I do agree with the majority of the class. The ending of “The Book of Not” is disappointing. We are introduced to this feisty young woman in “Nervous Conditions” who refuses to accept that there are certain positions in life that you can’t rise above. We see this naivety that endears us to Tambu and causes us to hope with her and root for her despite the odds stacked against her. We see her physically stand up for herself against her brother when she figures out he is stealing her mealies. Then as Tambu begins to mature and become more immersed in the “real world” we see this fire that she possesses slowly begin to die out. There are a few times when we almost see the same spark (when she received the best O-level grades and she was certain she would receive the award and this goes on for the better portion of the term) but in the end, she is beaten down and broken by her family and the British education system. But real life doesn't happen the way we want it to. I believe that Dangarembga wrote the end of the book this way because this mirrors real life. In real life, there are (as mentioned numerous times in class this past week) glass ceilings and there isn’t always a “happy ending”.
The conversation with Mai is interesting. The story is told from Tambu’s point of view, who we have been rooting for her Nervous Condition. And from that same time (since nervous conditions), we have seen Mai almost as another obstacle that is blocking Tambu’s way. It’s so easy for us focus on how out of line Mai is, especially once we hear her demanding for what she feels is justified to her after he found out that she was the one who reported Babamukuru to the Elder Siblings. But then again, with Zimbabwea being in this liminal, transition state (especially during the war time), family loyalties and communities fall apart.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The last sentence of your post is spot-on.
ReplyDeleteI, too, think that Mai is being a little unreasonable considering that she has never given Tambu a reason to want to send money home. However, I think you're right -- war puts strains on families that would otherwise be normal (if there is such thing). Not only is Mai having to cope with the physical absence of most of her children, but she is also having to psychologically sedate herself -- the world is just too much for her. On the homestead, there are few possessions, so her children are her most treasured items, and they are all taken away from her, not on her own accord.
Her betrayal against Babamakuru was probably not as personal as Maiguru made it out to be; she probably just needed to do something to cope. She wanted to punish someone for this life that has been dealt to her, and since Babamakuru seems to be living so "well," then she targeted him. I don't think their family relation was considered in Mai's psychological state.
I really like that you defended Mai, and the point Prof. Shingavi made in class was eye-opening. I never considered the implications upon Mai of losing her oldest daughter - and thus her biggest help on the fields. Not to mention the continuous loss of children, from Nhamo to Netsai (who is lost to the cause, and no longer a help on the fields, but rather one more person to look after). Thus her turning on Babamukuru and blaming him makes sense, as she is probably in a terrible emotional state and needs to displace them.
ReplyDelete