LITR / CRCL 5734: Colonial & Postcolonial Literature

Sample Student Final Exam 2003

Natalie Martinez
LITR 5734
Dr. White
30 June 2003

Treatment of the Self-Other in Post-Colonial and Colonial Literature

    The concept of the self-other can have many variations such as me and not me, us and them, and the in-group and the out-group. The concept can be categorized in different areas of study as well, such as: philosophical viewpoints, gender issues, historically and culturally. In literature, the self-other or the subject/object concept is better examined through the various relationships between the two. The self-other creates a field of dialogue in the text and this dialogue presents many different attributes of the self-other in post-colonial and colonial literature. The concept crosses both genres of literature; however, it is more and more evident that the “other” in post-colonial literature is beginning to transform or define itself through the “self” and in some circumstances even reversing poles and moving towards reflection and hybridization. The key to identifying this evolving concept is by exploring relationships in the text and examining the author’s attitude towards these relationships in conjunction with the self-other.

In A Passage to India, by Forster, the character of Aziz and Fielding represent a relationship that experiences several changes throughout the course of the text. The attitudes that are reflected at the end of the novel represent this text on a whole more postmodern than colonial. First, the relationship begins as a polarization. There were certain attitudes held by the “self” or “positive”, as represented by Fielding and the “other” or “negative” by Aziz. However, it is interesting the way that Forester presents the attitudes of the “others” first.

For example, the Indians in the first section describe their beliefs about the English and Aziz joins in and claims, “Why talk about the English? …Why be either friends with the fellows or not friends? Let us shut them out and be jolly” (9). Forster does this to make the conflict in second section more dramatic. The poles then seem to reverse when in the beginning of the second section Fielding sticks up for Aziz, “ I make no reflection on the good faith of the two ladies, but the charge they are bringing against Aziz rests upon some mistake, …The man’s manner is perfectly natural; besides, I know him to be incapable of infamy” (181). Then later again, “Fielding sunk his head on his arms; really, Indians were sometimes unbearable” (195).  The relationship between the self-other is moving towards an exchange between the two. In Kimberly Jones’ final exam from 2001, she claims that, “By the end of text, Aziz represents a colonized individual who is questioning the Western thoughts he has assimilated into his own cultural ideologies, and begins to resist the English.” Therefore, at the very end of the novel when Aziz and Fielding are riding their horses and both men realize that although they want to be friends (largely because the reversal of poles takes place) they will not be able to. Forster through his multiple viewpoints and tackling of social customs and belief systems has really begun to move into the postmodern arena. In The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory, one critic has said, “At the very least, postmodernism highlights the multiplication of voices, questions, and conflicts that has shattered what once seemed to be (although it never really was) the placid unanimity of the great tradition and of the West that gloried in it” (15).  This seems to be exactly what Forester accomplishes as well as Roy and Kincaid.

In The God of Small Things, Roy explores (through the exchange of multiple characters and Velutha) the relationship between those who are “human” or “self” and those who are “de-humanized” or “other”. Velutha is a Paravan and in the caste system in India, this is considered the very bottom of the ladder. “Pappachi would not allow Paravans into the house. Nobody would.”(71).They were treated as sub-humans with no status, however, Roy emphasizes his numerous abilities in carpentry and machinery to show the caste system as dehumanizing.

For example, Mammachi tries to rehire him but, “it caused a great deal of resentment among the other Touchable factory workers because, according to them, Paravans were not meant to be carpenters. And certainly, prodigal Paravans were not meant to be rehired” (74). Mammachi who is “self” tries to treat Velutha as a “human” but ends up sounding patronizing in her attempt at compassion. “Mammachi didn’t encourage him to enter the house…she thought that he ought to be grateful that he was allowed  on the factory premises at all, and allowed to touch thing that Touchables touched. She said that it was a big step for a Paravan” (74).

Moreover, Roy shows how those who represent “human” can try to fit their own definition. Estha tries to defend Velutha, “I saw Velutha at home before we left,…So how could it be him?” only to be shot down by Baby Kochamma, “…And next time, Esthappen, don’t interrupt” (74). However, the human/dehumanized relationship continues throughout the novel. Mammachi again puts Velutha into the latter category by referring to him as a dog, “If I find you on my property tomorrow I’ll have you castrated like the pariah dog that you are! I’ll have you killed” (269). Roy explores deeply the relationships between the human/dehumanized in order to get to her message, that through love, through the emphasis of the small things, the day to day of things, the once dehumanized can indeed be seen as the humans they are.

In The Adventures of Robinson Crusoe, by Defoe, a more culturally traditional relationship exists between the self/other. Defoe’s attitude toward the self/other manifests itself into the relationship between master and slave; Crusoe as Master and Friday as slave. Of course Crusoe sells Friday and this gives us incredible insight into the colonial “master” mindset. Slaves= money, bottom line and this type of complete separation can really categorize much of colonial literature in some form or fashion and who’s to say that literature didn’t propagate some of these attitudes and beliefs?  One example of this type of relationship occurs when Crusoe first finds Friday. “At last he lays his head flat upon the ground, close to my foot, and sets my other foot upon head, as he had done before; and after this, made all the signs to  me of subjection, servitude, and submission imaginable, to let me know how he would serve me as long as he liv’d” (167-8). Crusoe later explains how he taught Friday to refer to him as Master.  Defoe creates this master/servant relationship in this text that completely identifies with the subject/object pattern. And although in Defoe’s opinion it probably wasn’t a negative relationship, it certainly illustrates how colonial literature relied heavily upon these types of ideologies.

In Lucy, by Kincaid, there is a heavy emphasis on the reflection of the self/other; a type of relationship that enables them to see themselves in each other. Kincaid stresses this type of relationship more than any other because I think it moves the text into a higher level of consciousness, in the sense that reflection and evaluation are necessary to move forward. One example occurs when Lucy realizes that the mother she was trying to get away from is actually inside of her. “ …for  I had spent so much time saying I did not want to be like my mother…I was not like my mother- I was my mother”(90). This novel deals primarily with Lucy trying to escape being the “other” only to realize that it is part of who she is. Whether the “other” is represented by her mother, Mariah, Peggy, Dinah, her boyfriend, or even herself, what actually happens is that she learns that all these “others” make up her “self”. She finally understands what her Mother already knew,  “My past was my mother: I could her voice”,  that no matter how far away she would go, she would always carry a part of her mother with her; this could be applied to culture as well. In Dendy Farrar’s summer 2003 presentation she claims that, “Lucy does not take control of her past. She is continuously haunted by her family and her past.”  Kincaid’s use of the reflection relationship between the self/other allows the reader a deeper analysis of what future post modern generations will have to deal with; a realization that the relationship between the self/other is becoming less a separation of the two and more of combination.

A further step towards this type of literature can be seen in the hybridization of the self/other in Derek Walcott’s poetry. Walcott deals with the alienation that he feels towards his own culture and is torn between the two cultures and what happens is a fusion of the two manifests itself into his writing. Like all good writer’s, he experiences a tremendous amount of anguish about this. However, what we get in the end product is an exchange between the self/other. And this exchange allows us new insight into what may be called the “third wave”. In Walcott’s poem, “A Far Cry from Africa”, the last stanza sums up a dilemma that hybridization ultimately creates: 

Again brutish necessity wipes its hands/Upon the napkin of a dirty cause, again/A waste of our compassion, as with Spain, / The gorilla wrestles with the superman. /I who am poisoned with the blood of both,/ Where shall I turn, divided to the vein?/I who have cursed/ The drunken officer of British rule, how choose/Between this Africa and the English tongue I love? Betray them both, or give back what they give? / How can I face such slaughter and be cool? / How can I turn from Africa and Live? (17-18).

In conclusion, the relationship between the self/other in literature has provided us with very valuable insight into the differences in attitudes from post-colonial and colonial literature. The next step will be to make a new definition, one that enables us to be better humans and to deal with acceptance; perhaps a new literature of hope.

WRITING LOG: SUNDAY JUNE 29 1:00 P.M.-1:27

             MONDAY JUNE 30 5:00 P.M.-9:00

 TOTAL TIME: 4 HOURS AND 27 MINS. GIVE OR TAKE A FEW