Okot p’Bitek’s “Song of Lawino,” a poem written as a monologue by a rural African woman named Lawino, is a profound commentary on the cultural dislocation felt by African societies post-independence. The poem introduces Lawino’s lament about her husband Ocol’s rejection of his heritage in favour of Western ways. This premise allows for an exploration of moral hypocrisy, which becomes apparent when African elites, such as Lawino’s husband, scorn their indigenous cultures. The hypocrisy stems from a kind of moral duplicity where the values of the colonisers are adopted uncritically, and traditional African values are discarded as primitive. This hypocrisy is not just a personal failing but is emblematic of a broader societal issue in the post-colonial context, which this article attempts to explore.
Lawino’s Lament: A Critique of Cultural Abandonment
Lawino’s perspective provides insights into how values are weighed and considered in a post-colonial society. Her critique is levelled at those who, having gained a veneer of Western education and lifestyle, use it to assert their superiority over the uneducated. p’Bitek uses this personal drama as a microcosm to discuss the broader theme of moral equivalency between cultures. He questions the assumption that Western ethical and cultural standards are inherently superior and should replace African traditions. Therefore, the poem’s introduction is not merely a setup for the narrative but is also a complex exposition of the themes of cultural conflict and identity crisis from a global perspective.
The troubling notion of duplicitous moral equivalency is at the core of the poem’s critique of post-colonial African societies. It encapsulates a situation where there is a pretence of moral parity or similarity between two vastly different sets of values or systems, which, in reality, are inequitably valued. Lawino’s critique of p’Bitek’s work is potent because it points out the absurdity of measuring life’s value through the biased lens of colonial influence. She challenges the reader to consider the intrinsic value of her people’s ways of life before they are dismissed in favour of foreign customs.
This evaluation is significant in the post-colonial discourse as it highlights the ongoing internal struggle within colonised societies to find a balance between embracing modernity and preserving traditional culture. “Song of Lawino” poignantly lays bare the conflict between old and new, between the coloniser and the colonised, and between authenticity and pretence.
Selective Memory and Moral Convenience
In “Song of Lawino,” the protagonist Lawino bemoans her husband Ocol’s abandonment of his Acholi heritage for Western customs, which he perceives as superior. This mirrors the way Western nations honour contentious historical figures despite their atrocities: there’s a selective acknowledgement of the past, glorifying achievements while ignoring the severe human costs. Lawino’s lament can be seen as a metaphor for the particular historical memory of the West, which often glorifies its “civilising” colonial past without fully acknowledging the violence and exploitation that accompanied it.
The juxtaposition of Western nations’ tacit approval of certain modern atrocities and their historical veneration of figures like King Leopold II of Belgium can be thoughtfully related to the themes in Okot p’Bitek’s “Song of Lawino.” p’Bitek’s work is a sharp critique of the post-colonial African society that has adopted Western values while discarding its own. Just as Western nations often overlook the transgressions of an ally or historical figure due to strategic interests or national pride, the characters in p’Bitek’s poem ignore the value of their cultural heritage in favour of Westernisation.
Duplicity of Moral Equivalency
How the West often fails to address or even tacitly supports present-day injustices—like those alleged in Israel—parallels Ocol’s hypocrisy in “Song of Lawino.” Just as Ocol adopts Western ways and looks down on his own culture, Western nations preach human rights and dignity but fail to uphold these principles uniformly, especially when strategic allies are involved. Ocol’s moral duplicity in rejecting his roots reflects the moral duplicity of Western nations that espouse human rights while failing to condemn their violation by allies or honour figures whose legacies contradict these values.
p’Bitek also critiques the notion of cultural superiority, which can be related to the Western conception of historical figures like Leopold II as worthy of honour despite their brutal legacies. This suggests valuing specific histories over others, a hierarchy of culture and morality that p’Bitek fundamentally disputes. Similarly, the Western reluctance to entirely repudiate its colonial past and the current injustices it overlooks is a testament to a hierarchy of whose rights are defended and whose are disregarded.
“Song of Lawino” poignantly underscores the conflict and dissonance within post-colonial societies that struggle with their identity and values in the shadow of a colonial past. This dissonance is not unlike the variance observed in the Western practice of tacitly permitting contemporary atrocities while revering historical figures with checkered pasts. Both scenarios reveal a complex grappling with moral integrity, cultural identity, and the politics of memory and forgetting.
In essence, p’Bitek’s poem and the Western attitude toward historical and contemporary atrocities are narratives of selective amnesia and moral convenience. They call into question the narratives we embrace and those we ignore and challenge the reader and society to reflect on the authenticity of cultural and moral stances in the face of inconvenient truth.
“Song of Lawino” by Okot p’Bitek is a poignant narrative that challenges the post-colonial identity crisis and the moral ambiguity that arises when a society abandons its essence. The poem becomes a powerful medium for discussing how individuals’ and societies’ fluctuating moral compasses lead to inconsistent responses to historical and contemporary atrocities.
In the poem, Lawino represents the voice of traditional wisdom and moral clarity. Her husband, Ocol, who has embraced Western education and rejected his African heritage, symbolises a society that has lost its moral compass by abandoning its essence. This metaphor extends to the international arena, where the responses to historical figures like Adolf Hitler and King Leopold II and conflicts such as those in Palestine and Ukraine reveal a troubling inconsistency.
Hitler is universally condemned for his genocidal regime. In contrast, Leopold, whose regime was responsible for millions of deaths in the Congo, has not been widely held to the same level of infamy. This inconsistency points to a moral relativism shaped by historical narratives prioritising specific histories over others. Western education, like Ocol’s, often glosses over colonial atrocities, creating a skewed ethical understanding similar to how Ocol views his cultural practices as backward.
Inconsistent Moral Compass: International Parallels
The international response to contemporary conflicts further illustrates this dichotomy. The global outcry and support for Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression starkly contrast the more muted and complex reactions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While the sovereignty and rights of Ukrainians are robustly defended, the rights of Palestinians often seem negotiable, subject to a labyrinth of political considerations. This reflects Ocol’s moral duplicity; just as he selectively adopts and discards cultural elements, international responses selectively weigh human suffering and the right to self-determination.
These contrasting responses indicate an international moral compass oscillating based on geopolitical interests, historical alliances, and racial and cultural biases. Just as Ocol’s new identity is tethered to the approval of his colonial masters, ignoring his wife’s appeals to remember his roots, the international community often aligns its moral compass with strategic interests, sometimes at the expense of consistent ethical principles.
The implications of such a fluctuating moral stance are profound. When a society like Ocol abandons its essence—be it cultural values, historical truths, or ethical consistency—it risks losing its identity and the trust of its people. Lawino’s lament is thus a call for a return to a moral and cultural centre that does not waver with the winds of convenience or the tides of power dynamics.
“Song of Lawino” critiques a post-colonial identity crisis and an international order that often fails to apply universal standards of morality and justice. The discourse on identity and morality in the poem mirrors the international community, urging a reflection on the values that guide responses to injustice and the importance of preserving a moral essence that upholds the dignity of all humans, irrespective of their geopolitical significance. The challenge remains to establish a moral compass as unwavering as Lawino’s commitment to her cultural identity, honouring the past while seeking justice in the present.
The discourse within Okot p’Bitek’s “Song of Lawino” resonates with the contemporary moral dilemmas faced by the global community. The poem underscores the peril of losing cultural moorings and moral clarity, a lesson that parallels the international arena’s inconsistent stance towards historical and current atrocities. Just as Lawino implores her husband to remember his roots and wisdom therein, the international community must also strive for a consistent moral code that equally honours all human life and history, irrespective of geopolitical interests or the passage of time. We hope to forge an identity not fractured by duplicity or marred by selective memory only through commitment to universal principles of justice and the recognition of our shared humanity. This is the essence of a moral compass that does not merely point towards the most convenient direction but guides us towards a more just and equitable world for all.