THE SOCIAL FUNCTION OF WRITERS

There was a strong correlation of response to questions about the function of writers. Most writers suggested variations on writers should inform, educate and entertain (for example, Randoulph Wilson claimed the function of writers was to “entertain, to correct society and to inform”). All the writers interviewed assumed that their role as a writer was to contribute to society. Writers based outside the country, such as Jarrett-Macauley and Cheney-Coker, defended their artistic freedom first yet were drawn to engage with what Achebe calls “the task of re-education and regeneration” (Achebe, 1975, p. 73) facing Sierra Leonean society. For example, Jarrett-Macauley suggested that African born writers may seek to promote social change but that “it should be a personal choice” whereas the response of Sierra

Leonean based writers was to assume it to be a duty. Indeed, the belief that writing is socially and politically useful, I suggest, is taken for granted amongst writers in Sierra Leone yet the specificities of how writers actually impact society did not appear to have been investigated or significantly problematised.

Amongst Sierra Leonean writers there is an assumption that literature can raise aspirations and that the development of the creative imagination is a progressive human goal. There is

165

also an assumption once someone is educated and literate in English that it equips them an authority to speak on societal issues assuming an acquired wisdom. Undoubtedly social conditions and the recent experience of civil conflict has led to an overemphasis on the educative role of creative writers who might well be writing thematically different work of better quality if effective social, educational and publishing infrastructure were in place and a local readership existed. Were social conditions to improve and better channels of

communication to exist between writers and society, writing might adopt more of an entertainment role.

Writers arrogate a role for themselves to act as a check on the excesses and shortcomings of both citizen and nation while novice writers, in particular, tend to adopt a didactic tone in their writing. As a whole the authors interviewed were unclear exactly who they write for i.e. the internal population or an international English audience (the latter being more prevalent due to potential international recognition, travel and new income opportunities). They subsist as a group that write, read each other’s work, perform and discuss their work and Sierra Leonean issues through the gaze (and from the space they occupy) as Sierra Leonean writers.

AVS Koroma defined a Sierra Leonean writer as “a patriot who describes issues critically and is devoid of any bias or malice’. He believes writers can bring social change because people become “better informed, sensitised and educated about the ills of society and it lays a foundation or basis for solutions” (2006). Sydnella Shooter seeks to make a “meaningful contribution to build a nation ruined by war” through her writing yet at the same time wants to leave the war behind. She sees writing as a way to “express deep thoughts and

166

For Arthur Smith the individual role of the writer is “to entertain, teach and inspire high ideals”. The writer is the “trumpeter of the existence of Sierra Leone creatively, with a Sierra Leonean identity trying to have a voice in the world”. The existing condition of writers, however, means that:

you are disenfranchised, threatened by being readerless hence in a position of weakness and those who can read and write may not be interested. You are isolated unwittingly becoming elitist without meaning to be. If we only write about elite interests then literature becomes isolated. Even the elite are of the people and should talk not about the good life but all problems social and political.

Arthur Smith admitted that being a writer in Sierra Leone is “a challenge”. This challenge is:

wrestling the nation from a downward slide into illiteracy and ignorance tied up with abject poverty – reinforced by impoverished minds that cannot read or listen to other voices. [There is a] very limited and unprogressive mindset.

In 2010, Smith added “A reading country is a more development oriented country. The writer has a duty to go beyond just writing and raise national consciousness, public spiritedness and literary consciousness”. Similarly, Farouk Sesay suggested the role of writer is to “reawaken the consciousness of the people”.

Mohammed Sheriff considers himself an ‘engaged writer’ in that he “writes all the time, is committed and determined to see his writing reaching out to audience and make a difference”. Creative writers are almost always engaged in other professions so whether they are socially engaged or not depends on what their other work is. However, he also stated “You can’t avoid social responsibility if you are educated and can write.” Sheriff views his writing role as a form of social and development action.

167

Pat Maddy claimed that “As a writer, I want to know where the wealth is going, what kind of education people are getting and to be able to bring that consciousness so people know their rights”. He said his plays ‘Big Berrin’ and ‘Big Breeze Blow’ (both from 1984) “all happened – lawlessness, killing and raping is still here”. Maddy complained that some people produced “pseudo elitist plays whereas he used people from the street”. He was very frustrated with the lack of interest in literature and the decline of reading. “People who don’t read are becoming librarians” he complained “it’s crazy.”

De Souza George claimed he is “writing for and to the people” however he felt that writers are divided concerning whether they are the voice of the people or not:

Maybe the idea of being a voice for the people no longer holds as people have radio voices and music and are not listening or reading their authors.

According to De Souza George, there is a switch to arts for development and so people are writing for different audiences and with particular messages. His own motivations are very strongly geared to social improvement yet, as with other authors, the means for achieving this goal are not easily available: “If writers are convinced about the messages they preach, their commitment will induce the necessary atmosphere (to bring about social change)” De Souza George claimed.

Aminatta Bangura said “novels improve my English and help me know more about my culture”. She suggested that the best way to increase literacy and reading was to “decrease sports activities” and “close most cinema venues”. Memunata Samura said that literature helps “motivate people to read and learn more about society.” Other reading group members

suggested the following purposes for literature:

168

“to help us know more re cultural behaviour, things happen in everyday lives, “to motivate people to read and learn more”

“entertainment, social criticism and education” (John Kallon)

The fact that drama (in Krio and other indigenous languages) is thriving as a tool for

community development promoted ambivalent responses amongst writers with those working in this field tending to defend it as a new incarnation of Sierra Leonean drama. The role of the writer, for Farouk Sesay, “should not be to work on sensitisation. Commercial theatre has been swallowed by sensitisation which kills creativity and restricts it. Theatre needs finance.” Tom Caurray talked of playwrights becoming “theatre messengers” switching from writing to represent the masses to selling messages to masses. “Authorial authority is gone” he

complained. “People must be suspicious of theatre. Entertainment has become about education and likewise education has become entertainment”.

Writers value and actively enjoy the unique space that writing and ‘being a writer’ in Sierra Leone provides. In fact, Elvis Hallowell recalled that, during the war, they “talked more about what it meant to be a poet rather than representing people”. He also alluded to a sense of belonging to a tradition of revolutionary African poets:

The Sierra Leone civil war heightened consciousness and people weren’t occupied in other ways so they met, write, drank, talked and read Nigerian Literature for solace, we compared ourselves to Christopher Okigbo, JP Clark, the Senegalese negritude poet Senghor and Okot p Bitek. Literature in the war was full of fire.

Questions on the social function of the writer prompted further discussion on the crisis of readership which was raised as a constraint. The decline of reading was interpreted, initially, as another symptom of national malaise rather than something that writers could seek to

169

change by actively supporting or initiating literacy campaigns or translating their work into audio programmes in local languages, for example. Writers from the group identified as ‘recent writers with university education’ are becoming ambassadors for literature in order to promote the conditions in which their writing may be able to reach, and potentially influence, more Sierra Leoneans as well as to gain respect and popularity as national writers.

Although writers assume a broad social role as distinctly Sierra Leonean writers, there is a thematic disjuncture between writers and the populace. While Sierra Leoneans crave

entertainment and escape (hence the popularity of Nigerian films and Premier League football) writers continue to produce socially motivated literature which people are either unable or unwilling to read. Writers are aware that Sierra Leoneans are becoming saturated with educational messages and advice and less aware that their own writing often leans towards that direction even if it is not commissioned as a form of sensitisation.