Husband and Wife

It seems there are two husband-wife relationships that are mentioned in The Poisonwood Bible. The first is obviously between Nathan and Orleanna, and the other is between the Belgians and the Congo. Actually Orleanna herself established the latter relationship as one of spouses. She did so at the end of “The Judges” when she pitied the “poor Congo, barefoot bride of men who took her jewels and promised the kingdom” (201). Here, I think Orleanna was relating herself to the Congo, and both relationships look like they have some similarities.

For example, both “couples” have been struggling through some arising changes in terms of their relationships. First of all, the Congo became an independent nation, changing its name from the Belgian Congo to the Republic of Congo. It was at this time that it seemed the Congo had escaped from the Belgians’ oppressive colonial power. However, a few months later, Lumumba was murdered under the orders of President Eisenhower. It was as if the Congo had been rebelling, appeared to succeed, and then was harshly admonished for its rebellion.

In a similar way, Orleanna has been standing up for her beliefs, even if that means talking back to Nathan. An instance of this is when Nathan suggests the Congo is helpless, and Orleanna defends the Congo (53). Yet another example is when Anatole ate dinner one night and argued with Nathan. After Anatole left, Orleanna spoke up and reproached Nathan for not handling Anatole very well (133). Between the two examples, Nathan became very angry and hurt Orleanna verbally and emotionally. He insulted her and broke her prized china platter. These instances demonstrate the bad treatment she receives after attempting to “rebel” against Nathan’s power as head of the family and as her husband.

Also, the Congo is exploited for the purposes of the Belgians just as Orleanna is used by Nathan for his own intentions. When Leah accompanied Nathan to the independence ceremony in which Patrice Lumumba spoke, she heard Lumumba talk passionately about how the Belgians “despoiled their land and used the Negroes for slaves, just as long as [they] could get away with it” (183). In addition, Orleanna sadly observes how she “was [Nathan’s] instrument, his animal. Nothing more” (89). I think she and the Congo—each as a spouse that is powerless in a marital relationship—are unable to prevent their “husbands” from using them in whatever way they wish. They try at times to loosen the chains of their bondage, but unfortunately their attempts do not seem to bring about any successful results.