ROMANTIC IDEALISM AND
THE TRAVAILS OF THE ARTIST IN ESIABA IROBI’S THE OTHER SIDE
OF THE MASK By
Norbert Oyibo Eze
Two things are evident in the above
dialogue. In the first place, the dialogue suggests that a
major travail of the artist is the tendency not to be
satisfied with his products. Every great artist usually
feels that his work can be better than it is, thus he is
constantly in search of the elements that imbue greatness to
the work of art. He grapples to represent reality at both
empirical and metaphysical levels for, according to Emmanuel
Obiechina, a great artist is a “man sensitive to the nuances
of our chequered existence, who feels and sympathizes
deeply, a suffering human soul who suffers with those who
suffer and is able to pierce the barriers set up by the
embattled people in order to reveal that which is being
hidden away from view”(2). Because the great artist works on
uncharted terrain, he is often misunderstood.
The second point that emerges from the dialogue is the
contest between subjectivity and objectivity. This is
gleamed from the dominant value of making out laurels to
writers on the basis of ‘connections’. Jamike’s conception
of his works as excellent works of art, deserving laurels,
is challenged by the prevailing social morality, the
objective life. Zhipora tells us that he is “a harassed man”
because “for the past six years, he’s been entering for”
national art competitions, hoping to win, but each year, he
is given special mention, while “the prize goes to some
other person who is a great name in the eyes of the judges
or someone who is a friend of the secretary of the
organising committee for the competition”(14). This idea of
giving artistic laurels to writers on the basis of
“connection” is validated and given sufficient weight in the
text by Kamuche when he tells Zhipora:
He should have entered again for this national competition.
And informed me. I would have gone to meet the judges one by
one in their homes and brought the laurel here to him two
days before the announcement of the results. Lady, I am
respected. I have powers. I throw my weight around. In this
country, I have connections (14-15).
The issue of unwarranted suppression of excellence and
unmerited award of literary and artistic laurels, as well as
giving sensitive positions to people on account of
‘connections, is a major national question, one which has
continued to make genuine development in the country
intractable. That Jamike eventually wins an international
award with the same piece of art work, which only received
special mention locally, suggests that he has been casting
his pearls to the dogs all these while. This indicates how
badly the country’s intellectual life has been tainted by
corruption.
In addition to deceitful award of artistic laurels, is the
tendency to give intellectual accolade to writers and
artists on the basis of ideology. Dr. Animalu who has been
the secretary of the national art competition for years,
quarrels with Jamike’s works on the ground of ideology.
Examining one of Jamike’s sculptural works in his studio,
Animalu cynically remarks:
But I don’t see any trace of material dialectics in it. No
ideological perspective. And no symptom of commitment
(39-40).
For Animalu the essence of art lies in
ideological clarity, what the playwright refers to as
“Bolshevic hobbledehoy”(40). But in spite of Aminalu’s
disdainful comment he nevertheless recognises certain
elements of greatness in Jamike’s works which he considers
“Excellent specimens of decadent petty bourgeoisie art”(40).
Animalu’s one dimensional perception of art does not permit
him to understand that, “An artist is the vortex of forces
and vibrations swirling all around him”, and that “He
digests life at both empirical and metaphysical level” (49).
Animalu the critic fails to comprehend that the great artist
does not present a simple story with an easily digestible
ideology, but a web of ideas that frequently “refrain from
the judgement of closure” (Lester 258). Gideon Lester
further argues rightly that ideology is not the quality that
imbues the work of art with greatness. He substantiates this
argument with Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice. He
posits that what makes this play great is not ideology but
the shifting layers of narrative motif which permeates the
play’s plot structure. According to him: The frequent contextualization and the shifts in emotional
allegiance that result, yield great dramatic dividends. The
scene that immediately follows Shylock’s dialogue with Tubal
takes place in Belmont, where Bassanio correctly solves the
riddle of the caskets. No sooner have he and Portia, Nerissa
and Gratiano sworn “to solemnize/the bargain of their faith”
than Salerio enters with the news from Antonio “that steals
the colour from Bassanio’s cheek” and suspends the action of
the scene. (258). Top | 2/4 | Next Page > | 
