Critical Perspectives on Cameroon Writing

2. Speech by Minister of Higher Education, Professor Peter Agbor Tabi

7 2 Opening Address by Dr. Peter Agbor Tabi, Minister of Higher Education on the Occasion of the Opening Ceremony, 1 December 1994 Your Excellency the Minister in charge of Special Duties at the Presidency of the Republic, Your Excellency the Governor of the South West Province Madam Vice-Chancellor of the University of Buea. Honourable Members of Parliament, Honourable Members of the Social and Economic Council, Your Royal Highnesses the Traditional Rulers, Director Generals of Public Corporations, Deans and Directors of the University of Buea, Provincial Delegates, Dear Colleagues, Dear Students, Ladies and Gentlemen, Let me, first of all, on behalf of the family of Higher Education in our country, and in my capacity as Chancellor of the Universities, welcome you here today, in the University of Buea. It gives me great pleasure to officiate at the opening ceremony of this major cultural event which brings together distinguished writers and critics. It is a clear indication that the University of Buea, in keeping with its mission statement, cherishes freedom of academic expression and the dissemination of knowledge for the good of mankind and excellence. Knowledge which does not promote human values and the amelioration of the human condition is worthless. The University of Buea is today hosting the 2nd Conference on Cameroon Literature. The first was held at the University of Yaoundé in April 1977. Some sixteen years have elapsed since then, during which period Cameroon has changed a lot. In 1977, we all know, as the regime in place was rather autocratic and a debilitating censorship law prevailed. Today, with the advent of democracy, times are changing. 8 The muzzled muse is gradually regaining its voice. A cursory look at Cameroon Literature in English before 1982 clearly indicates that there were not enough titles available to keep even a lazy student busy. Mbella Sonne Dipoko, Sankie Maimo, Victor Musinga, Kenjo Jumbam - these were the few creative writers of some talent. From 1982 to the present more titles in all the literary genres have been produced in the last twelve years than in the preceding two decades. What, however, is or ought to be the relationship between the University, the creative writer and the literary critic? If the University’s role is that of inculcating knowledge, then one of its main objectives would be to make known the theoretical principles of literature, for literature is a science, and as such it has its own rules. If it is that the creative writer depends on inspiration, it is truer to say that the masterpieces of today were 10% inspiration and 90% sweat. We believe that the university, with its manifold specialists, ought to serve as a nursery for the blossoming of talent. In other words, the University ought to be the creative writer’s bed-fellow. But the University also has the role of not only helping to bring forth, but of examining the product, of evaluating the work which has been brought to fruition of determining what is literature and what is not, of drawing the line between high culture and low culture, between the eternal and the transient, between what appeals to the best in us and what simply emphasizes our bestiality. The University should be the forum par excellence, where the literary work is dissected objectively and honestly, based not simply on impressions, but on the principles and practices of literature. As Alexander Pope once noted: the critic should have enough courage “to censure a friend and to praise an enemy.” I indicated earlier that there has been a substantial quantitative increase in the literary productivity of our writers this, unfortunately is not being matched by an equal improvement in the quality of the writing. It appears to me that many are unable to draw the line between art and rage. Not that we have anything against agitation and propaganda. In a sense, all art is propaganda in so far as the writer seeks to foster a certain vision of the world. But, if we remember Shakespeare, Racine. Dickens, Dostoyevsky, Hemingway, Richard Wright or Nicolas Guillen, it is not so much for what they said, as how 9 they said it; not so much for the matter as for the manner. There must be a marriage between the form and the content. The urgency of the message should not give rise to shoddiness of form. Everyone on the streets can shout out against all the...