Things Fall Apart

The Question is: "Achebe is very conversant with western literature and its traditional forms. He borrows from the tradition of greek tragedy by centering the story of "Things Fall Apart" around a tragic hero, Okonkwo. Many literary critics have noted several similarities between "Things Fall Apart" and classical tragedies like "Oedipus Rex" and "Hamlet". Find out more about the western definition of tragedy and the tragic hero. In what ways do they depart from the conventions of Western Tragedy and the tragic hero. In what ways do they depart from the Aristotelian model? In your opinion, what contributes most to the final tragedy of Okonkwo? Could his fall have been averted?"


Greek tragedy features much in Achebe’s “Things Fall Apart”, and is basically the form which the book takes to impart its story. Okonkwo, the protagonist, can be compared to a classic example of a Greek tragic hero, but before we begin, an introduction and a brief outline of the Greek tragic hero in all his glory.
The word “tragedy” is derived from the Greek word tragoedia, meaning “goat song”, which described the chorus’ entrance as they wore masks and goat skins in imitation of Dionysus, the Greek God of wine. In the tragedy, Aristotle’s Greek tragic hero has to possess a few essential qualities that will ultimately result in the “catharsis” (purgation) of the feelings of pity and fear the audience has towards the destiny of the ill-fated hero, which is the aim and objective of every successful tragedy. Firstly, tragic heroes are usually born into nobility, which endows upon us the fact that they are responsible for the own fate. The irony here is that, although they are usually powerful and charismatic, and no matter how much power they wield in their hands, they can never ever control their own destiny. This, in addition to a tragic flaw they usually possess, curtails their potential for greatness and results in their downfall by the end of the tragedy, when they are doomed to a fatal error in judgement due to this flaw. This is the “harmartia” which every Greek hero must undergo in a tragedy- to rise to a position where he is almost certainly esteemed for glory, and to fall because of this reversal in fortune. In analyzing the Greek tragic hero, it is vital to keep in mind that the Greek hero in question in stuck in a situation which is almost inescapable from; for example, Oedipus could not prevent his own birth. In the end, it is his “harmartia” which brings the hero down, even though he has not truly done anything wrong in context. As a result, the audience experiences the catharsis because the hero, although fallen, still wins a moral victory because he is greater than what the common man in the audience can ever hope to achieve, and because he faces the truth of his mistakes and dies with honour. This elevates the tragic hero to a position higher in our esteem and wins our unfailing sympathy for the ill-fated hero in question, yet at the same time purging it because the unconquered spirit of the hero lives on in his tragic death. This, then, is the final aim of each and every proper Greek tragedy.
The Western tragedy, on the other hand, is described as more a prose or poetic narrative, as compared to a drama. To the Western tragic hero, the aim of the tragedy is to please the audience by exploring social matters within the play and making fun of them if they were unpopular, leading to a tragic ending in the story, or elevating their importance, resulting in a happier ending which the audience would prefer. Particularly, Shakespeare’s romantic tragedies catered to the whims of the audiences he had to please- Hamlet, for example, mixed tragedy and comedy into one play, and poetry and prose, combining the best of both into a play which the audience liked. No matter whether the protagonist or antagonist suffered in the end, the play was created to show that they ultimately deserved their fate (Macbeth in Shakespeare’s Macbeth); exceptions were created (Shylock in Shakespeare’s “The Merchant of Venice”) to trigger sympathy from the audience. In addition, violence onstage played a very huge part in entertaining the audience, and often, the traditional Elizabethan tragedy ended in conflict and tragedy, which pleased much of the lower-class citizens of the era, who appreciated bawdy humour and violence more than the nobility of the Elizabethan era. Reversal of fortune was also frequently used to ensure that the plays did not fall too low in the audience’s esteem, and this led to the formation of the tragicomedy, which possessed both tragedy and comedy as elements. This was a form of play unique to the Elizabethan era, and deviated from the traditional Aristotelean tragedy.
Okonkwo is similar to the classic greek hero in the sense that he has a quintessential failing, a moralistic bugbear, that prevents him from becoming the ultimate hero. Where the greek heroes have their pride or hubris, Okonkwo has his fear of weakness and unquenchable pursuit of strength and power. This fear later leads to outbursts of violence, as he believes his tribe to be strong enough to go to war and hence kills the white man, while subsequently, the disillusionment that he faces with the weakness of the tribe leads him to hang himself. This is similar to the pride of Oedipus, when he demands the exile of the man who the gods have proclaimed to him is causing suffering to the land, yet ignoring Teresias’s prophecies about him being the man, until it is really proved to him, and he blinds himself in a fit of despair.

The plot of things fall apart is similar to a classic greek tragedy in the fact that it details the main character’s rise from commonality to greatness. In Oedipus, the story tells of how Oedipus, originally just a regular noble, solved the riddle of the sphinx, lifting the curse on the land, and later thus getting accorded the honour of becoming the King of Thebes. Similarly, the plot of things fall apart details how Okonkwo rose out of the shadow of his poor, weak father, and became the greatest wrestler in all the land by a young age, throwing the as-yet undefeated Amalinze the Cat; eventually, he became a great and prosperous warrior, accorded the honor of being one of the masked Egwugwu and taking three titles, as well as having a huge compound, three wives and nine children.

the essential difference between the classic greek tragic hero and okonkwo in things fall apart is that the classic greek hero is a greater projection of the common man, a great man who is noble both in spirit and in action, believing in greater ideals and ultimately failing because of their firm and often stubborn adherence to those beliefs. For example, Oedipus firmly believes in his own nobility. Yet their beliefs are not wrong to begin with; in fact, most of these beliefs are noble beliefs that many common people like ourselves would strive to identify with.

In that sense then, Okonkwo is different in this respect because his ultimate failing deviates from the harmatia of the greek heroes in a slight manner: the greek heroes’ harmatia is a facet of themselves which is inevitable, either something well and present in all men, or else something actually good and noble to begin with but later becomes twisted. In that sense, the greek tragic heroes cannot help themselves with regard to their harmatia; it is a quintessential, ineluctable part of them.

This is not necessarily the case with Okonkwo. In okonkwo’s case, we see that his ultimate failing, his unquenchable rage and thirst for strength and power, stems from his inner insecurities of his father; he wants so badly to cut off all links with his father that he is petrified of showing any signs of weakness whatsoever, to the point where his special affections for his children (particularly Ezinma) are muted and not publicly displayed. In this case, his failing has become more of a choice. As we know, Okonkwo, having secretly followed Ekwefi to the oracle of Agbala, does actually have a great deal of concern for his family and offspring. Yet his constant fear of weakness restricts him from showing any emotion whatsoever. This makes him much less like a regular person on his ascent to greatness, and less likeable due to his perpetual anger and brutality against those he considers to be weak, or those who step out of line. Thus his elitist and uncompromising character, while still retaining a large portion of (albeit private) humanity and emotion, allows for far less empathy than the noble and upright Oedipus and Antigone, who each followed a noble belief to its tragic denouement.

In addition, Okonkwo believed that his chi played a great part in his life. When he was strong and confident, in the beginning chapters, he believed that “When a man says yes, his chi says yes also”. He also believed that if he made any decisions which adversely affected him, his chi “was not made for great things. A man could not rise beyond the destiny of his chi. . . . Here was a man whose chi said nay despite his own affirmation”.


With regards to plot, the plot of things fall apart is markedly different from that of greek tragedies, in that it plots several falls for Okonkwo, as a sort of moralistic foil to his brand of vigilante justice. In classic greek tragedy, the plot tends to favor a single climax, with the first portion of the plot dedicated to the rising of the main tragic protagonist. Then, the second portion of the plot plays out a string of seemingly interlinked events, that foreshadow the eventual downfall of the tragic hero, which comes in the third and final part of the play. In this sense there is a strong singular plot buildup towards the eventual denouement.

While this is true of things fall apart, the several failings of Okonkwo shown along the way to create situations where he becomes dishonoured due to his excessive temper and violence, and his ultimate pride (“hubris”, in Greek terms); for example, his beating of his wife Ojugo during the week of peace leads to him being heftily fined. Also, his insistence on taking part in Ikemefuna’s death, because he was “afraid of being thought weak”, leads to a great deal of inner turmoil and anguish, that leads in turn to Okonkwo not eating anything for three days. Also, the unexpected plot twist of Okonkwo killing someone accidentally and hence being banished for 7 years, tends to bring the downfall of Okonkwo forward; unlike Greek tragedies, Okonkwo is disgraced before the end of the story, and his greatness is seen to diminish before the arrival and colonization of the white man. In that way, when Okonkwo is banished, there is irony there, as the readers can read by the changing of the circumstances that he is not going to regain his greatness, though he still retains many delusions of grandeur. The descent of Okonkwo is also emphasized by the once-favored Nwoye, who of late had become more manly according to his father’s wishes, defecting to the Christians. In the last two chapters itself, Okonkwo’s hate and anger turns into a “war of blame” when he channels his anger upon the villagers. When he beheads the messenger and finds no one on his side (“Why did he do it?”, someone asked) , he finally realizes that his fellow villagers would never war with the outside presence of the white colonialists, and therefore hangs himself because his hubris would never allow him to forgive himself for taking such a drastic measure and leading his clan into an atmosphere of inaction and fear, where no one was willing to side with him. Hence, the eventual destruction of Okonkwo is much more foreseeable than the Greek tragic heroes, whose destruction is much more sudden and unexpected.