Blogging The Caine Prize

A decade into The Caine Prize for African writing, it has carved a space for itself as one of the more significant institutions by which new African writing gets an international audience. But like bloggers such as zunguzungu have pointed out, the Alglophonic nature of the Booker or the Commonwealth Writers prize signify the inherent problems and limitations of many of these competitions. And yes, as zunguzungu has pointed out, the Caine Prize is specific to writers writing in English, so “the short list seems to be dominated by the same half-dozen countries, with only very rare exceptions; the Caine prize’s ‘Africa’ more or less means South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya, Zimbabwe, Uganda, and the diaspora living in Britain and the US.”

Before  the winner is announced on July 11, along with a group of bloggers I’ll be blogging on the 5 stories shortlisted for the prize, beginning with Bulawayo’s “Hitting Budapest” and Lamwaka’s “Butterfly Dreams.”

Here are links to all the shortlisted stories.

NoViolet Bulawayo (Zimbabwe) ‘Hitting Budapest’

Beatrice Lamwaka (Uganda) ‘Butterfly dreams’ 

Tim Keegan (South Africa) ‘What Molly Knew’

Lauri Kubuitsile (Botswana) ‘In the spirit of McPhineas Lata’ 

David Medalie (South Africa) ‘The Mistress’s Dog’ 

So here’s my first two reviews:

“HITTING BUDAPEST” by Noviolet Bulawayo

Crossing Mzilikazi Boulavard, for the characters in Noviolet Bulawayo’s story, is like crossing over to Europe: the “Budapest” of this story is a neighbourhood within walking distance, a cityscape of abundance, cleanliness, order, and big affluence that serves to impress the impossibility of crossing over. Though it is not necessary for the narrator to tell us that “Budapest is like a different country,” or that it is a “country where people who are not like us live,” we don’t mind the obvious statements, because we experience this day through the lives of children: “Bastard and Chipo and Godknows and Sbho and Stina” and “me,” the storyteller. It is an ordinary day, one like every other day, when the children walk away from the disinterested eyes of their own mothers (too distracted by gossip and hair to pay attention to setting limits for them), and the men of the community (too busy with a daily game of draughts) in “Paradise.” A brief journey, and they enter this extraordinary country of Budapest, where it looks as though “everybody woke up one day and closed their gates, doors, and windows, picked up their passports, and left for better countries.” This vast landscape is so silent, and so empty that the children’s entrance has the strange ring of conquest: it is as if they are the latest round of colonists, walking into the “empty land” that native inhabitants did not want, use, or need. Even the air in Budapest smells of nothing – no cooking fires send wisps of smoke to show that hunger and desire exist here, too.

The gut-chewing poverty with which the children are familiar, on a daily basis, is obvious from the start: this is a mission to steal guavas from Budapest—fruit that hangs ripe and uneaten in the screaming gaudiness of abundance. That their lives are riven by disorder and violence of the most intimate sort is also impossible to ignore, in the nonchalant way that hunger is always present, and in the way that ten-year-old Chipo’s pregnancy is mentioned: she is a hindrance on their missions, because she cannot run as fast as she once used to. The unreality of their dreams, possible only through dream-talk of escape into materially better lives, only serves to exaggerate impossibility. Each child, dressed in tattered clothes that bear the marks of other worlds—t-shirts that bear the name “Cornell”—know that escape from their “Paradise” will only be possible via the conduits of family members already abroad (a pipe dream, knowing that aunties and uncles abroad “clean poop” in hospitals, and disappear after a few letters), an education (one that we as readers know is not accessible to these children), or their physical beauty (an escape that we know will only provide a troublesome and temporary respite). The refrains “I’m going to America to live with my Aunt Fostalina,” or “I’m going to marry a man” who will “take me away from Paradise, away from the shacks and Heavenway and Fambeki and everything else,” ring like hymns about crossing the River Jordan and entering heaven.

As zunguzungu writes in his review of this story, “it traffics in the familiar genre of Africa-poverty-pornography, by which I would mean that its ‘story’ is only an obligatory excuse for the parade of affect-inducing spectacles which are the story’s real reason for existing.” His is a legitimate criticism. Are these “lazy stories,” where writers purposefully skew plots in the direction of spectacular societal failure, in order to please the Caine Prize judges?

The nuances in the ordinaryness of the violence that the children encounter in “Hitting Budapest”—and the impossibility of mutuality, despite what Levinas writes about regarding the lives of Others—is executed in such subtle terms that the painful is sublimely beautiful at times. The intensity of the hunger and desire is so everyday and so immediate that even a dead body they encounter only leads to a  joyful possibility of bread (selling the hanging woman’s shoes). The finesse of Bulawayo’s writing, I think, rescues this story from the grasping crassness of poverty-porn.

“BUTTERFLY DREAMSby Beatrice Lamwaka

What I remember, as I read Lamwaka’s first words, is the way in which we woke up at 6AM in the cloud of rainy season river fog, to glue our ears to the shortwave: what a prize possession it was, in the early years we spent in Zambia. My father listened, with the worry and attachment of the nationalist, who had abandoned loved ones and nation, in a bid to secure himself, and those closest to him.

In Lamwaka’s story, we walk straight into the auditory dreaming of a “string of parents…who listened to Mega FM” every day, “[l]istening and waiting for the names of…loved ones…hearts thump[ing]” every time they hear familiar names of places or even the names of loved ones. After one hour of wordless listening, they “sighed after the programme” concluded. They listen to hear news of children lost to war and chaos, in the interminable waiting of a refugee camp. Though most abandon hope for their lost children, “Ma dreams of butterflies” filling the room, as if those wings, on their pilgrimage of renewal, are a harbinger of  her child’s return. After five years of waiting, and rumours that others had seen their beloved Lamunu’s body “bursting in the burning sun,” they hear, on Mega FM, that Lamunu is at “World Vision, a rehabilitation centre for formerly abducted children,” where children are being “taught how to live with us again.” But when Lamunu returns, the facial scars scream the story of a child soldier, though the family hastily arrange for a ritual to cleanse that story out of Lamunu’s private experience, and their collective body. Lamunu obeys quietly, and remains silent.

It is then that the reader who is unfamiliar with the name learns that Lamunu is a girl – her “breasts were showing through the blue flowered dress that [she] wore.” The family wait, through her silence, to see when she will say something, laugh, and play the mischievous child they knew – to see if her tipu (spirit) has returned to her body. They have rituals to ensure that an abandoned tipu is buried into the earth with a body, but none for those whose bodies still exist above ground, with their tipu buried long ago.

“Butterfly Dreams” is a story about the interminable waiting of a refugee camp, and about how swathes of people learn to incorporate disruption as an everyday experience. Instead of groundnuts, their “gardens grow huts.” It’s a story about dreaming and aching for returns—returns of loved ones like Lamunu, or perhaps even for the life they once had—but as with the story of Lamunu, a return does not mean a return of the familiar or the comforting.

This story, though it reaches moments of revelation that are beyond “poverty porn,” does mine extensively from the cliché. Again, I have to return to zunguzungu’s anxieties about stories addressing the “Africa” of the Western imaginary, by which writers seem to be guided as they vie for prizes. Zunguzungu refers to Ikhide Ikheloa, who regards the Caine Prize’s shortlist as indicative of the How to Write About Africa syndrome, and as “a riot of exhausted clichés…huts, moons, rapes, wars, and poverty,” in which “[t]he monotony of misery simply overwhelms the reader.” While zunguzungu is “not that interested in banning all stories that contain ‘huts, moons, rapes, wars, and poverty’ from the canon of Real African Writing”—since “it’s not like slums and poverty and social dysfunction are a ‘non-African’ subject”—commodifying it may be what’s obscene. In Lamwaka’s story, there’s an element of “mining” for misery that feels distinctly unsettling.

There is a powerful Jim Goldberg photograph I’ve written about (“New Europeans”): a man stands in the foreground of the image, radio pressed close to his chest. In the background are the layers and layers of tents, the life from which this radio allows a brief respite. He looks as though he is praying, as if all the words that pour out of this antenna-ed box contain and control him.

I wish that “Butterfly Dreams” was similarly able to transcend the clichés of African war, African refugees, and African horror, and reach towards a similar kind of communication about impossibility, dreaming, and the shadows that exist between the two.

About these ads

Comments

  1. Qalil Little says:

    The whole prize is curious to me. While I am eager for writers like these to be recognized for their talent and skill in story telling in a foreign language I find myself caught between wanting to read stories told in their languages and the almost impossible challenge of learning all those languages in order to enjoy them.

    The Africa poverty porn seems to be a particularly strong desire in Western communities. The African authors who are darlings of the western literary World typically write this way. It reminds me of a documentary I watched recently about Hip-Hop music and the artists who were trying to make it had messages of social justice and real love they wanted to talk about, but the only lyrics and music the execs were looking for were the misogynistic violent types. This is what the literary powers of the World demand from African writers. They’re not interested in the glorious and interesting unless it is told from a certain perspective – theirs.

    If we could ever stand together as African Authors or those who devour it, we have to rise above some of these restrictions, learn French, Arabic and Portuguese and get about the job of having our own literary prize!

  2. Mel u says:

    I really enjoyed your insightful posts-here is my response

    Today I learned a new literary expression “African-poverty-pornography” in reading Zunguzunga’s very insightful post on “Hitting Budapest”-here is how the term is to be understood:

    ““If you were so inclined, in fact, the thing you could say about it would be that it traffics in the familiar genre of Africa-poverty-pornography, by which I would mean that its “story” is only an obligatory excuse for the parade of affect-inducing spectacles which are the story’s real reason for existing. Rather than building a character through back-story, you could say, the purpose of “Chipo” and her fellows is only to dramatize a particular sociological narrative about poverty, to put into view a picture of what you might call a collapsed mode of social reproduction.”

    One of the interesting moment in “Hitting Budapest” occurs when the children are in a rich party of the city and a affluent very Anglozied woman asks to take their picture (to show friends back in London a picture of street children she “actually spoke to”)-clearly the woman is receiving a form of voueristic titilation from this encounter. The question then becomes is writing this story like taking a picture of the kids to show people back in London how close you dared to get to real poverty. Bluntly is the author of “Hitting Budapest” (and most of the other Caine Prize stories) writing a story those with high end literary literary educations (as many Caine Prize writers and probably most all readers) can ring their hands over at the poverty of the people of Africa? This did make me reflect a bit. Are these stories written to appeal to the Oxford based Caine Prize Judges?

    This brings up the broad question-how much do author intentions matter. My first, and now second,response is that Dickens knowingly did just that. He wrote (certainly in his opening years) about the extreme poor of London (most of the people really) to sell magazines and books to the more affluent people who want only a literary contact with the poor. Does Dickens make use of Cliches about the poor in say Toto Oliver Twist or The Old Couriosity Shop. I am a life time reader and lover of Dickens but I would have to say yes he does rely on cliches and standard figures like orphans to arouse sympathy. Dickens himself came from poverty and wrote his way out of it.

    To give another example, Robindranth Tagore, the first Asian writer to win the Nobel Prize, came from a family of incredible riches, the kind you can hardly even find anymore. He wrote many stories deeply sympathetic to the poor of India, especially women in which there is no hint of “poverty-porn”. He had no economic need to sell stories by pandering to his readers.

    Related to this issue is the Dalit Literature of India which is written by and about the lives of what was once called the Out Cast people of India (apx 120 Million People). Many of these stories focus on the lives of toilet cleaners, street sweepers, and others in the lowest kind of jobs. Most of the authors have advanced degrees, some with Phds from Oxford. Their stories depict institutionalized poverty based on cultural norms going back 1000s of years. Dalit literature is treated as distinct sub-genre of literature. Some of it does feel a bit like “poverty porn”.

    I recently read Edward Said landmark book, Orientalism. I think the bad feeling some of the Caine Prize stories arouses come from a Colonial sense that the authors are what are called “native experts” teaching the Europeans how to manage their subjects and being well paid for doing so. They know an over simplied view will sell better than an indepth analysis in which the full humanity of the people in the stories are disclosed. The authors are then, pushing this as devil’s advocate, paid informants and sell outs.

    I do not agree with this but I respect it and I am trying to understand the harsh reaction these stories are producing in some readers.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,483 other followers