ABSTRACT This paper explores the link between exile and national redemption in Ben Okri’s The Famished Road (1991) and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s Purple Hibiscus (2003). Although exile constitutes the dominant interpretive concept as it relates to the scandalous and the breaking of a vicious cycle of violence and hopelessness in both novels, the connection between exile and postcolonial national redemption has gone unexplored. Drawing on Walter Benjamin’s notion of becoming-traitor and on exile as ex salire, the paper argues that contrary to Edward Said’s and Walter Mignolo’s conceptualisation of exile as the idiom for rethinking location and identity beyond the imaginary of the nation as territoriality, Okri and Adichie re-present exile as an ethico-political act of radical refusal and epistemic disobedience to the existing norms of violence and nonbeing, and a precondition for postcolonial redemption. The paper reveals two things: that novelty, in both novels, can be located at the conceptual level wherein the transformation of exile into a strategy of rebellion and subversion becomes the precondition for postcolonial agency and redemption; and that the scandalous event is a site of contestation, epistemic disobedience and futurity.

中文翻译：

---

Ben Okri 的《饥饿之路》和 Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie 的《紫芙蓉》中的流放和后殖民国家救赎

摘要 本文探讨了 Ben Okri 的 The Famished Road (1991) 和 Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie 的 Purple Hibiscus (2003) 中的流放与国家救赎之间的联系。尽管流放构成了主要的解释概念，因为它与两部小说中的丑闻和打破暴力和绝望的恶性循环有关，但流放与后殖民国家救赎之间的联系尚未得到探索。借鉴 Walter Benjamin 的成为叛徒和流放作为 ex salire 的概念，该论文认为，与 Edward Said 和 Walter Mignolo 将流放概念化为重新思考位置和身份的习语相反，超越了国家作为领土的想象，Okri 和 Adichie 将流放重新呈现为一种彻底拒绝和认知不服从现有暴力和非存在规范的伦理政治行为，以及后殖民救赎的先决条件。本文揭示了两点：两部小说的新颖性都可以定位在概念层面，其中流放向反叛和颠覆战略的转变成为后殖民代理和救赎的前提；并且丑闻事件是一个争论、认知不服从和未来的场所。