FRACTURED MASCULINITIES IN SOYINKA’S THE TRIAL OF BROTHER JERO

Abstract

Man is constructed to be strong, macho, emotionless and strong. The notion that a man does not cry, stems from his social construction which is a function of the definition of what it means to be a man in his social milieu. Masculinity is constructed across different strata of life and these include class, race, ethnicity, age and profession. It bothers on the roles assigned to the boy child in a particular social environment and the status he assumes as he grows to become a man according to the dictates of the societal norms. Every member of the society, mothers inclusive, understands these roles and statuses as the minimum standard for which a man is understood to be a man indeed. He is therefore expected to act socially, economically and emotionally even when he lacks the capacity to do so. The construction gambit, however, becomes fractured in the face of realities of existence and challenges to those things that define him as a man. Using constructionist model, this study therefore investigates the fracturing of man’s social construction and the challenges of coping with the redefinition of manhood. The study employed qualitative approach which involves literary text analysis of Soyinka’s The Trial of Brother Jero to reveal subordinated masculinities, social castration and the helplessness of the male characters devoid of economic power and emotional stability to act as real men. Finding reveals that man becomes vulnerable when his construction is contrary to the actual performance as a provider and head of the family. It was therefore suggested that parents, especially mothers, should raise boys and girls the same way as they grow to become adult members of the society.