The first word “Under” in the title Under the Udala Trees already foreshadows the content of this text, it served as a big indicator to the subordinated identities that would be navigated in the text. The word “under” translates to “a position directly lower”, “located below or beneath something else” and true to the title Okparanta interrogates what it meant for one identity to be subordinate to a larger one and the conflicts that arise from this position. What does being under mean for the Igbos, the female and the homosexuals?
The word “Under” is infused with meaning like the term
‘queer’ that has been strategically taken up to signify a wide-ranging and unmethodical resistance to, and questioning of, normative models of sex, gender, and sexuality. The novel takes a stance against violence associated with sects and the implication of this on life.
The novel works on so many levels, rendering an intricate interrogation of varied forms of societal prejudice, interweaving different categories of oppression, marginalization to create a whole. Ijeoma is used to navigate issues of class, sexuality and ethnicity.
Her demotion from a middle-class city school girl to a poor semi-orphaned house help; her queer sexual identity in a hetero-normative environment and; the taboo encompassing Igbo-Hausa alliances are all undercurrent in the stance this novel takes against an oppressive society.
Ijeoma identifying as both an Igbo girl and a lesbian provides a link for different ill-treated sectors. A link can be made between the burning of the Igbos during the civil war – to which the text also refers – and the burning of homosexuals: both have gone or are going through a genocide.
Corpses flanked the roads. Decapitated bodies. Bodies with missing limbs. All around was the persistent smell of decaying flesh. Even if I was no stranger to these sights and smells, Papa’s case being the foremost in my mind, still I felt a lurching in my stomach…
Ndidi began to cry, and then all of us were crying too, because we had all seen what remained of the face, and we had all recognized her: Adanna in the midst of the logs, burning and burning and turning to ashes right before our eyes.
These are two different pages from the first, the first referring to the death of soldiers and the second the death of a lesbian character. Unjustifiable death seems to be the fate of these two sub identities. As Queer theory provides a site for collective contestation and interrogation, the author doesn’t just stop at gender and sexuality but expands this to the issue of ethnicity and war. What was the purpose of the war, what was the fate of those that emerged losers in the war.
…supplanted, rather, by a collective fretting over what would become of us when Nigeria prevailed: Would we be stripped of our homes, and of our lands? Would we be forced into menial servitude? Would we be reduced to living on rationed food? How long into the future would we have to bear the burden of our loss? Would we recover? (11)
The uncertainty of the Igbo’s at the beginning of this text as expressed by Ijeoma is also reflected later on while contemplating fate of homosexuals in Nigeria. War brings changes but these changes are not always favourable to both parties. The losers of the war would automatically be labeled as the weaker “other”. In the course of history, the fate of the “other” has not been pleasant.
The protagonist of the novel despite not directly partaking in the war is directly affected by it. She looses her father to death and her mother to despair. A psychological reading of the text would consider this trauma as the foreground for her deviant sexuality. Like the narrator stated at the beginning, there would be no story if she hadn’t been sent away and her being sent away was a factor of the war. The war led her to Amina and irrevocably changed her life.
There is no way to tell the story of what happened with Amina without first telling the story of Mama’s sending me off. Likewise, there is no way to tell the story of Mama’s sending me off without also telling of Papa’s refusal to go to the bunker. Without his refusal, the sending away might never have occurred, and if the sending away had not occurred, then I might never have met Amina. If I had not met Amina, who knows, there might be no story at all to tell.
Being Igbo and automatically part being part of the Biafra agitation was an identity that shaped the lives of major characters in this text. The author does not dwell on the war and the three years of its raging were glossed over, but yet the effects of the war remained, burned to the collective memory of the people. For most Nigerians the end of the war meant victory, for the Igbos, it meant dealing with their loses, finally interacting with their personal and communal loss.
… I stayed staring at the cubes of yam and listening, thinking of all that it would mean now that the war was over. For example, it was over, but even the fact of that could not bring Papa back. It was over, but nothing could be done to bring Amina’s family back. The dead would not suddenly leap out of the grave. Chances were that not a single one of them would rise the way Jesus rose from the dead. No resurrection for them.
There are very few stories about the damaging effect of the war on the female psych, because men make up the fighting population, war stories usually focus on them. Festus Iyayi’s Heroes is one of such cases. We see the effect of war on these men and experience the war through their eyes, these stories usually neglect the female’s POV as if Nigeria was devoid of females during the war.
Okparanta adds to the ongoing discuss of women’s participation during significant happenings in the society and how they’re affected by such happenings. The was is one of the most traumatic event that has happened to Nigerians and she navigates this trauma by focusing on female characters. The focus of this text on a female character, brings us to the interrogation of gender role and identity in the society.
The text questions gender role and the position of the “female” in the society. The earliest evident reaction towards the relegation of the female to a position of “Under” is during the bible study session Adaora holds with Ijeoma. Two bible passages implanted a deep critical lens in Ijeoma and sparked off her reaction.
Two angels had come to visit Sodom, and Lot had persuaded them to lodge with him. But then came the men of the city, knocking on Lot’s door, demanding to see the guests. Bring them out to us, that we may know them. But Lot refused. Instead, he offered the men his two virgin daughters, for them to do to the daughters as they wished, so long as they did not harm the guests, so long as they did not do as they wished unto the guests.
The first of these passages was the one of lot quoted above and the one of the Levites found in chapter 19 of the books of Judges. The Levites just like lot above offered up a damsel to be raped instead of themselves and she was later mutilated for sexual impurity. It seemed like such a complex story to Ijeoma. Her mother tried to point out the heteronomativity evident in these stories, but we can all see like Ijeoma could, the cruel treatment of the female sex in this biblical passages. Ijeoma responds to this cruelty by saying;
After a moment I realized that I did know why. The reason was suddenly obvious to me. I said, “Actually, Mama, yes, I do see why. The men offered up the women because they were cowards and the worst kind of men possible. What kind of men offer up their daughters and wives to be raped in place of themselves?”
The rape of women in these passages were pointer to the deeply historical foundational backings of women degradation in the society. The religious, social and even family structure supports the marginalization of the gendered female. Adaora implies to Ijeoma multiple times that her worth is tied to marriage and child birth and her femininity is an indicator for an expiration date on her usefulness.
Listen, and listen well. Oge na gakwa. Time is passing. You need to get out there and find yourself a husband. Time waits for no one.” She took what remained of the old candle and tossed it into the dustbin. Under her breath, she muttered, “If you’re not careful, you’ll find yourself like that candle, all burnt up and nothing to show for it.” She picked up the pestle, held it, but she did not in fact pound. Instead, she looked at the cubes of yam and said, “Marriage has a shape. Its shape is that of a bicycle.
Doesn’t matter the size or color of the bicycle. All that matters is that the bicycle is complete, that the bicycle has two wheels. “The man is one wheel,” she continued, “the woman the other. One wheel must come before the other, and the other wheel has no choice but to follow. What is certain, though, is that neither wheel is able to function fully without the other. And what use is it to exist in the world as a partially functioning human being?” Under her breath, she said, “A woman without a man is hardly a woman at all (p. 147)”.
Why is the worth of the female tied to the duties she is expected to fulfill? Adaora makes womanhood synonymous to marriage, reducing or destroying whatever else usefulness the woman might have to herself and the society aside marriage and child bearing.
This gender role assigned to the female re-establishes the structure of heteronomativity view in the society. The heteronormative view, assumes that sexual and marital relations are only fitting between people of the opposite sex.
It involves the biological alignment of ,sex, sexuality, gender identity, gender roles in a way that privileges heterosexuals.
It can be noticed from the passage above that Adaora did not once think that the two wheels that make up a bicycle could both be females or males, especially since wheels are identical. This stringent gender identity is one that thrives in a patriarchal society. It not only ends with Ijeoma but it is made evident in the relationship between Chibundu and Chidinma.
Children are supposed to be received as gifts from God, yet the birth of Chidinma does nothing but annoy and burden Chibundu. We discover as the text progresses that this is due to the sex of the baby. Chibundu not only refers to her biological sex but her gender, In the statement he makes of her being incapable of passing on the family name.
He questions the values of her being based on her gender as he held a conversation with Ijeoma; She’s just as good as a son.” “Ha!” he cried out, very indignantly. “Is she really? Are you forgetting that girls cannot pass on the family name?” There is already a predestined and unquestionable narrative of marriage and childbirth for her.
He does not see the value of a female child and hence pressures Ijeoma to produce a male child. The relationship between them goes downhill from this moment. Consumed by having a male child, he overlooks Ijeoma’s suffering even when she has a miscarriage. He views her as vessel for procreation rather than a being of companion.
…The way he was snapping more often than ever. As if all the world, and especially me and Chidinma, had become like thorns on his skin…
…He nodded. “We should try for a son.” I let out a sigh. It came out a little like a gasp. “If the man who goes to the farm and comes back with no cassava is a true farmer, he will return to the farm, will put in the work necessary, so that one day he can return from the farm with cassava in his basket.” He paused. “We will try again for a son, put in the work necessary to bear ourselves a son. I will have a son. I deserve that much from you.”…
A lack of content pervades their marriage but he believes he deserves a child from her because traditionally her role as a wife is to bear children. With or without love in the marriage the child bearing function of the female is a constant. The issues of strict gender roles is one of the reason for repression amongst females. Suppressing their desires to fit stringent societal expectations has its consequence.
This repression is examined as sexual repression in the psyche of Ijeoma. She tries to recant her sexual identity to please the community represented by her mother, the head master and his wife and avoid the violence that comes from being a divergent in the society. John Rechy (2000) states that, “we [homosexuals] become strangers in a strange land, sinners in the eyes of religionists, criminals in the eyes of some lawmakers – that is, outlaws.
That early separation forces the homosexual into roles and camouflage in order to survive a hostile environment… “(p. 124). The image of being condemned sinners is repeated continuously in the text, it is like a chant from Adaora to Ijeoma. Before Ijeoma witnesses the violence of the society, Adaora already nailed in her speech to such extent that Ijeoma’s psyche was already ruptured from verbal violence.
…Simple: something disgusting, disgraceful, a scandal.” “But what exactly is disgusting or disgraceful or scandalous about lying with mankind as with womankind? Does the Bible explain?” “The fact that the Bible says it’s bad is all the reason you need,” Mama said. “Besides, how can people be fruitful and multiply if they carry on in that way? Even that is scandal enough—the fact that it does not allow for procreation.”…
Adaora views the sinfulness of lesbianism in line with procreation. This explains Butler’s concept of heteronormativity, whereby societies view marriage between a man and woman as having a sole role of procreation and therefore the only sexual relationship that can exist according to this concept is between opposite sexes. This heteronormativity is even stabilized by such religious authority as the bible.
The text does not stand in violent opposition of heteronomativity as this would do nothing but continue a cycle of violence, instead it questions it. It interrogates the compulsory heteronormativity that is assumed as inherent in the patriarchal structure of the society. It does this by highlighting the thought process of Ijeoma as she goes through her crisis. Ijeoma questions both the use of religion as a weapon and the society unwilling to accept change.
…Just because the story happened to focus on a certain Adam and Eve did not mean that all other possibilities were forbidden. Just because the Bible recorded one specific thread of events, one specific history, why did that have to invalidate or discredit all other threads, all other histories?
…reflection of God’s vision of change, the same way that birth was. Maybe it was the point of life, and of the Bible, that things had to change. Was this not what the pastor had said was the reason why the New Testament was created after the Old?
It is viable for multiple sexual identities to exist in the society and leave in peace with each identity refusing to be narrow-minded about the possibility of other identities. Despite the claim of foreign origins, the society is capable of change and should be able to widen its frontier to accommodate the changes it is experiencing. The novel subtle undertakes a journey of normalising queer sexualities.
