This in itself tells us that the memory being explained to the reader has not been articulated very accurately and therefore has lost some of its intended meaning by substitutionary definitions. Odili’s statement then, on page 9 of the novel, “My memory is naturally good” only causes more need to question the accuracy, reliability and honesty of the meaning being portrayed as his very method of depicting his account cannot be trusted since as it has been previously discredited by his lack of skill to describe accurately. This in turn effects the content and its reliability within the novel and how it may be seen as either reliable or …show more content…
Relying on his own memory to narrate the happenings of the text, Odili creates space for alteration, selection, deletion, and change. His accuracy within narration is discredited by his lack of skill to describe accurately. Odili proves himself to be vulnerable to adaption of perspective or opinion of his critique, substantiating the lack of surety of viability. Gikandi and Achebe together suggest that despite all efforts to best portray what is being said, one will never fully grasp the entirety of narration, as one cannot narrate without being marginalised but cannot describe accurate without participating. The search for meaning within the New Nation is unfixed; the definitions of morality and power not yet clear with the lack of the presence of firm identity and vision within the Postcolonial state. Meaning in the New Nation, having been in the act of being redefined by these two juxta positional stages, is not yet clear, and this leaves room for questioning what the writer’s role is. The meaning of morality and power and what borders their definitions are blurred by the lack of identity and vision within the new Independent nation, therefore meaning can be seen as relative as morality and power is relative within the text, due to the lack of accuracy within the