Comments on: Its time to return what was stolen from Africa

By: Ptof Chris L Wanjala

Ptof Chris L Wanjala — Mon, 24 May 2010 08:15:53 +0000

JOHN WANYONYI MANGULIECH hails from Kimilili Location,Bungoma District, Western Province,Kenya.He belongs to a genre of ritual artists called BASAWLA KUMUSE,in Africa.He is a reciter of the history of his people during a ceremony called LUFU.A senior citizen dies.Three days after the burial, that ritual called LUFU is perfromed.Mourners who include dignitaries of the ethnic group assemble in the home of the diseased ; they choose an open ground in front of the hut of the deceased and sit in a horse shoe “circle,”with the next of kin and the relations of the deceased on one side,and the visitors on the other.The ritual leader who for our purpose is Mr.John Wanyonyi Mangulechi,describes a line dividing the two sides of the horse she.He walks along this line as he lectures the people who remain seated throughout the performance.He traces the origin of man drawing from the creation stories of the ethnic group and the history of man worldwide.He narrates the stories of heroes of the tribe and their contributions to the well-being of the tribe.He blends his narrative with song, dance, and aphorism,which echo the genetic wisdom passed from one generation to another.He tries to tie tradition to modernity and illustrates moral lessons using the oral history of the tribe.He warns the young and the old about conduct that deviates from the norm.He tells the daredevils not to climb a slippery tree called KUMURUMBA.In 1982,a section of the Kenyan army tried to organize a cou detat(?).They failed and some of them died.Manguliechi uses their story to illustrate the moral of climbing.They tried to climb a tree and came down rolling and weeping.He teaches women to respect their husbands:Ä wife is a cook,”Manguliechi preaches. “She cooks and feeds the husband’s people- community”.The moral conduct of the woman is stressed.The ideal woman is called OMUKHAYE( a lady.)He instructs men on how to handle their wives.Every husband has to bear certain things in mind when he is dealing with women.A woman is arunning river.A man can pierce the water with his spear.He will not leave a mark made by that spear in the water.A man crosses the river.He leaves no footprint on the water.One spear is not enough to pirce a woman’s shield.Manguliechi, as a ritual leader,is the paragon of good morals and an enemy of sorcerers and other malevolent people in the society.He teaches the youth how to grow in an upright way..

by Chris L Wanjala

By: Ptof Chris L Wanjala

Ptof Chris L Wanjala — Mon, 24 May 2010 07:41:43 +0000

What was the legacy of Okot p’Bitek(1930-1982) regarding the promotion of East Africa’s intangible heritage?

By: Ptof Chris L Wanjala

Ptof Chris L Wanjala — Mon, 24 May 2010 07:35:08 +0000

Dear friends,
Chris Wanjala who is a renowned authot of the critical text,The Season of Harvest is a renowned literary critic who worked with such luminaries as Ngugi wa Thiongó,Okot p’Bitek,Henry Owuor Anyumba and Taban Lo Liyong to bring British culture in Kenya to its knees.He is the author of Standpoints of Literature(1973),The Season of Harvest,1978, and For Home and Freedom(1980).His novel,Drums of Death,was first published in 2005.He has edited Faces at Crossroads, Singing with the Night,Debtors and Attachments to the Sun.He is working on his memoir.He is Professor of Literature at the University of Nairobi.His interest in museaums and monuments comes from his background of African Studies.He helped to found the Egerton Museaum in Njoro,Kenya.He is a consultant with Bomas of Kenya where he has helped to redefine the role of that cultural centre in the promotionm of tourism in East Africa.He chaired the technical committee which drafted the cultural policy of Kenya.Currently he is helping the directorate of tourism as it comes up with the stratigic plan for culture and heritage tourism.In his book,The Season of Harvest, he cracks the myth perpetrated by Taban lo Liyong, that East Africa, as compared to West and South Africa, is a literary and cultural desert.His is an examination of culture, literature and art,and the way intellectuals, especially creative writers and politicians have helped or discouraged its progress.He extols writers from Africa,the Caribbean,and Black America,who have managed to correct the picture of Africa as a continent without culture,education, and technology.He reproches writers whose works merely copy the popular culture of the West.In his book,The Season of Harvest,he eamines three levels of alienation:a situation where an African writer cynically portrays sex,adventure, crime and violence for the easy pleasure of his/her reader;the writer who concentrates on form and language of the text and ignores the message.The third level is positive:the writer does not only seek to expalin,but also to change it. He delineates the role of literature in society.He describes how literature can change the society.He shows how a writer, endowed with language and imagination makes an adverse situation vivid by using his/her imagination to portray the situation with a view to changing it.Writers inevitably live as individuals;to create,they must wthdraw from the society.Chris L Wanjala, an accomplished lieray critic himself discusses the role of the critic.The critic examines the role of the writer and the attitudes of the consumers of works of art.
Comments on Chris L Wanjala’s ouvre of wrks by KITUYI KEVIN MANYONGE.

By: chris L Wanjala,PhD,Professor of Literature

chris L Wanjala,PhD,Professor of Literature — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 02:53:52 +0000

Pan-Africanism must start with us as individuals coming from individual African communities with each of us as representatives of those communities.Jomo Kenyatta was an institution and everything about him has monumental value to all of us Africans at home and in the Diaspora.It was Banda of Malawi who built a monument in Blantyre in honour of Kenyatta.Kenyatta spent many years in England and travelled to Russia.Have all his memorabilia been returned to Kenya? Has his walking stick been returned to Kenya from the British Museum?These are things we are talking.When Lord Maurice Egerton of Tatton(1874-1958)hunted in Africa, all the animal heads he collected were returned to Manchester and housed in the Tenants’ Hall in Tatton Park in Knutsford.The only legacy he has in Kenya is Egerton University and his three farms which were donated to the Kenya Government.If Kenya can return Britain’s artefacts- material culture items belonging to a Briton- why does the West not reciprocate?

By: chrisman Letters

chrisman Letters — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 23:01:08 +0000

Dear Muthoni,
How come you did not find a minute to reply me?

By: Edgard Mansoor

Edgard Mansoor — Mon, 12 May 2008 16:15:42 +0000

For similar cases and more comments,please visit also this page, this page & this page. Thank you, Edgard Mansoor

By: Edgard Mansoor

Edgard Mansoor — Mon, 12 May 2008 00:02:40 +0000

For a similar case, look at this post.

Edgard Mansoor

By: chris Wanjala

chris Wanjala — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 15:28:06 +0000

Dear Muthoni.I want you to elaborate on a few points.
Chris Wanjala

By: Dr.KWAME OPOKU

Dr.KWAME OPOKU — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 21:33:22 +0000

Since writing thia article,we have noted the good example of Italy in returning to Ethiopia the Axum obelisk which was stolen under Benito Mussolini.

THE RETURN OF THE OBELISK TO ETHIOPIA: A VICTORY FOR ETHIOPIA, ITALY AND THE RULE OF LAW.

The return home of the final piece of the Axum obelisk to Ethiopia is an undoubted victory for Ethiopia, Italy the rule of law and democracy.
The Ethiopians must be congratulated for their persistent and unwavering struggle for the return of a cultural object and a symbol of their identity which was forcibly removed by the Italian fascists under Benito Mussolini in their attempt to colonize Ethiopia some 68 years ago. Years of protests, anger and anguish have preceded this final and historic victory of Ethiopia. All Africans must rejoice with them, in the hope that this signals a new beginning in our relationship with former colonizing European powers as far as the return of stolen or illegally transferred cultural objects are concerned. France, Great Britain, Germany, Portugal, Spain, Holland, Belgium and the rest of those countries, whether former colonizers or not, such as Austria and Switzerland, should take note of this historical event for which the Italians are to be congratulated.
It surely was not an easy task to convince many Italians who, like the rest of Europeans, have been subjected to false propaganda for many decades by the so-called experts who claim that it is legal and right to deprive others of their cultural objects through the use of force. They have been convinced that if you are strong enough, you can take whatever you want from another country, particularly, African and Asian countries and keep it despite claims for return by the countries of origin. They have been taught that Resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly, the Conventions of UNESCO and other bodies discouraging such practices and urging the settlement of outstanding disputes are not binding and should therefore be ignored.
They have heard important museum directors, from museums such as the Louvre, The British Museum, Musée du Quai Branly, Museum für Völkerkunde Wien, Ethnologisches Museum, Staatlische Museen zu Berlin, The Art Institute of Chicago, Opificio delle Pietre Dure, Florence, Prado Museum, Madrid and others state that these stolen objects are now part of the culture of the countries which stole them and are now keeping them. The supporters of Mussolini’s fascists in Italy must have seen this return as a final and definite confirmation of the defeat of their racist ideology which places the African at the bottom of their racist ladder of human development: a return to Africans of the 160-tonne obelisk which the Duce himself has ordered to be taken to Rome as a war trophy. The return of such cultural objects to their owners should be seen as part of a long-term process to discard racist and imperialist superiority complexes. These racist complexes have hindered in the past the observance of the principles of equality and the respect for human rights in Europe and elsewhere. Some may consider the return of these cultural objects as a necessary catharsis.

The return of the obelisk is also a triumph for the rule of law and democracy. The rule of law is incompatible with the use of force and certainly the acquisition of cultural objects, whether in war or in peace through the use of force cannot be considered as compatible with democracy. You cannot preach democracy and resort to the use of force to deprive other nations of their cultural objects. I am well aware that there are many voices in the United States, Great Britain, France, Italy, and elsewhere who do not think the use of force to remove cultural objects from Asia and Africa have anything to do with the rule of law and human rights.
The return of the obelisk also gives the lie to those museum directors who act as if the removal of stolen cultural objects from their countries will somehow affect their cultural identity. Italian culture will surely survive the removal of the Axum obelisk. Will the British, French, German and Austrian cultures survive the removal of stolen African cultural objects from their countries? Will Berlin survive the return of Nefertiti to Cairo?
What can the reader do to help this process of restitution? The main problem, as far the average reader is concerned, is the absence of information on what objects have been stolen from which country and by which country. Many museums do not even list most of these items in their handbooks or catalogues and keep them safely in their depots.
A first step would be to consult the internet sites of movements such as the African Reparation Movement to see the list of stolen items from your country or other countries. If there are museums near where you live, visit them to see if you can look at some of these objects and try to ask questions. You should also look at the UNESCO homepage to find some literature on the subject.
The main problem for us as Africans is the lack of interest on the part of most of our governments for this issue. Many have not even bothered to request from the former colonial governments for the return of our cultural objects which were taken away during the colonial period. You must ask why. Many of our intellectuals and museums experts have also kept a deafening silence. Many of our countries have not even bothered to ratify the UNIDROIT and UNESCO Conventions on this matter. It almost looks as if our leaders are not interested in cultural matters. Where then is the famous pride in our culture?
Kwame Opoku,Vienna,29 October

By: DR.KWAME OPOKU

DR.KWAME OPOKU — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:08:40 +0000

Muthoni Thang’wa is surely right on all points. The real wonder is how western museum directors and their allies, presumably persons with university education, can advance arguments which they must know are untenable. I have spent a considerable time in examining these arguments and there is not a single one which is respectable either from the point of view of logic, law or history. Most of them are so flawed that attempts to counter them may come close to insult. Take the argument that the African religious or ritual objects kept in European museums have become part of the culture of the British and other Europeans. Is it being seriously suggested that the traditional African religions against which European missionaries and others carried on a ferocious battle are now part of the religious practices of Europeans? Will the Catholic and Anglican churches buy such arguments?
One can only conclude that for some Europeans and Americans, when it comes to defending the looted art objects that fill their museums, any argument, however devoid of substance ,is better than none and that they must at all costs defend their illegitimate possessions. Africans must take note of this position. Kwame Opoku.