The rhythm in this fifth stanza is supported with use of rhyme (‘nose’ and ‘rose’, but also ‘know’ is vaguely connected as well).
In the sixth stanza, there is use of everyday language, ‘bunny chows’ and ‘…it’s in the bone,’. This is obviously contrasting the ‘white’s only inn’ of stanza five where a sense of politeness and formality clash with arrogance as it is apparently superior to the ‘working man’s café’ which is informal at best, and where blacks can be more careless with their manners because, although apartheid is over; that is still how blacks are expected to act (‘…it’s in the bone,’ – deep rooted tendencies) and because of the deep-rooted order and segregation the blacks can not bring themselves to act any differently to how they are expected.
This stanza isn’t really open to interpretation about its imagery as there aren’t any metaphors (for exception of the final line) or similes. In comparison to the imagery of the inn, there is barely any.
It doesn’t have any methods of writing which could aid the imagery; however there is a distinctive pattern in sounds.
In stanza three, the line, ‘…name flaring like a flag,’, also suggests that the white people who would have gone to the inn, and generally the people who owned the inn are arrogant about their superiority over the blacks by emphatically stating it by building an inn for whites only which seems to have its own place, whereas in stanza six, the ‘working man’s café’ is described as being ‘down the road’ which is not quite as exclusive as the inn’s purpose is supposed to be.
The inn ‘squats in the grass and weeds,’ according to the poet, which suggests that in his opinion, if the inn had to be there anyway, it would be temporary like a ‘squat’ house.
‘…Brash with glass,’ suggests that the poet can look through on to a new way of life, which was previously only
his and his kind’s idealist view but still, the glass acts as a barrier still, preventing him from entering this new life under Mandela’s time in power.
The word ‘brash’ also implies that the said barrier is very obvious about being there and separating the two races.
However, in the last stanza, although the anger that is portrayed through ‘leaving small mean O of small, mean mouth. Hands burn for a stone, a bomb, to shiver down the glass,’ could be interpreted as his wanting to act as a
terrorist for the blacks’ cause against the whites even though there is no need any longer; but also it could be his wanting to ‘shiver down’ the system which repels him psychologically from freedom because of the segregation of blacks and whites and the difference in wealth, which ultimately means a difference in status: which is the entire point of the poem.
Also noting that it says ‘shiver’ rather than shatter, which could be an indication of his coldness and bitterness about the way he was treated during apartheid.
In both stanzas two and three, the word ‘white’ is used as symbolism for anger or hatred, for example, ‘and the hot, white, inward turning anger of my eyes,’ and ‘crushed ice white glass’.
This use of the word ‘white’ as a symbolism of anger and hatred the author mentioning it in conjunction with his eyes brings to mind that as the cliché saying goes, ‘eyes are the window to the soul,’ and as his eyes are white they reflect his soul as being filled with loathing for the whites.
‘…the soft labouring of my lungs,’ in the second stanza implies that in District Six, the air feels different and it is harder to breathe, maybe because it is tainted with hatred and tormented memories…
The final line, ‘Nothing’s changed,’ sums up the poem; although it is post-apartheid, the attitude is still the same, despite the political differences.
‘Not My Business’ is not specific about the period of time: nor the exact location that it was set in. Although, as the poet is Nigerian, it can be assumed that it is set in the same place.
The poem’s theme is about the escalation of one controversial act and how it can ignite a whole load of other events which become more serious with each deed if no one resists it. None of the characters in the poem looked out for one another in each of their times of need, so, when the last person sought after someone to help him when he was to meet his fate at the hands of ‘them’, there was no one let, and in the end, it was no one else fault but his own, because of his own selfishness or perhaps his weakness (hunger, for example).
Nonetheless, ‘Not My Business’ as a piece of writing’s structure has stanzas which are spattered with an expansion of the plot (which is in third person narration and is impersonal and indifferent to the victims’ suffering) followed by the same repeated chorus (in the first person narration which is the character’s perspective). He denies any involvement of the poet in the case of the attacks of Akinna, Danladi & Chinwe, who are the victims in the poem.
‘Not My Business’ comprises a defiant attitude and a tone which suggests an egocentric nature of the poet (or at least the character in which the poet acts the part of – the poem is in a third person narration in the first few lines of the first three stanzas, and each of those are followed by a first person narration at each chorus and then again at the fourth stanza).
The character/poet in ‘Nothing’s Changed’, however, does not defy his people as the character did in ‘Not My Business’ because he (the former character) seemed to feel stronger about his cause than the latter did; as the latter only appeared to be concerned with his own well-being (‘What business of mine is it so long as they don’t take the yam from my savouring mouth?’).
Along these same lines, ‘Not My Business’ also has a running religious interpretation with its three denials of the victims who ultimately may perhaps have saved the character from his fate in the fourth stanza.
The poem follows the lines of the story of Peter’s three denials of Christ in the New Testament in the Bible, when it was Christ who would have sanctified him.
Another interpretation of the three denials is when related with Charles Dickens’ ‘A Christmas Carol’, when the three spirits visited Scrooge and gave him reasons and chances to change his hostile and cruel ways. So, as a parallel: when each of the victims were attacked and the main character in the poem hindered them; it was another
chance which was wasted and eventually led to the fate that Scrooge would have had, had he not had heeded the spirits pleas.
A sub-theme or pattern that carries on throughout the poem with several references is that of hunger or food in ‘Not My Business’ (ie: the constant repetition of the chorus: ‘What business of mine is it so long as they don’t take the yam from my savouring mouth?’ which represents the yam as the character’s well-being, and then ‘…and stuffed him down the belly of a waiting jeep,’ in the first stanza.)
This is possibly because this area is one that is scarce of food but not only that, but because the are is constantly being terrorised by ‘them’, the people who live there feel like they have no sense of security or happiness and therefore cling to whatever scrap they might have. (Hence, ‘savouring mouth’ and ‘savouring mouth’ are metaphors for the character’s desire for peace, possibly.)
This desire for peace contrasts the character’s motivation in ‘Nothing’s Changed’ (‘Hands burn for a stone, a bomb to shiver down the glass.’)
The poet is careful to refer to the tyrants as ‘they’, making them as seem as an impersonal and monstrous ‘force’ which is intent on singling out their/its victims knowing that they will not be opposed.
‘They’ humiliate their victims; taking what pride they might have had, for example, when Chenwe was attacked she may have been bundled into a sack as if she were merely just an object or some kind of animal as this line explains; ‘One neat sack for a stainless record.’
When ‘they’ are made impersonal, the jeep which is the symbolism for death or destruction in this poem (waiting like the Grim Reaper for its time to strike), is personified, ‘…down the belly of a waiting jeep,’ so the jeep is acting the part of ‘they’, but ironically, where the impression is given that ‘they’ are vociferous in their attacks; the jeep is always described as being silent; ‘…in its usual silence.’
Comparing this abuse in this poem to the abuse in ‘Nothing’s Changed’, the types of abuse are different. The abuse in ‘Not My Business’ is more physical whereas the abuse suggested in ‘Nothing’s Changed’ is more psychological (mental and emotional abuse). While ‘they’ are thrashing their victims about and/or killing them, the opposing force who are the white people in ‘Nothing’s Changed’ must use their racism as a means of mistreating the blacks psychological because; firstly, there is no indication of physical abuse, only the fact that it is probably only the poet’s head now, that he cannot enter a previously ‘whites’ only’ building.
In the first stanza, two strong verbs are used; ‘beat’ and ‘stuffed’ and are both used in violent contexts. The same goes for the second stanza where ‘booted’ and ‘dragged’ are used and are used in the same context. The poet appears to not be afraid to use these strong verbs so that he can portray the brutality and butchery of the entire unjust situation. However, this contrasts when he uses euphemism in the second stanza for the murder (or hinted murder) or Danladi; ‘…dragged Danladi out, then off to a lengthy absence.’
‘Not My Business’ has attacks which could happen at any time, ‘They picked Akinni up one morning…’, ‘They came one night…’, ‘Chinwe went to work one day…’ and ‘And then one evening…’; so when the metaphor; ‘bewildered lawn’ is used it is not surprising that someone/something is at least bewildered to why this character was picked to be the next victim. Of course, if the poet/character made himself genuinely believe that the abductions and/or murders of the previous victims was nothing to do with him and that he was not involved; then to find that the jeep was waiting for him would have a reality check and that must have been the very last thing that he would have expected.
‘Not My Business’ is less personal than ‘Nothing’s Changed’. This is mainly due to ‘Nothing’s Changed’ being completely in the first person narration so that all aspects of the character’s consciousness are covered.
