Ozonna Soludo And The Burden Of De-Personalisation

Ozonna Soludo, son of the governor of Anambra State, Prof. Chukwuma Soludo, has become a controversial figure given his unorthodox self-presentation on social media. His trademark appearance of having a lady’s handbag hanging over his shoulder as well as other dramatic conduct in front of a phone camera has got tongues wagging. Some people have gone as far as describing him as a disgrace and disappointment to his family.

Very recently, he posted a video of himself performing the role of a native doctor with powers to change one’s fortune through the instrumentality of now notorious “oke ite” (magic pot). This dramatic performance was obviously in reference to his father’s onslaught against persons engaging in such practices in Anambra State. Ordinarily, that should be seen as one of those mischievously creative pieces associated with social media content creators, but given his connection with the governor, more meaning is bound to be read into what should otherwise be taken as mere clownishness aimed at entertaining rather than communicating anything serious.

The above recent video has refreshed the continuing controversy over Ozonna’s on-camera self-presentation. I recall someone, on seeing the video, repeated the now

-common statement that the boy has become a pain in the ass for his governor father. Some commentators have been more philosophical, observing that the young man is a perfect illustration of life’s inherent insufficiency – no one gains it all in life; you win some and lose some – Ozonna is a rare loss in the largely successful life of the Soludo family. There has also been a needless political angle to it, as some persons appear to be weaponising it for the purpose of direct or indirect mockery of the governor.

However, in truth, I have not seen anything in Ozonna’s social media conduct that is so extraordinarily weird as to produce the sort of sensation we have witnessed. What he has done ranks nowhere near some of the eccentric images we have become accustomed to on social media. Obviously, the fuse about Ozonna is all about his father’s profile – he is a governor, an eminent scholar, and former governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), so his son’s life should mirror such social distinction rather than projecting social media clownishness.

This thinking pattern is very evident in the fact that the negative commentaries have predominantly emphasised how Ozonna’s conduct represents a disgrace to his father and family – with little or nothing being said about how the said conduct affects him as a person. In other words, the judgment has not been strictly about the appropriateness of his conduct but about our expectations in view of his family background and father’s social profile.

What is happening is de-personalisation of Ozonna – a dilution of his personality and agency – by projecting him as one whose life must mirror his father’s irrespective of his own distinct talent, disposition, and ambitions. Otherwise I have seen nothing outrageous about his social media conduct if he has chosen to pursue a life in entertainment and popular culture rather than the more professional careers like academia and technical consultancy as did his father.

Truly we have seen people display so much more serious – if not scandalous – degrees of eccentricity, yet have been held in high esteem by society. Charles Oputa, a.k.a. Charly Boy, has never been a “gentleman” on TV screens or social media. In fact, while Ozonna merely carries ladies’ handbags, Charly Boy started as a full cross-dresser, donning female clothes. He had once shared nude photos of himself while another widely shared photo showed him kissing popular TV presenter, Denrele Edun. Yet, Charly Boy is not being seen as a disgrace to the family of Nigeria’s eminent jurist, late Justice Chukwudifu Oputa. There is also a Chinedu Okoli, a.ka. Flavour, a very gifted musician, some of whose lyrics and performances have been nowhere near decent, yet he is so highly regarded with his songs continuously played at “responsible” events. Similarly, we have had a Fela Anikulapo-Kuti who appeared on stage and screen wearing only pants and smoked marijuana, yet he has been widely recognised as a hero and was in 2014 nominated by the federal government for a national honour as part of the centenary celebration of the almagamation of Nigeria. Ozonna has committed no crime, but Fela did by taking an illicit drug. Many other such examples exist.

While the above persons have been clearly eccentric, sometimes to a level that challenges morality and laws, their cases have not generated the same negative sensation as that of Ozonna simply because they became successful in what they did, creating a respectable identity for themselves so much so that it became impossible to view their personality from the narrow prism of their parents’ social profile. This is particularly true of Charly Boy whose father was a respected judge and Fela whose father was a Christian religious minister and mother a respected social activist. Justice Oputa, who once confessed his agony trying in vain to stop his son from his “disgraceful” path, lived to see that “disgraceful” path lead to national fame and social power. He must have been a proud father appearing on his son’s popular personality interview show, Zoom Time, in one episode aired in the early 2000s – an irony of life.

And here is the paradox: Clowning becomes respectable when it yields money, fame, and social power. Thus, crazy dressing and dance as well as other such weird acts which otherwise would have been treated with outrage or contempt do, before our very eyes, become respectable practices to be imitated. If Ozonna, who is definitely talented, manages to push himself high enough up the ladder of showbiz success, the story will instantly become different.

One fact that emerges here is the intrinsic tendency of our capitalist culture to define the worth of human labour based on the money it yields. The more money labour fetches, the more dignity that is ascribed to it. Many decades ago, taking up music as a career was viewed as a mark of unseriousness and idling, just as playing football was seen then. But today, this perception has changed as the two careers have evolved to become big money ventures. Legendary highlife artist, Osita Osadebe, narrated the bitter battle he had with his father when the latter heard he was about going into music. A similar story has been told by Chief Ferdinand Opera (a.k.a. Dan Satch) of the Oriental Brothers fame. The emotions of these two fathers must have changed from agony to pride when success eventually greeted the endeavours they had initially opposed.

Today, Ozonna Soludo is considered an idling fellow partly – and importantly – because he may not have a huge bank account to show for what he is doing. His content-creation labour is viewed with contempt because he has not joined the ranks of the millionaire content creators. Human labour has become so commoditised under capitalism that its dignity now almost lies in its monetary value. If Dangote were to be a guitar enthusiast and started posting videos of him playing the instrument, many people will likely wonder where he has got the time to be “idling” instead of managing his businesses. This is irrespective of the fact that Dangote’s socio-economic survival and comfort are no longer dependant on whether he works or not, and that as for his businesses, they will still run effectively without his physical presence. After all, businesses set up by the likes of Arthur Guinness and Henry Ford grew to become much bigger after the death of their respective owners. Nonetheless, many people – despite this truth – will still consider Dangote as legitimately working only when such work will earn him money.

Away from the particular case of Ozonna, it is clear that de-personalization has remained a pervasive part of our social living. Individuals are often expected to lose their agency and act entirely based on collectively held sentiments. They are in effect stripped of the autonomy and freedom to reflect on their existence, interpret meaning, and make choices grounded in their own judgment.

Many times, we see parents trying to force their children to follow the same path they (the parents) have followed. For instance, parents that have set up a successful business want their children to come into the business. Those who have had successful careers in professions want their children to embrace the same professions – all this without consideration for the child’s talent and passion. While wealth can be inherited, vocations are not inherited as they naturally arise from an individual’s inherent abilities and calling. This is why many persons who succeeded in various careers have found it difficult to replicate the same success in their children. Many compel their children to study the same discipline as themselves or just any other “prestigious” discipline that leads to a “prestigious” career – only to eventually face the reality that callngs differ. For example, legal luminary, Femi Falana (SAN), trained his child as a lawyer but he ended up a successful musician – that is his calling; Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s parents wanted their daughter to become a medical doctor but she eventually moved to her calling in which she has excelled today. The same thing happened with Fela Anikulapo-Kuti who repudiated his parents’ choice of legal education to study music at the Royal College of Music, London. Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu chose a military career over his father’s choice of having him become an entrepreneur under his multi-million-pound business empire, and today history appears to show he followed his calling.

Many other examples exist. Today, a lot of young people, under societal influence, are ignoring their calling – as evident in their natural abilities – to pursue education and career in fields society considers prestigious. Many individuals are making other choices, not as a matter of conviction born of personal reflection and judgment, but in response to the urge to belong. Worse, this societal influence is so pervasive that individuals most times are not exactly conscious of it, believing that their actions are entirely a product of their personal judgments.

Finally, even though the social imperative of human existence decrees that no one lives in a way that is completely out of touch with the cultural sentiments of their surroundings, there is the need for balance between these and an individual’s social autonomy. Without such balance, the person risks dissolving into the collective, becoming merely a passive bearer of inherited norms rather than an active interpreter of them.

While it is damagingly anti-social for an individual to reject society with its norms and expectations, it is important that they retain the freedom to engage it critically—appropriating its values where they foster growth, and resisting them where they undermine personal meaning and freedom. This is not as easy as it sounds; negotiating the boundary between social conformity and individual self-determination is tension-filled and fraught with risks. This is where both the individual and society have to be very cautious to avoid either extreme: destructive individualism and dehumanizing de-personalisation.

I am convinced Ozonna is currently enduring the burden of de-personalisation stemming from collective expectations based on his family background.

Henry Chigozie Duru teaches journalism and mass communication at Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria.