I noticed that a major theme in African fiction is the clash between tradition and modernity. We see it in works like The Lion and the Jewel by Wole Soyinka and Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe. I’d even argue that most of our works have been pigeonholed into talking about modern versus traditional Africa.
I decided to find out why this is. Why do we talk about modernity and tradition as two sides of a coin—as antithesis? What is our preoccupation with tradition and modernity and why do we write so much about this? I ended up forming an opinion and that’s what I’m sharing today.
First, definitions.
Merriam-Webster defines Tradition as ‘an inherited, established, or customary pattern of thought, action, or behavior (such as a religious practice or a social custom)’.
Britannica explains modernity as ‘the self-definition of a generation about its own technological innovation, governance, and socioeconomics’.
The first thing I noticed is that some people see tradition as being the ‘authentic’ African experience or life and modernity as being a corruption from the western world. And some other people see modernity as good and progressive while tradition is primitive. So, what is our preoccupation with this war?
I would like to argue that it is a need to be—if not one, then surely the other. If Africa equals traditional values, farming and women solely in the kitchen, then surely modernism and its loud display of work from home and women in politics must be Western. And if we seek to be authentically African, then we must make a choice. We must ‘return’ to our traditions and purge our land of the white man’s ideologies.
But this is a limited way of thinking.
The idea that modernism is a Western construct should be killed. Dead on arrival. Shot at the entrance.
Yes, the ideology may have been propagated by the colonisers in order to rationalise their actions—‘Yes, they are primitive and traditional. We needed to seize control, help them out of their ignorance.’
Yes, the ideology may have lasted well after independence because of the feeling of displacement from the sudden change from a world we knew to something different, something foreign. What would we have become if we were not taught their language, given their names, if our shrines were not burned and our culture called demonic and backwards?
Yes, there is this. But!
But from the definition of modernity up there, we see that it really doesn’t belong to a race but a time. A generation. So, even without the European influence we would be what we call ‘modern’ by now. I guess what that might have looked like should be left to those whose job it is to imagine these things—fiction writers and historians.
China had the Yin Dynasty, and in historical films we see the apparels, the houses, and the traditions they practiced. Yet, we don’t point to the Chinese today just because they don’t pee in pots and say ‘Oh, they’ve been westernised’. They are making strides, building bullet trains and creating technology that suits their changing needs but we do not judge them for this shift.
This is because progress is not a western construct. It is born from time and knowledge.
But sometimes, we don’t act like we see this. Honestly, I feel like we just mourn not knowing what we could have been without the Western influence, and it really is valid, but it shouldn’t stop us from understanding this. We shouldn’t idealise the ‘good old days’ and forget that they were ‘just days’ when they were happening. I don’t think many people who speak about upholding traditions would want to travel on donkeys, spend weeks at sea on voyages and communicate through letters (Although we can definitely do that. Hit me up if you want to be my pen pal).
Let’s talk about tradition and modernity and why they should not be separated by a ‘versus’.
Traditions did not come with the first humans to walk the earth, like some sort of manual. They are not unchangeable, older-than-life truths. Instead, they were created when they were created because of the experiences and the needs of the people who made them, and practicing these traditions even when they no longer suit our needs and experiences is not being faithful to tradition but being resistant to change.
Think about this; what we constantly enforce today will become the traditions our generations speak of and what they constantly enforce will be the traditions their generations speak of.
One of the reasons tradition is so important is because with the passing of tradition from one generation to the next, the social wheel (proven way of life) doesn’t have to be reinvented time and time again. We don’t have to start from ground zero each time: we just learn from those who’ve been here before us. For example, our children do not have to learn social etiquette through trial and error (what works and what doesn’t)—there is an existing blueprint.
Now, this blueprint will need tweaks here and there as times change and new technologies are created. This is where the clash between tradition and modernity often rears its head. Some people believe the blueprint must remain fixed, while others understand that change must happen. This becomes a push and pull and is simplified into the statement ‘Tradition vs modernity’.
I believe tradition births modernity. Without tradition as a backbone, on what do we base modernity? If there is a now, there has to be a before. And the thing is, tradition may be a ‘before’ but it is not linear and it morphs and grows every day. Tradition is both the past and the present, becoming and evolving with each decade that passes.
Modernity has to do with the technological innovations that come up in response to our changing needs. It has to do with a better understanding of human rights and equity. In many ways, it is progress and progress is not a fight against tradition but a coexisting concept.
The Argument of Values
Yes, one of the major arguments is the issue of eroding traditional values.
Traditional values like community, family, respect, modesty, and integrity will and should never go out of style. These should be timeless. But the thing is, they are values, not practices and when most people think of tradition they think of the values and practices as one and same. Traditional practices that no longer serve us should be let go for newer practices that have the same values.
This means that not all traditional practices have a wisdom we can still apply today and so should remain in the past—in the times they were most useful. Tradition will be a crutch if we insist on making it timeless (Tradition, not values). It should be in a state of flux, always evolving.
Rather than holding on to archaic, and sometimes, harmful practices in the name of honouring tradition, we should try to understand the rationale behind these practices and see how we can transfer that wisdom into a tradition that is more suited to the present. On the other hand, instead of racing to change and disregard tradition, maybe we need to calm down and probe these traditions for the fundamental wisdom they possess—the wisdom that has coalesced from centuries of human sentience.
So, my opinion is that the statement should not be ‘Tradition versus modernity’, but ‘Tradition and modernity’. Seen as two evolving co-existing concepts and not as opposing sides of the pole.
As for why we write so much about it, I believe it has to do with what we see and what we feel as writers. With innovations and new norms, there is greater pushback from those who want to hold on to tradition and these conversations are everywhere around us, easily finding root in our unconscious and flowing into our art.
But maybe with the advent of genre fiction in the African fiction space, the heavy focus on themes like tradition vs modernity will take a chill pill for a while and I won’t hear ‘Children nowadays have no regards for tradition’ when you express disapproval for Female Genital Mutilation.
