Childlike Syntax

Something interesting that I have noticed throughout My Life in the Bush of Ghosts is the style in which Amos Tutola writes. In the Foreword, Geoffrey Parrinder states:

“Tutola’s writing is original and highly imaginative. His direct style, made more vivid by his use of English as it is spoken in West Africa, is not polished or sophisticated and gives his stories unusual energy… His writing is distinct from the correct but rather stiff essays that some more highly educated Africans produce…”

I have to agree with this point. There is a certain almost rambling feel to Tutola’s syntax at the beginning of the novel. The sentences are long and often repeat words or ideas… such as I did not “underst[and] the meaning of ‘bad’ and ‘good’”. He repeats this idea even in the following chapters. This style does two things for me as a ready. First of all, it creates a haunting overtone. The repetition is almost eerie, and the repetition of this phrase leaves the reader expecting to hear about the consequences of not knowing good or bad. The second thing it does for me, is mimics a child’s linguistic style. Children tend to make run on sentences or repeat ideas just to get a point across. Tutola is definitely not a child, but he writes with a childhood characteristic. This is what was missing in Ake and almost made the book unbelievable. As Soyinka was trying to relate a childhood experience in adult language and terms, here it seems as if Tutola is mimicking that childhood “experience” with altered syntax. An example of this is on page 113:

“ But having travelled with her to a distance of about one and a half miles we entered a town, and immediately we entered there I asked her for the name of the town, she replied that it is a nameless town.”

This line is almost poetic due to its rhythm. It reminds me of a children’s song. But something to notice is that these kinds of sentences become less frequent throughout the book up until the ending when he returns to his earthly town. Almost at once that singsong syntax is reiterated and to me, it seemed as if in a way he was a child again. When he left, he was a child and his mother and brother treated him as one. They did not watch him grow up or go through these life experiences, so in a way he is made into a child again. A good example of this is when his mother tells him he will not go to the bush world again in their presence. It is almost like an order given to a child.