all, writing is a form of preservation, and in writing down oral literatures, we are preserving voices that would otherwise have gone unheard and unnoticed.
And that is what Peter Wasamba kept stressing: in his field work, and ultimately his teaching, he is giving voice to the voiceless. He listens to the stories of those who are never heard (thereby forming relationships with these people, something nonexistent in solo literary readings), and he records them. His efforts are going to change conditions for the poor, for the land, and in general, for the betterment of humankind and our life on earth. But stories serve still more purposes: they preserve the lives of people, stories of hardship and wisdom, terror and joy... they give voice to the voiceless.
But of course, in order to study these oral texts, we have to read them. Or we have to write them down. But writing them down firstly involves listening. And our society is losing the art of listening...
But that is a topic for another day...
No comments:
Post a Comment