In late September, I had an informal chat about Wole Soyinka's writing style, which uses complex vocabulary that can make comprehension difficult. This conversation arose from a social media post by an influencer- Judas of Beads who openly shared her experience reading one of the renowned 90-year-old Nobel Laureate's books.
Her post was met with such disdain from a group of people who I would describe as exhibiting literary classism and gatekeeping. Some people could not even handle the disgust of her name being mentioned with someone like the Professor and in fact, she was in no position, qualified to talk about him. It was no longer about the message, the messenger's reputation was now being "dragged".
While I can at least understand where all those condescending comments are coming from as a Nigerian who understands the social workings of the typical Nigerian society, I see it as a missed opportunity for a case to be made about the essence of writing itself when a book is published and made available to the general public - and the author did not in any way mention that his book is for a specific "literary" section of society. Anyone interested in reading a book by a renowned author should not be ridiculed for openly sharing their opinion about a book they bought with their money.
I first came across Wole Soyinka's writing in my secondary school where we read his play "The Lion and the Jewel". The play follows Baroka, the lion, as he clashes with the modern Lakunle over the right to marry Sidi, the titular Jewel. Lakunle, a civilized antithesis to Baroka, unilaterally seeks to modernize his community and change its social conventions without any clear reason. The Laureate's books - are popular with students in Nigerian schools - especially in secondary schools. His other works include; Kongi's Harvest, Joshua: A Nigerian Portrait, The Trials of Brother Jero, Death and the King's Horseman, Chronicles from the Land of the Happiest People on Earth, You Must Set Forth at Dawn, The Interpreters, Season of Anomy, Aké: The Years of Childhood, The Man Died, Of Africa, Climate of Fear, Harmattan Haze on an African Spring and more.
Not that it matters, but I cannot say I am a fan even though I can understand his style of writing and explain the message. The post by that influencer caught "internet fire" creating rolling storms of comments. Some commentators online accused anyone who claimed not to understand Wole Soyinka's writings as being close-minded, having poor lexicon skills, and a level of understanding that was beneath the author and people in his class. There is a place for that level of complicated use of grammar but in the context of this discussion, questions are allowed.
It is granted that there are people who would enjoy some complicated use of vocabulary but that does not in any way justify them as being "more intelligent" and better at the use of "good English" than others who argue that the writing is unnecessarily convoluted taking the fun out of act and art of reading. It is also important to note that writers who use simpler vocabularies are not in any way less intelligent as was the case of some best-selling books that Judas of Beads shared in the same post were described as substandard and had poor writing or storytelling skills in comparison with Wole Soyinka.
As I mentioned earlier, it was a missed opportunity that mirrored the needless "classist" reality of a country like Nigeria with millions wallowing in multidimensional poverty and access to basic things including access to good education and a struggle to give up an outdated curriculum with very little practical application to solving real-world problems. A society where people would rather boast about having first-class degrees while struggling with simple comprehension and learning how to hold emotionally intelligent conversations useful for developing soft interpersonal skills.
The pattern of the conversations around that social media post reflects a society where people are very invested in the act of looking like something or someone rather than practically being it. Hence, there are too many "pseudo-articulate and good-looking humans with a foreign accent" as David Hundeyin puts it, roaming the streets that it is difficult to differentiate from the real and wanna-be. A similar instance is conversations about how many people now label themselves as "experts" on their bio but the experience is questionable. Nigeria is a society deep into the culture of the use of big grammar and the irresistibility of people who can sway a crowd with big words because such grandiose display can be mistaken for intelligence and such a trick works like magic.
How dare anyone complain about Wole Soyinka's writing? People falling over themselves with the notion that it was an outright insult and affront to say that about the Professor, a literary giant in his own right but I see that as a very elitist and the usual condescending Nigerian behavior to think someone's call for accessible writing should be met with insults because why shouldn't anyone read a book by Shakespeare, Charles Dickens or Wole Soyinka? and what is wrong if someone is confused about the paintings by Michelangelo on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel? or someone saying that they cannot understand a piece of fashion item on the runway even though they had bought a ticket to come sit on the front row of the fashion show. What is wrong with people having unpopular opinions about works that are widely loved and respected around the world?
One would even ask at this point, how many of those students required to read a piece of literature in school enjoyed the readings? how many of those who claim to understand and enjoy Wole Soyinka's style of writing can share that basic form of what they learned with others who are interested? Because that would have been another way to have approached Judas of Beads sharing her experience about that particular book and even mentioning she wanted to read the book because someone else had talked about the book in a way that aroused her interest. Hence, the disappointment when she opened the first page and was lost.
How many times have we seen the adaptation of Shakespearean and Dickens works into simpler forms to expand the accessibility? In the West, there is so much dedication and investment in making the works of renowned authors accessible because accessibility is a way to sustain such knowledge. There is a deep sense of purpose in movie adaptions and versions broken down to the simplest forms of language for children who cannot handle such forms of writing at their level or a class of audience who may be interested but have no patience for understanding the need for such complex vocabulary.
I would also argue that language develops and becomes accessible with time and the way people in the past wrote may have been because of the limited vocabulary and they were probably writing for a section of the public but over time, that circle of audience has expanded as more people read and they have become the legends we now know them to be. So, it would not be justified to say anyone seeking accessibility in this age and time is beneath low-level intelligence.
There is something magical about making a thing like knowledge accessible in some form rather than letting it stay enclosed to a few elites. That magic is one of the many reasons why too many people in poor countries continue to lag because, for every one argument about making something more accessible, there are 10 arguments against it rooted in religion and traditions that justify why a section of the population "does not deserve" to access it. Hence, rich countries continue to invest heavily in accessibility issues which gives their citizens opportunities to compete in a fast world and widens the existing gap where poor people continue to work more times as hard to catch up or even get to one-tenth of the level of their mates in rich countries.
Think of the Met Gala, an annual fundraising gala held for the benefit of the Metropolitan Museum of Art's Costume Institute in New York City. The event was formerly for the rich elites of the Upper East Side but according to the the minis series "In Vogue: The 90s" on the DisneyPlus streaming platform, Anna Wintour and her team at Vogue pushed for accessibility of the event to include more class of celebrity, musicians, actors, politicians, fashion enthusiasts and influencers who would ordinarily not get an invite.
Today, many folks including myself are now invested in the MetGala red carpet and it was recently announced on the Vogue website that Colman Domingo, Lewis Hamilton, A$AP Rocky & Pharrell Will Co-Chair the Met Gala 2025. The Met Gala is huge and I mean very huge. Most people attending have thousands of followers that they "carry" with them to the red carpet and the event afterward, which in itself is beneficial exposure to the institute and their work. The internet allows us to see things as though we were present but there are still many events that remain accessible to very few. Who knows, maybe, if the invitees' range to the MetGala were not expanded, it may just be another type of event we hear about in 2025, read about but not see as much as we see now.
So excuse me when I argue for more accessibility with literature and why someone sharing their "not so positive" experience about voluntarily reading Wole Soyinka does not in any way make them less intelligent than those who love his style of writing. Other than the insults, it should be an opportunity to reflect on the possibility of making Wole Soyinka's writing more accessible and adaptable to a wider audience who are curious to read and sustain his work long after he is gone, rather than students who are "forced" to read as part of their curriculum and the elite few who bask in the joy of such complex use of vocabulary to tell stories and those who can afford to attend play adaptions on stage or book festivals.
And who remember days when publications like whitepapers, research and reports by international organisations like the United Nations, World Trade Organization and even National Governments were cumbersome, such that "ordinary" people did not care much to read? which meant, those publications would just sit there somewhere wasting away regardless of how groundbreaking the content was because apart from the pages being so many, the langauge was far too complex for a "public" that was supposed to be reading and applying the knowledge.
Now, we have shorter versions like summary for policy makers, a page summary and even animated versions used for educational purposes. There are more calls for scientific liteature to become more accessible and useful for practical application because making a piece of work accessible is collectively more valuable and beneficial for the society in the long run.