Caroline DeRhodes INTL 3111 Arnold July 1, 2011 Ironic Disconnect in Anthills of the Savannah In Anthills of the Savannah,

author Chinua Achebe draws his novel to a very interesting, somewhat surprising conclusion. Chris Oriko, one of the main characters of the novel, faces a tragic death when he is shot in the chest by a police officer. What is more tragic about this is the irony surrounding the situation. Similarly, in the short story Silence, author Tadeusz Borowski fills his story with irony. Both of these authors clearly chose ironic situations to focus the readers attention on what they felt was important. In both of these stories, the author makes use of an ironic disconnect between the readers expectations and the events that actually occur in the plot. One of the most ironic things about these stories is the idea of corruption. In Anthills, the police officers are supposed to be the authority figures and protect the people from harm. Instead, they are the ones who rob a beer truck after Sams death and drink to the point of intoxication. To make things worse, the police sergeant, who is clearly inebriated, abducts a young school girl in attempt to drag her behind a cluster of huts to rape her. Whether it is the alcohol or the corruption of the police force in general that is causing the police officer to do this is unclear. However, it is obvious that this police officer is not fulfilling his civic duty. On the other hand, in Silence, the prisoners are the corrupted ones. One would think that these prisoners of the concentration camp would be innocent in their situation, just struggling to survive. While this may have been their motto in the beginning, it has clearly become very

DeRhodes 2

skewed by the end. They manage to capture a Nazi guard and end up stomping him to death. Perhaps it was the torture they faced, or perhaps it was just hatred toward their captors, but something had to fuel their resentment for this officer. In fact, they choose to kill the man after the American has told them that the United States is there to rescue them and punish the camp guards. This proves how deep their hate was, almost to the point of loathing, that they would still decide to kill him knowing he would be punished. These authors provide evidence that corruption can be present within anyone, authority figure, prisoner, or otherwise. In fact, this was one of Borowskis writing styles; he makes a point not to depict the prisoners as totally innocent (Carpenter). Also ironic in these two stories are the roles that the authority figures play. The police sergeant in Anthills should be the one keeping order after the death of Sam, yet he is drinking along with everyone else. He made the choice to abandon his duties and jump on the partying bandwagon. He goes as far as to attempt to rape a young girl and then murder Chris by shooting him point blank in the chest. Although the police sergeant made all these decisions, they were in fact his decisions to make, drunk or not. He does not attempt to have control over anyone or anything besides his rape victim. Sam on the other hand, who is also a prominent authority figure, attempts to have control of everyone and everything in his village. His attempts of control include corruption and terror, trying to strike fear into those inferior to him. He believes his power as an authority figure is more that of a totalitarian dictator. Similarly, in Silence, the American officer seems to be under the impression that he has the whole camp and its prisoners under his control. He walks into the prisoners barracks and begins speaking like he deserves their undivided attention no matter what they had been doing prior to his arrival. However, the two men whispering about where they could kill the Nazi

DeRhodes 3

guard shows that the American obviously does not have the attention he thinks he does. He asks the prisoners, not [to] commit lawless deeds, which may lead to trouble, and please pass the sons of bitches over to the camp guards (Borowski 322). Tadeusz notes that the block answered with a prolonged shout, yet shows no mention whether it was a shout of approval. Earlier however, when the American states that, all the criminals of the S.S. [] will be punished Borowski notes that the men in the bunks broke into applause and shouts. In smiles and gestures they tried to convey their friendly approval of the young man from across the ocean (Borowski 322). Borowski clearly wants the reader to note the difference between the prisoners shouts of genuine approval and their shouts of appeasement. They clearly feel the S.S. guards should be punished, but do not agree with the Americans suggestion of not committing acts of lawlessness. Unlike the police sergeant, the American officer seems to think he has complete control of the prisoners, as if they will follow every order he gives them. The police sergeant is the one committing the acts of lawlessness, while the American officer lets his pseudo sense of control allow the prisoners commit the lawless act they were planning. This is where Borowski ties in his ironic disconnect; the reader believes that the prisoners are shouting in agreement with the American officer, yet we later find out that they were not so much shouts of agreement as they were appeasement. Both of these stories end with someone facing a horrific murder, yet it is unclear whether either of the characters deserves it. In Silence, though we do not know the Nazi guards past, we can assume he was as cruel and torturous as Nazis stereotypically were. This being said, it is likely that he deserved the death he faced. If he held the prisoners captive and forced them to perform acts that they did not want to on a daily basis, he caused the prisoners to eventually reach their breaking point. Some may argue that the guard deserved a fair trial and to be

DeRhodes 4

punished by the law, while some may agree that he deserved the fate he came to. I believe this is why Borowski ends the story with the stomping of the guard, to allow the reader to reflect on the series of events and make conclusions of their own. In Anthills, Chris is shot in the chest after attempting to stand up to the police sergeant for trying to rape a young girl. While it may seem obvious that Chris did not deserve the fate he met, that conclusion is still unclear to me. He absolutely did the right thing by standing up to the sergeant, yet it seems that this is the first time that he has stood up to anyone or anything throughout the entire novel. He clearly does not agree with Sam and his methods of being president, yet he never does anything about it. Even after Sam orders the murder of Ikem, Chris does nothing to honor his memory by standing up to his childhood friend. When Sam orders Chriss death, Chris chooses to flee rather than stand up to him like a man. While Chris probably does not deserve to be shot and killed, it is the principle of his decisions that are called into question by his death. Chris does so much lying down throughout the novel, that when he finally decides to stand up, it seems to be too little too late. Both Achebe and Borowski chose to implement ironic disconnect throughout their stories to convey a certain point. Borowskis main theme seems to be that the prisoners are not always the victims. He chose to set his story in a concentration camp, where people were victimized for years and people assume that the prisoners were totally innocent, and manages to depict those same prisoners as the evil ones. Achebe however, seems to have a deeper message to express. Being actively involved in the politics within the African culture, Achebe has experienced firsthand the corruption and power struggle that comes along with it (Schleh). It seems that he has taken his personal experiences and combined them with fictional characters and stories to create Anthills of the Savannah. When Chris died, he was not standing up to Sam or defending

DeRhodes 5

his longtime friend, Ikem; instead, he died at the hands of a petty, drunk police officer over a matter completely irrelevant to Chriss role throughout the novel. Seemingly, Achebe is telling us that there is no real happy ending. Sam is eventually killed, but Chris and Ikem are also dead, giving us the impression that their efforts were all for nothing. But it is Ikems daughter, Amaechina, that signifies Achebes representation of hope. Amaechina, meaning, may the path never close gives Kangan hope that the future will be much brighter than their past. Achebes use of ironic disconnect, although unclear at first, eventually helps lead us to this conclusion.

DeRhodes 6

Works Cited Carpenter, John R. "Tadeusz Borowski." Literature Resource Center. 1 July 2011. Schleh, Eugene P. "Chinua Achebe: Voice of Africa." Literature Resource Center. May 1983. 1 July 2011.