The subversion of conventional masculinity and femininity in Euphrase Kezilahabi

Dunia Uwanja wa Fujo is Euphrase Kezilahabi’s novel that dramatises masculinity and femininity in relation to modern perspectives that contrast it with the traditional patriarchal definition of a man and a woman. The novel challenges and deconstructs the essentialists’ perceptions and perspectives of a man’s definition. This paper examines Kezilahabi’s attempt to challenge and deconstruct the traditional patriarchal definition of men and woman in the novel. The paper argues that masculinity and femininity are unisex and are fluid, hence, subject to continual alterations. The paper uses Robert Connell’s perspective of gender as a performed social construct and Judith Butler’s idea of the performative aspect of gender as a theoretical framework to read and interpret characters’ expression and performances in the novels. The analysis reveals that through his male and female characters, Kezilahabi explicitly demonstrates that that the socially-constructed masculinity and femininity constitute positions that can be occupied by both males and females and, hence, can be subverted. Through this novel, Kezilahabi dramatises multiple levels of masculinities and femininities influenced by modernity, Western ideology, education and money. Dunia Uwanja wa Fujo reveals Kezilahabi’s perception of gender as a contested taxonomy because of its mutable and ambivalent manifestations. Theoretical framework The reading and understanding of the subversion of conventional masculinity and femininity in Dunia Uwanja wa Fujo is informed by Butler’s (1990) and Connell’s (1995) gender perspectives According to Butler (1990), gender is a socially constructed through performance; it is manifested in ways through which individuals style their bodies and conduct themselves as well as ways through which they speak and move. She argues that gender is not only produced by and on particular bodies but is also located in particular activities, behaviours, and practices. It is through the “stylised repetition” of these gendered practices such as body gestures and mannerisms that masculinity is enacted through language (as a form of speech act), bodily (in terms of one‘s appearance), and through one’s actions. Butler further asserts that these gendered practices are not fixed and vary depending on situations. She, thus, sees masculinity and femininity as unstable subjects and discourages the categorisation of women/men as fixed coherent identities against the opposite sex. Like Butler, Connell (1995) contends that gender is not a natural state but is socially constructed through performances. Connell, who argues that masculinity exists in relation to femininity, insists that women can also possess and demonstrate masculinity features. She also points out that the concept of masculinity is always changing and in this changing process, there is a possibility of older forms of masculinity to be displaced by new ones because it is a dynamic ‘configurations of gender practice’ negotiated in time, ideology and culture (Connell, 2000, p. 28). It is a fluid subject. Connell and Butler differ from essentialists who believe that the construction of the male gender requires one’s moulding into a masculine role which presupposes autonomy, competition, and aggressiveness, and the domination of the innate human needs for connectedness, intimacy, and self-disclosure. A man is, therefore, expected to be active, tough, aggressive, a decision maker, a provider and his authority cannot be questioned by a woman whereas a woman is expected to be passive, submissive, silent, compassionate and caring. The essentialist patriarchal ideology rests on the idea that a man needs to prove his manhood because he has been socialised to believe that his masculinity is actually biological and not ascribed; thus, this state has to be continually maintained and enhanced through the externalisation of masculine behaviours. As opposed to the essentialists, Connell and Butler claim that gender is not natural without any necessary relationship between one’s body and one’s gender. Their notions of gender are, therefore, important in the discussion of this paper as they enable us to observe and interpret a character’s expressions and performances in Dunia Uwanja wa Fujo using a multilayered approach and affirm that masculinity and femininity are not fixed homogenous and innate constructs but are rather fluid, changing and circumstantial. 37 Sanaa Journal // Volume 1 (1): October 2016 The subversion of conventional masculinity and femininity in Euphrase Kezilahabi’s Dunia Uwanja wa Fujo, Felistas Richard Mahonge Subversion of Femininity and Masculinity In Dunia Uwanja wa Fujo, the author seems anxious to challenge the conventional definition of masculinity and femininity through the portrayal of his female characters Vera, Fatuma and Hadija, who display masculine traits similar to those of men and male characters; Denis, John and Tumaini who demonstrate feminine features. Kezilahabi uses Vera as an example of women who can transcend conventional gender boundaries. Through the portrayal of Vera (Mama Resi), he dramatises how a woman can perform masculinity and as such play roles traditionally and culturally assigned to men. Vera fights with a bus conductor when passengers are told to go out of the bus because it is stuck in the mud and needs to be pushed out. She refuses to alight and when the conductor forces her to do so, she yells at him saying she has paid her own bus fare and nobody should disturb her (56). Irritated by her arrogance, the bus conductor decides to return her money and forces Vera to take her luggage but she refuses, claiming that the agreement was to reach her destination. Angrily, the conductor pushes her down but she stands up and fights back. In this scene, Vera draws every passenger’s attention and many passengers are surprised by what they perceive to be her ‘arrogance’ and aggression. In this regard, the narrator explains: “Tumaini alishangaa kuona kulikuwa na wanawake wenye kiburi namna hii duniani” [literal translation: Tumaini was surprised to see that there are such arrogant women in the world] (Kezilahabi, 1975:58). Vera’s confrontation with the bus conductor appears to challenge normalised definitions and performance of everyday rituals of masculinity and femininity. Vera’s fight with men in public spheres deconstructs the conventional feminine traits of a traditional woman. The conventional patriarchal notion of a woman and the essentialists’ perception of a woman treat women as weak and non-aggressive characters who in most cases appear to be inferior and timid in front of men (Connell, 1995). However, Vera challenges this notion as she acts against what is expected of a conventional traditional woman. She undermines masculinity when she adamantly refuses to get out of the bus and the conductor is forced to let her stay put, while the rest of the passengers are ordered out. Sanaa Journal // Volume 1 (1): October 2016 Vera’s action is perceived as strange particularly by men who think that a woman must be submissive particularly to men. This kind of men’s perception towards Vera is affirmed through Tumaini’s comment: “Tumaini alishangaa kuona kulikuwa na wanawake wenye kiburi namna hii duniani ” (58). This comment captures a male’s normalised categorisation and generalisation of women as submissive and docile. His thinking reflects the society’s negative perception of women who try to cross traditional patriarchal boundaries by aggressively standing up and fighting for their rights. Such women are branded as stubborn and arrogant. Implicitly, Tumaini’s attitude towards this type of women reveals fear and nervousness in the men’s world; the fear that threatens men’s masculinity because they do not expect to have a world whereby a woman can act like a man. In other words, this comment subscribes to the entrenched normalised constructed gender imbalances that consider femininity as always subservient to masculinity. Also implied in Tumaini’s comment is the desire to entrench and perpetuate the patriarchal society’s imbalances of masculine-feminine relationships. However, Kezilahabi reveals that this status quo can be destabilised when conventional gender roles are challenged by men and women in the contemporary world. Through the portrayal of a married couple, Dennis and Vera, Kezilahabi subverts conventional feminine and masculine gender roles by depicting a wife who assumes masculine roles and orders her husband to perform what are normally coded as female gender roles in a ‘conventional’ patriarchal gendered socio-cultural set-up. The reader is confronted with this situation in the scene where Vera arrives from the village with visitors and instructs her husband to cook and serve them because she is tired. Dennis agrees and acts as duly ordered. He tells his visitors to read newspapers as he prepares a meal for them (59-60). From a traditional patriarchal perception of a man, Dennis is feminised because his wife makes him perform feminine roles as his spouse takes a rest, which is against them norm in a patriarchal society. The reversed gendered roles of Dennis and Vera may be attributed to their acquiescence of Western ideology, modernity and education. Vera’s argument about Western ideology’s perception of equality between men and women in her conversation with