Abstract
Let me start by admitting the obvious, that drama is not primarily an art of discourse. If that is so, then what has it to do with rhetoric to justify the title of this essay? Now rhetoric is the body of principle and theory having to do with the presentation of facts and ideas in a clear convincing and attractive language having about five divisions: (a) Poem (b) Narration (c) Argument (d)
Remarks and (e) Peroration or conclusion.
Remarks and (e) Peroration or conclusion.
Introduction
Aristotle, a classical authority on rhetoric conceived of it as a manner of effectively organising material for the presentation of truth while he thought of poetics as the presentation of ideas emotionally and imaginatively. It is clear that drama and rhetoric have at least one thing in common: namely language "the nexus of empirical and social reality"¹. From this one thing others inevitably follow: they may share ideas, "facts", "truth", "convincingness" and "attractiveness", and finally, both are structured. Given that they both share that "nexus of empirical and social reality" and given their common concern far "truth" and "ideas", it is not difficult to see why and how some literary, artists quite overtly and delibrately combine "poetics" with rhetoric, as Femi Osofisan does in Who's Afraid of Solarin2 which may be regarded as a forensic discourse or a dramatization of same³.
Content
The title of the play is the main thrust of Osofisan's proem and as proposition of invention, it is generative in nature and function. First it is generative of the dialectic between “afraid" and “not afraid”, along with other sets of dialectics; and secondly, it is generative of the need to show proof of "afraid or "not afraid". The title of the play, therefore, is a kid of maximal proposition in which "proof" of the inferential idea generated by it is located. As Donavan J. Ochs has observed: "Invention is generally defined as the locating of either true or probable proof..."4 Thus proof of the "truth" or probability that someone is afraid of Solarin must be located within the empirical and social reality which constitutes the drama. Solarin, therefore, is both instrinsic and extrinsic as a factor in proof of "afraid" or "not afraid". As dramatic persona he is extrinsic but as "truth" or "idea", he is intrinsic, because the author uses his name as testimony to prove who is afraid and why he is (or they are) afraid.
The use of testimony from external matter in proof of a proposition isvery well recognised in rhetoric. Cicero wrote of it I define testimony as everything which is taken from external matter to win credibility. Not every sort of person has impact as authority. To win credibility, influence attached to the person is sought. Either one's nature or circumstances give rise to influence. Influence in one'snature resides in greatness of virtue... (emphasis added)s
The use of testimony from external matter in proof of a proposition isvery well recognised in rhetoric. Cicero wrote of it I define testimony as everything which is taken from external matter to win credibility. Not every sort of person has impact as authority. To win credibility, influence attached to the person is sought. Either one's nature or circumstances give rise to influence. Influence in one'snature resides in greatness of virtue... (emphasis added)s
Conclusion
We have shown in this paper that Soyinka's diction is decidedly more difficulty in his prose (The Interpreters) than in his drama. We have also shown that dominant and peculiar rhythm which we have referred to as "Soyinkaian penultimate pause" is discernible is both his prose and his drama. As we said in the introduction, there is always something else to say about Soyinka's art. It makes sense, therefore, to conclude that this rhythmic device which links Soyinka's prose and drama is yet something else something which no careful reader can miss in the works of this great African writer.
References
Allan, W. Stamard (1978). Living English Speech; Longman Dathorne
O.R. (1979). African Literature in the Twentieth Century: Heinemann,
Eka, D. (1991). Diction and Rhthym in Wole Soyinka's The Interpreters. Forthcoming in Journal of the Literary Society of Nigeria.
Fowler, Roger (1981), Prose Rhythm and Metre. In Roger Fowler (ed.) Essays in Style and Language;
Rortledge and Kegan Paul, London; pp. 82 -199. Gimson, A.C. (1977). A Practical Course of English Pronunciation: A Perception Approach; Edward Arnold, London.
Osundare, N. (1987). Style and Literary Communication in African Prose Fiction in English. In: S.O. Unoh (ed.) Topical Issues in Communication Arts Vol. One; Modern Business Press, Uyo pp. 134-167.
Soyinka, W. (1967). Kongi's Harvest A Three Course Book Oxford University Press; London. (1967) The Interpreters. Heinemann, London (1984). The Trials of Brother Jero: Spectrum Books Ltd, Ibadan.
Vincent, Theo (1976). Rhythm and Meaning in Poetry. Journal ofthe Nigeria English Studies Association. Vol. 8 No. 2; 32 - 40.
O.R. (1979). African Literature in the Twentieth Century: Heinemann,
Eka, D. (1991). Diction and Rhthym in Wole Soyinka's The Interpreters. Forthcoming in Journal of the Literary Society of Nigeria.
Fowler, Roger (1981), Prose Rhythm and Metre. In Roger Fowler (ed.) Essays in Style and Language;
Rortledge and Kegan Paul, London; pp. 82 -199. Gimson, A.C. (1977). A Practical Course of English Pronunciation: A Perception Approach; Edward Arnold, London.
Osundare, N. (1987). Style and Literary Communication in African Prose Fiction in English. In: S.O. Unoh (ed.) Topical Issues in Communication Arts Vol. One; Modern Business Press, Uyo pp. 134-167.
Soyinka, W. (1967). Kongi's Harvest A Three Course Book Oxford University Press; London. (1967) The Interpreters. Heinemann, London (1984). The Trials of Brother Jero: Spectrum Books Ltd, Ibadan.
Vincent, Theo (1976). Rhythm and Meaning in Poetry. Journal ofthe Nigeria English Studies Association. Vol. 8 No. 2; 32 - 40.