Conflict of dogma: An investigation of the three competing belief systems in The River Between

Conflict of dogma: An investigation of the three competing belief systems in The River Between

Mark Olofson

University of Vermont

Link to pdf

______________________________________________________

            The belief systems of communities serve as part of the cultural glue that help to bind them together. In his book The River Between, Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo describes the conflict that arises when three different belief systems, which can be framed as both political and religious, try to occupy the same space in the hearts and attitudes of a previously united people (1965). The assimilationist viewpoint is embodied by Joshua through his devout Christianity; the militant-nationalist perspective and the importance of adherence to tribal customs is the perspective of Kabonyi. The third way, a more conservative nationalist path, is led by Waiyaki and his religious devotion dedicated the spread of education. For all three of these factions, their belief systems provide answers to questions and conflicts that that stem from the encroachment of the white man into their valley. The battle escalates due to the faith that each group puts in their beliefs, which makes the conflict not just among people, but also among worldviews. By investigating these different belief systems, we can understand how they provide comfort to their adherents in uncertain times, and due to their very nature hinder the possibility of compromise. Viewed in this way, I believe the story can be understood as a more broad description of reaction to forces that stand to fundamentally alter a way of life, although Ngũgĩ has seated the narrative within the specific context.

            The character of Joshua converted to Christianity at a young age, and due to his new faith, feared the retribution of his friends and neighbors (Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo, 1965, p. 29). From the mission he gained an education, which led to him denouncing the ways of his community. In his new faith he found comfort, safety, and a new community. As he grew in his faith and learned from the missionaries, he began to look down on his own people. Those that joined him in the church became part of this new community, and furthered the divide between the two. The deeper the division, the stronger Joshua was required to cling to his new faith. Not only was he a stubborn man (p. 27), but the Christian community satisfied his basic human need of belonging, and as the separation between the communities widened, the Christian community became the only sphere where that need could be fulfilled.

            The church also provided Joshua with a route to leadership in a community that did not depend on the traditional path to power. He was able to rise to prominence not through years of obedience, right action, right speech, and savvy political decisions; instead, his individual ability to preach and bring others into the faith made him the leader of the growing Christian community (Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo, 1965 p. 58-59). Livingstone, the head of the mission, entrusted Joshua with the authority of the church, and depended on Joshua to carry the Christian message to the hills (p. 28), specifically the ban on circumcision following Muthoni’s death (p. 58). This leadership role required Joshua to grow in both the orthodoxy and fervor of his beliefs. It also required him to continue to focus on those things that were far away – be they Jerusalem or the afterlife (p. 31). His power did not rise organically from the traditions of the tribe; instead it was tied inseparably to this new belief system. Outside of the church, Joshua had no real power, and was isolated from non-believers (p. 29).

            The encroachment of the white man into the valley raised many questions among the people, upsetting their previous understandings of the world. For Joshua, Christianity provided the answers to these upsetting questions. He “was not prepared to question what he knew to be God-inspired assertions of the white man. After all, the white man had brought Christ into the country,” (Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo, 1965 p. 99). Because the settlers reinforced his beliefs as well as his power structure, they were in the right. The proper response to settlement was assimilation; turning away from ritual and sin and instead choosing to “walk in the light,” (p. 32). The church also answered the question of taxes and government for him, as it preached from the Gospel to “render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s” (Matthew 22:21, King James Version). In Joshua’s belief system, the arrival of more white settlers does not seem to be a scourge, but rather another element encouraging his neighbors to join him in his faith, making more “men of Joshua” (p.89), waiting “to hear every single word that came from this man of God, their shepherd” (p. 85).

            Joshua could not give up or modify his belief in Christianity or his evangelism without sacrificing his very self. He had to disown Muthoni after her death, due to her rebellion from his authority. To do any less would have created cracks in his identity. He could not reconcile with Kabonyi, because to do so would have been to approve of sin. He was unable to join with Waiyaki’s educational efforts because they allowed for the retention of the tribal customs, the very customs Joshua had built an identity by being against. Joshua’s Christianity superseded his tribal beliefs, and the allowance for any inclusion of these old ways would have eroded his foundation. Christianity was more than just a religion for him; it provided community, safety, leadership, and above all, answers to difficult questions. For Joshua, “[a]ll the tribe's customs were bad. That was final. There could never be a compromise,” (Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo, 1965, p. 84).

            Kabonyi’s militant nationalistic stance can be understood as a permutation of Barber’s “Jihad” (1992). Following his break from the Christian group after Muthoni’s death, he fully devoted himself to the preservation and propagation of the tribe’s traditional customs. These social rules, rites, and taboos provided him with a strong link to the past, and seem to provide him with security in uncertain times. Not only did the push back towards the traditional seat him comfortably in the present, it also provided answers to larger questions, such as who should lead (Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo, 1965 p. 96) , and how they should react to the changes that are taking place in the community (p. 95).

            Kabonyi also embraced this rejection of new ways and turned back towards the traditional because it provided for him a leadership role with real power. His was the voice calling for tribal purity (Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo, 1965, p. 95), and action over education (p 128). He was able not only to take control of the Kiama, but also to promote his son to a leadership position (p. 101), which would seem to strengthen his network and preserve his legacy. As a leader, Kabonyi tried to maintain the regular order of succession from one generation to the next, instead of the upending of traditional roles that happens when youth are educated in a western manner (Prakash & Esteva, 1998). Kabonyi reinforced this order and his elder role as he continued to refer to Waiyaki as “boy” even though the community and elders had taken to calling him “teacher” (Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo, 1965, p. 94).

            Kabonyi’s belief system provided for him answers for what to do about the white man, his missions, his settlers, his taxes, and his customs. He wanted to “[r]id the country of the influence of the white man” in order to “restore purity of the tribe and it's wisdom” (Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo, 1965, p. 95). They were antithetical to the traditional ways, and so they to were resisted and rejected. There was no place for the religion, the settlement, or the education as it was conducted by the new people coming to the valley. As he asked the group of parents: “do you think the education of our tribe, the education and wisdom which you all received, is in any way below that of the white man?” (p. 95). The only way forward was to take action to drive the white man out, not further education (p.128).

            Turning back inward, Kabonyi could not give up his orthodoxy without giving up his personal identity and the path forward that he sees for his family and tribe. He made a bold and public statement when he broke with Joshua and the other Christians; to back away from his jihad would have been to put all of that past into question. Furthermore, it is implied that Kabonyi sees himself as the possible savior from Chege’s prophecy; in order to fulfill this role, he must “restore tribal purity” ((Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo, 1965, p. 95) and “drive away the white man from the hills altogether, (p. 128). Compromising on the path of the Kiama and its drive to bring everyone back into the traditional fold would destabilize his power as well as the growing influence of his son, Kamau, who was now also tied tightly to the Kiama (p. 101).

            Kabonyi harbors hate for Joshua and Waiyaki and their belief systems, but for different reasons. The conflict with Joshua is more straightforward; when Muthoni died, Kabonyi took it as a wakeup call to return to the traditional ways. This resulted in his break with the church and his return to traditional ways. Joshua, although occupying the role of his antithesis, is easy for him to locate and understand. Kabonyi’s conflict with Waiyaki is more complex; there are personal and political matters involved. One main element of the struggle, however, lies with Kabonyi’s concern that the people place a higher value on the white man’s education than on their traditional learning (Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo, 1965, p. 95). He appears to agree with Prakash and Esteva’s argument that western education cuts children off from their own traditions (1998). Education was something that occurred naturally and through components of daily life, not in one of the rapidly propagating schools (Kenyatta, 1965). Further, Kabonyi’s worries are immediate, as he asks of Waiyaki “Will education give us back our land?” (p. 147). Waiyaki, with his community support for noticeably different methods, makes him an enemy from within the group (Barber, 1992); truly a more insidious force than Joshua. Reconciliation with either of the groups is impossible for Kabonyi without their recanting of their previous ways and renewed devotion to the ways and customs of which Kabonyi is master.

            Waiyaki held a third value system that differs from both assimilationist Christianity and militant nationalism; his higher power was education, and his political stance could be understood as being a more conservative nationalist stance. He wanted to obey his father’s command as well as embody his father’s prophecy, fulfilling his destiny as savior and the last in his line (Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo, 1965, p.20). After obtaining the missionary education, the dissemination of this education became his purpose and role. He believed that the idol of education could be included in the canons of both Joshua and Kabonyi, providing a “secular salvation” (Prakash & Esteva, 1998, p. 17)  that can unite the people.

            The spread of education also gave Waiyaki a defined and distinguished leadership role in the tribe. He is the teacher, and for the children, parents, and elders who came to share his faith in education, he is their savior. He is able to speak beyond his years, and his opinions and actions steer the community. Although it is debatable from where his sense of individualism arose – certainly his father’s personal mandate worked in conjunction with his missionary education – he found in education a realm to express this individualism and create for himself a new and important role. His dogma is simple: “[E]ducation for unity. Unity for political freedom” (Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo, 1965, p. 143).

            Waiyaki’s belief system led to a complicated relationship with the white man. On one side he had faith in the system of education created by them, and indeed understands a model of education propagation only through the western paradigm of schools. However, he still believed in the importance of traditions, understanding that to turn away from them would result in tribal disintegration (Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo, 1965, p. 141). Although he stated publically that education will bring unity that will allow for resistance, internally his assimilationist thoughts seem to undermine his nationalistic drive.

            Waiyaki could not give up his stance towards education without giving up the position that he had built for himself in the community. However, the steps which he took in order to achieve that position eventually led to his downfall. Taking the oath opened him to scrutiny, and resigning from the Kiama in order to pursue his own efforts created an early internal division. Just as Joshua’s break from tribal customs required him to dive deeply into Christianity; just as Kayonbi’s break from the church required him to become the voice of orthodoxy; so too did Waiyaki’s break from both require him to wholly invest himself into the cause of education and the role of teacher.

            Although Waiyaki preached about the unifying power of education, just like the other two belief systems present in the tribe, it required a rejection of the other schools of thought. Christian factions would have had to embrace some tribal customs; Nationalists would have had to accept the white man’s education. Arguably, any of the three ways could have brought internal stability to the tribe, had there been agreement among the people about the primacy of any one system. However, do to the religio-political nature of the belief systems, their adherents stood fast, and unity was impossible. For each faction, questions about their place in the world and what to do about the future were answered by their dogma, and the leaders could not compromise without compromising themselves. The book ends ambiguously, with divisions still present; perhaps the third way will be extinguished. But as long as divisions remain, the entire community is vulnerable to the coming of the white man.

References:

Barber, B. R. (1992). Jihad vs. McWorld. The Atlantic Monthly, (March), 53–65.

Kenyatta, J. (1965). Facing Mount Kenya: the traditional life of the Gikuyu. New York: Vintage books.

Ngũgĩ wa Thiongʼo. (1965). The river between. Oxford [Oxfordshire] ; Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Prakash, M. S., & Esteva, G. (1998). Education as a human right: the trojan horse of recolonization. In Escaping education: living as learning within grassroots cultures (pp. 1–33). New York: P. Lang.