TEXT ANALYSIS

1: EPIC OF GILGAMESH

2: WRITINGS OF CONFUCIUS

3: ROSTAM AND SOHRAB

4: THINGS FALL APART by CHINUA ACHEBE

Martoni S. Saliendra
BSED 2
Afro-Asian Literature
 1
EPIC OF GILGAMESH

PLOT SUMMARY

Tablet XI

At this point, Gilgamesh realizes that he is talking to Utnapishtim, the Far-Away; he hadn't expected an
immortal human to be ordinary and aged. He asks Utnapishtim how he received immortality, and
Utnapishtim tells him the great secret hidden from humans:    In the time before the Flood, there was a
city, Shuruppak, on the banks of the Euphrates. There, the counsel of the gods held a secret meeting;
they all resolved to destroy the world in a great flood. All the gods were under oath not to reveal this
secret to any living thing, but Ea (one of the gods that created humanity) came to Utnapishtim's house
and told the secret to the walls of Utnapishtim's house, thus not technically violating his oath to the rest
of the gods. He advised the walls of Utnapishtim's house to build a great boat, its length as great as its
breadth, to cover the boat, and to bring all living things into the boat. Utnapishtim gets straight to work
and finishes the great boat by the new year. Utnapishtim then loads the boat with gold, silver, and all
the living things of the earth, and launches the boat. Ea orders him into the boat and commands him to
close the door behind him. The black clouds arrive, with the thunder god Adad rumbling within them;
the earth splits like an earthenware pot, and all the light turns to darkness. The Flood is so great that
even the gods are frightened:

The gods shook like beaten dogs, hiding in the far corners of heaven,
Ishtar screamed and wailed:
"The days of old have turned to stone:
We have decided evil things in our Assembly!
Why did we decide those evil things in our Assembly?
Why did we decide to destroy our people?
We have only just now created our beloved humans;
We now destroy them in the sea!"
All the gods wept and wailed along with her,
All the gods sat trembling, and wept.

The Flood lasts for seven days and seven nights, and finally light returns to the earth. Utnapishtim opens
a window and the entire earth has been turned into a flat ocean; all humans have been turned to stone.
Utnapishtim then falls to his knees and weeps.

Utnapishtim's boat comes to rest on the top of Mount Nimush; the boat lodges firmly on the mountain
peak just below the surface of the ocean and remains there for seven days. On the seventh day:

I [Utnapishtim] released a dove from the boat,

It flew off, but circled around and returned,
For it could find no perch.
I then released a swallow from the boat,
It flew off, but circled around and returned,
For it could find no perch.
I then released a raven from the boat,
It flew off, and the waters had receded:
 It eats, it scratches the ground, but it does not circle around and return.
I then sent out all the living things in every direction and sacrificed a sheep on that very spot.

The gods smell the odor of the sacrifice and begin to gather around Utnapishtim. Enlil, who had
originally proposed to destroy all humans, then arrives, furious that one of the humans had survived,
since they had agreed to wipe out all humans. He accuses Ea of treachery, but Ea convinces Enlil to be
merciful. Enlil then seizes Utnapishtim and his wife and blesses them:

At one time Utnapishtim was mortal.

At this time let him be a god and immortal;
Let him live in the far away at the source of all the rivers.

At the end of his story, Utnapishtim offers Gilgamesh a chance at immortality. If Gilgamesh can stay
awake for six days and seven nights, he, too, will become immortal. Gilgamesh accepts these conditions
and sits down on the shore; the instant he sits down he falls asleep. Utnapishtim tells his wife that all
men are liars, that Gilgamesh will deny having fallen asleep, so he asks his wife to bake a loaf of bread
every day and lay the loaf at Gilgamesh's feet. Gilgamesh sleeps without ever waking up for six days and
seven nights, at which point Utnapishtim wakes him up. Startled, Gilgamesh says, "I only just dozed off
for half a second here." Utnapishtim points out the loaves of bread, showing their states of decay from
the most recent, fresh bread, to the oldest, moldy, stale bread that had been laid at his feet on the very
first day. Gilgamesh is distraught:

O woe! What do I do now, where do I go now?

Death has devoured my body,
Death dwells in my body,
Wherever I go, wherever I look, there stands Death!

Utnapishtim's wife convinces the old man to have mercy on him; he offers Gilgamesh in place of
immortality a secret plant that will make Gilgamesh young again. The plant is at the bottom of the ocean
surrounding the Far-Away; Gilgamesh ties stones to his feet, sinks to the bottom, and plucks the magic
plant. But he doesn't use it because he doesn't trust it; rather he decides to take it back to Uruk and test
it out on an old man first, to make sure it works.

Urshanabi takes him across the Waters of Death. Several leagues inland, Gilgamesh and Urshanabi stop
to eat and sleep; while they're sleeping, a snake slithers up and eats the magic plant (which is why
snakes shed their skin) and crawls away. Gilgamesh awakens to find the plant gone; he falls to his knees
and weeps:

For whom have I labored? For whom have I journeyed?

For whom have I suffered?
I have gained absolutely nothing for myself,
I have only profited the snake, the ground lion!

The tale ends with Gilgamesh, at the end of his journey standing before the gates of Uruk, inviting
Urshanabi to look around and view the greatness of this city, its high walls, its masonwork, and here at
the base of its gates, as the foundation of the city walls, a stone of lapis lazuli on which is carved
Gilgamesh's account of his exploits.
ANALYSIS

Tablet XI recounts the gods’ secrets and the story of the deluge, and though the story often parallels the
biblical story of Noah, the two are not identical. In the biblical tale, humankind’s wickedness provokes
God to send the flood, and God chooses Noah to survive because of his righteousness. In Gilgamesh the
gods never give a reason for the flood. In fact, all of them but Enlil claim afterward that they opposed
the idea. In one older version of the story, Enlil decides to exterminate humanity because their noise
disturbs his sleep. His arbitrary nature appears earlier in the epic as well—he was the god who chose
Enkidu to die. Unlike Noah, Utnapishtim owes his survival to Ea’s cleverness, not to any special virtue.
When Utnapishtim tells the people they will have a great harvest of bread and wheat, he is making a
cruel pun. In Akkadian, the word for “bread” is almost identical to that for “darkness,” and the word for
“wheat” is very similar to “misfortune.” The gods regret the flood immediately, since they rely on
peoples’ sacrifices for their sustenance. Utnapishtim’s offerings are the first things they have eaten since
the flood began. Arbitrary as the gods’ actions seem, the story presents a clear philosophy: even if the
gods are capricious and men must die, humankind, nonetheless, is meant to live.

Gilgamesh finally finds the answer to his question about how he can elude death: he can’t. When Ea says
that some people should die but not all of them, he means that death is important, but that it should
apply only to individuals. People die, but humankind will always endure. The parable of Utnapishtim’s
sleeping test illustrates this point. Sleep is a foretaste of death, but it is also a bodily need as
fundamental as food. Gilgamesh has a body, so passing the test is impossible, but his humanness means
he has much to do in the world. The parable of the magical plant and the serpent foreshadows the
biblical tale of Adam, Eve, and the serpent. Just as with the flood story, however, the biblical version has
a different moral dimension. After the serpent steals the plant, Gilgamesh knows that death cannot be
avoided, a lesson he has perhaps already learned unconsciously, since he thought to share the plant
with his community. Since Enkidu died, he has been mired in grief, and his wanting to share the plant
shows that he is starting to think about his responsibilities to other people again. Though the serpent
doomed Adam and Eve to a life marked by sin, Gilgamesh’s serpent actually frees him in a way. Now he
is starting to think like a king.

Gilgamesh’s quest for eternal life poisons the life that he should be living in the here and now. His place
is in Uruk, which, if he rules it well, will live on after him and continue to grow in power and beauty. This
is what Utnapishtim was implying when he ordered his boatman to take Gilgamesh to the washing place
and return him to his city. The baptism acknowledges and honors his mortal body. This hero’s final quest
is his journey back home. Some critics read the ending of Gilgamesh as profoundly pessimistic. From a
Christian standpoint, it is—there is no heaven, no promise of eternal life, and no divine redemption or
grace, all of which make life worth living according to Christianity. Taken on its own terms, the ending is
deeply affirmative. Gilgamesh can now see Uruk for the marvel of human ingenuity and labor that it is, a
worthy monument to the mortals who built it.

The temple of Ishtar appears again in the poem’s very last verse, which suggests that feminine power
resumes its importance as Gilgamesh’s journey comes to an end. Gilgamesh and Enkidu’s troubles began
in earnest after they spurned the goddess. Yet after experiencing Siduri’s and Utnapishtim’s wife’s
kindness, and after learning about Ishtar’s grief for humanity after the flood, Gilgamesh’s attitude
changes. Now that he accepts the fact that earthly life is all there is, the female force, which brings
babies into the world and keeps the fire lit in the hearth, once again becomes central. Gilgamesh, one of
the world’s great homoerotic love stories, ends with the hero’s return to the “house of Ishtar,” where a
woman rules.
 2
WRITINGS OF CONFUCIUS

Background

Confucius (Chinese: 孔子; pinyin: Kǒng zǐ; Wade–Giles: K'ung-tzu, or Chinese: 孔夫子; pinyin: Kǒng Fūzǐ;
Wade–Giles: K'ung-fu-tzu), literally "Master Kong",[1] (traditionally 28 September 551 BC – 479 BC)[2] was
a Chinese thinker and social philosopher of the Spring and Autumn Period.

The philosophy of Confucius emphasized personal and governmental morality, correctness of social
relationships, justice and sincerity. These values gained prominence in China over other doctrines, such
as Legalism (法家) or Taoism (道家) during the Han Dynasty[3][4][5] (206 BC – AD 220). Confucius' thoughts
have been developed into a system of philosophy known as Confucianism (儒家).

Because no texts survive that are demonstrably authored by Confucius, and the ideas most closely
associated with him were elaborated in writings that accumulated over the period between his death
and the foundation of the first Chinese empire in 221 BC, many scholars are very cautious about
attributing specific assertions to Confucius himself. His teachings may be found in the Analects of
Confucius (論語), a collection of aphorisms, which was compiled many years after his death. For nearly
2,000 years he was thought to be the editor or author of all the Five Classics ( 五 經 )[6][7] such as the
Classic of Rites (禮記) (editor), and the Spring and Autumn Annals (春秋) (author).

Confucius' principles had a basis in common Chinese tradition and belief. He championed strong familial
loyalty, ancestor worship, respect of elders by their children (and, according to later interpreters, of
husbands by their wives), and the family as a basis for an ideal government. He expressed the well-
known principle, "Do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself", one of the earlier
versions of the Golden Rule.

Writings: Lǐ, yì and rén

The Confucian theory of ethics as exemplified in Lǐ (禮) is based on three important conceptual aspects
of life: ceremonies associated with sacrifice to ancestors and deities of various types, social and political
institutions, and the etiquette of daily behavior. It was believed by some that lǐ originated from the
heavens, but Confucius stressed the development of lǐ through the actions of sage leaders in human
history. His discussions of lǐ seem to redefine the term to refer to all actions committed by a person to
build the ideal society, rather than those simply conforming with canonical standards of ceremony.

In the early Confucian tradition, lǐ was doing the proper thing at the proper time, balancing between
maintaining existing norms to perpetuate an ethical social fabric, and violating them in order to
accomplish ethical good. Training in the lǐ of past sages cultivates in people virtues that include ethical
judgment about when lǐ must be adapted in light of situational contexts.

In early Confucianism, the concept of li is closely related to yì ( 義 ), which is based upon the idea of
reciprocity. Yì can be translated as righteousness, though it may simply mean what is ethically best to do
in a certain context. The term contrasts with action done out of self-interest. While pursuing one's own
self-interest is not necessarily bad, one would be a better, more righteous person if one's life was based
upon following a path designed to enhance the greater good. Thus an outcome of yì is doing the right
thing for the right reason.
Just as action according to Lǐ should be adapted to conform to the aspiration of adhering to yì, so yì is
linked to the core value of rén (仁). Rén is the virtue of perfectly fulfilling one's responsibilities toward
others, most often translated as "benevolence" or "humaneness"; translator Arthur Waley calls it
"Goodness" (with a capital G), and other translations that have been put forth include
"authoritativeness" and "selflessness." Confucius's moral system was based upon empathy and
understanding others, rather than divinely ordained rules. To develop one's spontaneous responses of
rén so that these could guide action intuitively was even better than living by the rules of yì.

To cultivate one's attentiveness to rén one used another Confucian version of the Golden Rule: "What
one does not wish for oneself, one ought not to do to anyone else; what one recognises as desirable for
oneself, one ought to be willing to grant to others." (Confucius and Confucianism, Richard Wilhelm)
Virtue, in this Confucian view, is based upon harmony with other people, produced through this type of
ethical practice by a growing identification of the interests of self and other.

3
ROSTAM AND SOHRAB

PLOT SUMMARY

Rostam and Sohrab is a tragedy from the Persian epic Shahnameh. It tells the tragic story of the heroes
Rostam and his son, Sohrab.

Rustam is a Persian hero and one of the favorites of King Kaykaus. Once, following the traces of his lost
horse, he entered the kingdom of Samangan. The king hosted Rustam, while his horse was being
searched for. There Rustam met princess Tahmina and married her. Very soon he left the kingdom and
never came back. Meanwhile, Tahmina gave birth to his son and named him Sohrab. Rustam and Sohrab
never met until a new war between Iran and Turan started many years later. By then Sohrab was known
as the best fighter of Turan army. As no one else dared to fight Rustam, Sohrab was sent to wrestle with
the legendary Persian hero. However, the name of the hero was kept in secret, as Sohrab knew that
Rustam was his father. On the battle field without stating the reason Sohrab told his rival that he would
not fight against Rustam. Thus Rustam did not reveal his name. After a very long and heavy wrestle,
Rustam felt weak and afraid to spoil his reputation, so he stabbed his son in the heart. Tahmina, who
came to the field to keep them from bloodshed, was too late and Sohrab died on his mourning father's
hands.

ANALYSIS

Most critics agree that Sohrab and Rustum marks a turn in Arnold's work from the exploration of the
isolated sells emotional and existential plight, which characterizes such poems as "The Buried Life" and
Empedocles on Etna, to what Arnold considered a more objective type of poetry. The poem is thus
important because it is vital to understanding this major shift in Arnold's poetics. Further, Daniel Kline
has persuasively demonstrated that Sohrab and Rustum is essential for comprehending Arnold's struggle
with language. (2) I would claim that the poem is crucial for another substantial reason. In Sohrab and
Rustum Arnold first confronts not only the limits of language but also the major obstacle to human
community with which he will battle throughout his prose: the individual's resistance to recognizing the
boundaries of his own knowledge and power. In Sohrab and Rustum Arnold dramatizes this resistance to
critical perspective, the role others play in helping the individual reach such perspective, and the cost of
the struggle to attain it. Understanding how Arnold is working through these ideas in Sohrab and
Rustum is particularly important because these concepts come to dominate much of his later writing on
literature, politics, and religion. The resistance to critical perspective that Arnold dramatizes in Sohrab
and Rustum he thematizes in his prose. (3) In fact, his entire critical project is an attempt to overcome
what Arnold perceives as his audience's resistance to other people and ideas. Arnold's prose also
thematizes the importance of others in attaining critical perspective and the necessity of this perspective
for maintaining community, both ideas that he first dramatizes in Sohrab and Rustum. (4) Finally, I
suggest that Hegel, with whom Arnold was in fact familiar if his reading lists are any indicator, can help
to elucidate Arnold's dramatization of these themes in Sohrab and Rustum. (5) In "The Function of
Criticism at the Present Time," Arnold describes a critical perspective that is open to other voices:

That is what I call living by ideas: when one side of a question has long had your earnest support, when
all your feelings are engaged, when you hear all round you no language but one, when your party talks
this language like a steam-engine and can imagine no other,--still to be able to think, still to be
irresistibly carried, if so it be, by the current of thought to the opposite side of the question, and, like
Balaam, to be unable to speak anything but what the Lord has put in your mouth. I know nothing more
striking, and I must add that I know nothing more un-English.

4
THINGS FALL APART by CHINUA ACHEBE

Background

Albert Chinụalụmọgụ Achebe (born 16 November 1930) popularly known as Chinua Achebe
(pronounced /ˈtʃɪnwɑː əˈtʃɛbeɪ/;) is a Nigerian novelist, poet, professor, and critic. He is best known for
his first novel and magnum opus [3], Things Fall Apart (1958), which is the most widely read book in
modern African literature.

Raised by Christian parents in the Igbo town of Ogidi in southeastern Nigeria, Achebe excelled at school
and won a scholarship for undergraduate studies. He became fascinated with world religions and
traditional African cultures, and began writing stories as a university student. After graduation, he
worked for the Nigerian Broadcasting Service and soon moved to the metropolis of Lagos. He gained
worldwide attention for Things Fall Apart in the late 1950s; his later novels include No Longer at Ease
(1960), Arrow of God (1964), A Man of the People (1966), and Anthills of the Savannah (1987). Achebe
writes his novels in English and has defended the use of English, a "language of colonizers", in African
literature. In 1975, his lecture An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" became the
focus of controversy, for its criticism of Joseph Conrad as "a bloody racist".

When the region of Biafra broke away from Nigeria in 1967, Achebe became a devoted supporter of
Biafran independence and served as ambassador for the people of the new nation. The war ravaged the
populace, and as starvation and violence took its toll, he appealed to the people of Europe and the
Americas for aid. When the Nigerian government retook the region in 1970, he involved himself in
political parties but soon resigned due to frustration over the corruption and elitism he witnessed. He
lived in the United States for several years in the 1970s, and returned to the U.S. in 1990 after a car
accident left him partially disabled.

Achebe's novels focus on the traditions of Igbo society, the effect of Christian influences, and the clash
of values during and after the colonial era. His style relies heavily on the Igbo oral tradition, and
combines straightforward narration with representations of folk stories, proverbs, and oratory. He has
also published a number of short stories, children's books, and essay collections. He is currently the
David and Marianna Fisher University Professor and Professor of Africana Studies at Brown University in
Providence, Rhode Island, United States.

PLOT SUMMARY

Although Okonkwo's father was a lazy man who received no titles in his village and died with huge
debts, Okonkwo was a great man in his home of Umuofia, a group of nine villages in Nigeria. Okonkwo
despised his father and does everything he can to be nothing like him. As a young man, Okonkwo began
building his social status by defeating a great wrestler, propelling him into society's eye. He is hard-
working and shows no weakness—emotional or otherwise—to anyone. Although brusque with his
family and neighbors, he is wealthy, courageous, and powerful among his village. He is a leader of his
village, and his place in that society is what he has striven for his entire life.

Because of his great esteem in the village, Okonkwo is selected by the elders to be the guardian of
Ikemefuna, a boy taken prisoner by the village as a peace settlement between two villages after his
father killed a Umuofian woman. Ikemefuna is to stay with Okonkwo until the Oracle instructs the elders
on what to do with the boy. For three years the boy lives with Okonkwo's family and he grows fond of
him, he even considers Okonkwo his father. Then the elders decide that the boy must be killed, and the
oldest man in the village warns Okonkwo to have nothing to do with the murder because it would be
like killing his own child. Rather than seem weak and feminine to the other men of the village, Okonkwo
helps to kill the boy despite the warning from the old man. In fact, Okonkwo himself strikes the killing
blow as Ikemefuna begs him for protection.

Shortly after Ikemefuna's death, things begin to go wrong for Okonkwo. When he accidentally kills
someone at a ritual funeral ceremony when his gun explodes, he and his family are sent into exile for
seven years to appease the gods he has offended with the murder. While Okonkwo is away in exile,
white men begin coming to Umuofia and they peacefully introduce their religion. As the number of
converts increases, the foothold of the white people grows beyond their religion and a new government
is introduced.

Okonkwo returns to his village after his exile to find it a changed place because of the presence of the
white man. He and other tribal leaders try to reclaim their hold on their native land by destroying a local
Christian church that has insulted their gods and religion. In return, the leader of the white government
takes them prisoner and holds them for ransom for a short while, further humiliating and insulting the
native leaders. The people of Umuofia finally gather for what could be a great uprising, and when some
messengers of the white government try and stop their meeting, Okonkwo kills one of them. He realizes
with despair that the people of Umuofia are not going to fight to protect themselves because they let
the other messengers escape and so all is lost for the village. He also decides never to let the whites
imprison him.

When the local leader of the white government comes to Okonkwo's house to take him to court, he
finds that Okonkwo has hanged himself, ruining his great reputation as it is strictly against the custom of
the Igbo to kill oneself.

ANALYSIS
Many people believe that this book was written as a way to demonstrate how appalling the British
settlers treated the African communities. Achebe’s political points are blunt; however, Achebe insists
that the book is actually a social commentary on the need to be able to change and be flexible in life. He
admits that change is inevitable and it was Okonkwo’s inability to change that caused his downfall.

Things Fall Apart is not a commentary on the problem with colonialism; it is a commentary on the
representation of a lost tradition. From an anthological perspective, the tradition has been
compromised, not by the white commissionaires but by the decision of the Umofian society to switch
their religion and give up on their traditions.

Things Fall Apart is not a bitter novel about a lost life but rather a celebration of tribal societies and a
revelation of his people’s souls. When religion and tradition are lost, things fall apart. Okonkwo is the
voice that reminds the people of this and asserts that their traditions contained value. Achebe has
created a history of his people that, before Things Fall Apart, was simply never written or even known.