A central conflict in human society is a divide between obedience and autonomy. People are by nature, herd animals, with a need for the security of knowing their place in the world. In Erich Fromm’s essay, “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem,” states that by being obedient, we gain a measure of the power that we worship, be it the Church or the State or a charismatic leader, and we become strong. We become righteous. It frees us of thought and of the accusation of wrong-doing (Fromm 4). Following this, he argues that in order to disobey, a person must not be afraid to be alone, or to err, or to sin. A person must be able to say, “No!” (Fromm 4). The ability to say “no” must take place in a situation where the attempt at freedom
…show more content…
He is not fleeing from the obligations of his life, but from the image of his father, Unoka. Unoka was a lay-about sort of man who, similar to Gregor Samsa’s father, was content to drift through life letting others shoulder his burden. Okonkwo’s effort for autonomy was to become the authority himself and demand the submission from those closest to him: his wives and children. In Okonkwo’s world, there was no ability to say “no.” He disparaged those who had the ability to be disobedient, calling them “women” and “weak.” (Achebe ?) In Igbo culture, the center of life was the clan. There is no independence and no autonomy in a communal society. The members of the clan had the ability to change their circumstances, but there was no real capacity to live outside the group. When the white men came, there came a change to Igbo society. Different paths became available and previously silent dissenters in the tribe became outspoken. Okonkwo was unable to handle the changing dynamics and started losing his fragile sense of power. As a result, he commits to the colonials, an unforgivable crime. He believes that the murder of the messenger will awaken the fire of independence in his kinsmen; however, it only tightens the yoke of submission. In his final act of independence, he commits suicide rather than face the consequences of his …show more content…
He goes on to say that when a man can only obey and not disobey, he is a slave. When a man can only disobey and not obey, he is a rebel (Fromm 2). For these two characters, the motivations for their deaths define them as people. While Gregor had been living as a slave, he used his death to spare others pain and in so doing, died a martyr. On the other hand, Okonkwo died out of anger and resentment, not due to a conviction or to spare his clan in any way. He lived his life as a man who would tolerate no weakness; and so when his own weaknesses were exposed, he chose death rather than face his inner darkness. He died a rebel, not a revolutionary (Fromm 3). Our lives have meaning and our deaths can serve a purpose. We can use them to save others or make a statement. Authority can tell us how to live our lives and can dictate our deaths, but it is up to us to give both of them meaning. That meaning is the truest definition of
He is not fleeing from the obligations of his life, but from the image of his father, Unoka. Unoka was a lay-about sort of man who, similar to Gregor Samsa’s father, was content to drift through life letting others shoulder his burden. Okonkwo’s effort for autonomy was to become the authority himself and demand the submission from those closest to him: his wives and children. In Okonkwo’s world, there was no ability to say “no.” He disparaged those who had the ability to be disobedient, calling them “women” and “weak.” (Achebe ?) In Igbo culture, the center of life was the clan. There is no independence and no autonomy in a communal society. The members of the clan had the ability to change their circumstances, but there was no real capacity to live outside the group. When the white men came, there came a change to Igbo society. Different paths became available and previously silent dissenters in the tribe became outspoken. Okonkwo was unable to handle the changing dynamics and started losing his fragile sense of power. As a result, he commits to the colonials, an unforgivable crime. He believes that the murder of the messenger will awaken the fire of independence in his kinsmen; however, it only tightens the yoke of submission. In his final act of independence, he commits suicide rather than face the consequences of his …show more content…
He goes on to say that when a man can only obey and not disobey, he is a slave. When a man can only disobey and not obey, he is a rebel (Fromm 2). For these two characters, the motivations for their deaths define them as people. While Gregor had been living as a slave, he used his death to spare others pain and in so doing, died a martyr. On the other hand, Okonkwo died out of anger and resentment, not due to a conviction or to spare his clan in any way. He lived his life as a man who would tolerate no weakness; and so when his own weaknesses were exposed, he chose death rather than face his inner darkness. He died a rebel, not a revolutionary (Fromm 3). Our lives have meaning and our deaths can serve a purpose. We can use them to save others or make a statement. Authority can tell us how to live our lives and can dictate our deaths, but it is up to us to give both of them meaning. That meaning is the truest definition of