This paper critically reviews Sotunsa’s (2005) “Features of Talking Drum Poetry,” a doctoral thesis submitted to the English Department, Faculty of Arts, University of Ibadan. To present this paper in a simpler form an attempt has been made to divide it into sections.
Section one discusses the introduction which is the background to the paper, while section two (the abstract) discusses the paper’s goals. The third section covers the summary of the thesis. Section four as well is a critical review of affirmations made by the author.
We considered some scholars’ views on these affirmations and looked at their genuineness. We made assumptions to rectify some views likewise we made comment to credit the genuineness of author’s arguments where it is necessary. In the last section, we do the summary and make some recommendations in support of author’s arguments established in the last chapter of the thesis.
Our goal, in this paper, is to do a constructive criticism on Sotunsa’s doctoral thesis basically, it is for academic purposes.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The Summary of the Thesis
3. The Critical Analysis of Findings and Affirmations in Sotunsa (2005); Features of Talking Drum Poetry
4. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This paper provides a critical review and constructive assessment of Sotunsa’s doctoral thesis, "Features of Talking Drum Poetry," evaluating the author's scholarly arguments, methodological approach, and findings regarding the stylistic and functional significance of Yoruba drum poetry.
- Theoretical analysis of Yoruba drum poetry as a distinct mode of oral communication.
- Evaluation of the stylistic and aesthetic attributes, including pitch, timbre, and rhythmic elongation.
- Examination of the integration of drum poetry in contemporary popular music and theater.
- Critique of categorization standards for Yoruba musical instruments and performance styles.
- Recommendations for the future development, global recognition, and preservation of drum poetry.
Excerpt from the Book
The Critical Analysis of Findings and Affirmations in Sotunsa (2005); Features of Talking Drum Poetry
Doctoral thesis as shown by Hart (1998: 20 – 25) must fulfill seven requirements which the author claims to be generally agreed upon across the academic fields. These include, specialization in scholarship, making a new contribution to an area of knowledge, demonstrating a high level of scholarship, demonstrating originality, the ability to write a coherent volume or intellectual work, ability to develop the capacity and personal character to intellectually manage the research, including the writing of the thesis, and the showing of an in-depth understanding of the topic areas and works related to the research.
In her attempt to fulfill the requirements mentioned above, the author demonstrates high level of scholarship that made her come out with findings which we want to draw out and criticize later in this work.
i. Firstly, the author while agitating in support of the consideration of African oral poetry as poetry on its own opines:
The text alone cannot constitute the oral poem. For this reason, no discussion of oral poetry can afford to concentrate on the text alone, but must take account of the audience, the context of performance, the personality of poet-performer and the details of performance itself (p. 4).
This excerpt shows that the author is in support of scholars like Olajubu (1981:71), Bamikunle (1985: 48), Emovon (1981), Finnegan (1992) who are all in support of the consideration of oral literature as an independent form of literature which its content and context goes beyond the text. For this reason, she is supposed to be kudos because this claim is true. Oral poetry is a distinct form of poetry and it must be treated as such.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: This chapter establishes the background of Yoruba oral poetry as a dynamic verbal art and outlines the paper's intent to critically review Sotunsa’s research on drum poetry aesthetics.
The Summary of the Thesis: This section provides an overview of the six chapters of the original thesis, detailing the author's arguments regarding the stylistic features, functional significance, and communicative models used in drum poetry.
The Critical Analysis of Findings and Affirmations in Sotunsa (2005); Features of Talking Drum Poetry: This chapter offers a detailed critique of the author's findings, highlighting both the scholarly merits of her arguments and specific areas of disagreement regarding drum categorization and methodological rigor.
Conclusion: This final chapter synthesizes the critique, emphasizing that academic work requires ongoing review and updating, and advocates for the continued exploration of drum poetry as a cultural asset.
Keywords
Yoruba oral poetry, drum poetry, talking drum, semiological approach, musical aesthetics, dundun, Yoruba culture, performance art, speech surrogate, drum performance, communication theory, drum categorization, oral literature, rhythmic elongation, linguistic analysis.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this academic paper?
The paper serves as a critical review and constructive analysis of Sotunsa’s doctoral thesis, "Features of Talking Drum Poetry," focusing on the stylistic, linguistic, and functional aspects of Yoruba drum traditions.
What are the core thematic areas discussed in the review?
The review covers the status of drum poetry as a unique verbal art, its role in contemporary media and music, the aesthetic qualities of drum speech, and the traditional barriers associated with the profession of drumming.
What is the overarching goal of this critique?
The primary goal is to conduct an academic assessment of the thesis, acknowledging its original scholarly contributions while identifying areas for clarification, correction, and further research.
Which scientific methods are analyzed in the work?
The paper examines the author’s use of semiological approaches, functionalism, ethno-musicology, structuralism, and various communication theories to analyze drum poetry performances.
What topics are covered in the main body of the review?
The main body evaluates the author’s definition of the talking drum, the linguistic analysis of sound waves in drum poetry, the use of drum poetry in popular music and film, and the necessity of re-evaluating drum classification systems.
Which keywords best characterize this research?
Key terms include Yoruba oral poetry, talking drum, performance art, semiological approach, linguistic analysis, and contemporary cultural preservation.
Does the reviewer agree with the author regarding the definition of a "talking drum"?
The reviewer partially agrees but critiques the author for relying too heavily on "dùndún" performance styles while neglecting other drum types, such as "bàtá" or "ṣákárà," which also act as speech surrogates.
How does the reviewer suggest the art of drumming should evolve?
The reviewer suggests incorporating drumming into primary and secondary school curricula, similar to how sports are promoted in other cultures, to ensure the art form's growth and survival beyond family-based traditions.
- Citar trabajo
- Luqman Kiaribee (Autor), 2015, A Critical Review of Sotunsa’s “Features of Talking Drum Poetry”, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/343777
