LITR / CRCL 5734: Colonial & Postcolonial Literature

Student Poetry Presentation, 2003

Presentation on Derek Walcott’s “Exile”

Presenter: Kristy Pawlak
Respondent: April Davis
Recorder: Jessica Hayman

Intro: I chose to take this poem and relate it to some of the discussions we’ve had regarding current aspects of culture and hybridization both in America and in general.  The poem is a little long, but it reads quickly and so I’m going to read it all the way through.

1)      Reading of the poem.

2)      As with many of Walcott’s poems there are several directions that you could take this poem.  However, I feel that his most recurrent theme of being torn between two cultures is strong in this poem.  I would like to examine the conflict of the “exile” (the student) in this poem, which can be related to Walcott’s own conflict.  Also, I would like to discuss the definition and connotations of the word exile and what it means that Walcott thinks of himself in these terms.  For discussion sake, I also plan to relate this to America’s situation today.

3)      There are a couple definitions which are central to my discussion. Other terms will be defined as we go.

a)      Exile- One who lives away from one's native country, whether because of expulsion or voluntary absence

b)     Immigrant-1. A person who leaves one country to settle permanently in another.

4)      I read this poem as Walcott speaking to a student/writer who is moving to England from India to study and write.  I think that the feelings given to the student are probably a reflection of Walcott’s own feelings as he moved to other countries to study.  In the start of the poem we see the student as one of many “migrants” on the deck of a ship.  I feel a certain sense of happiness or maybe you’d call it contentment because the student feels that this is where he was meant to be.  I imagine it to be that feeling you get when you have been unsure about a decision and then all of a sudden you have a sense of calm and knowing that you did the right thing.  Walcott repeatedly uses the word “home” in the first part of this poem.  “you were home” and “Never to go home again, for this was home.” This emphasizes that the student has the feeling that you only get when you can truly be relaxed and yourself in the comfort of your home. 

5)      Next I think we see the student’s bubble burst a little.  The weather changes and becomes unfamiliar and he realizes that he doesn’t quite fit in.  Walcott uses imagery of the seasons to describe what happens to the student.  The winter sets in and he forces himself to forget where he’s from and go about his business—“your memory kept pace with winter’s pages, piled in drifts.”  But then as spring comes along we see the student inspired by memories of India and he begins to write about his homeland. 

6)      However, the student is writing his idyllic “hymn to Mother India.”  Then Walcott and I think the student begin to recognize the fact that India is not what it once was and cannot be again.  The poem points to imports of culture and technology as changing forces. “cinema-hoardings leer in language half the country cannot read”; “metal, highways lead nowhere.” I think that here Walcott begins to make the point that the student/writer just by the fact that he is in a foreign country writing about India is a part of the change.  “Invisibly your ink nourishes…brittle pages of the Ramayana stoke the mulch fires.”  The Ramayana, as Robert—I think—told us the other day is an ancient epic Indian poem.  This imagery is of traditional Indian culture being consumed by even innocently penned works and other cultures being mixed with theirs.

7)      Walcott’s point becomes clear with the phrase “The hymn to Mother India whores its lie.”  One of the definitions of the verb “whores” is “To compromise one's principles for personal gain.”  Here Walcott is clearly stating that the student/writer has compromised some principle for his personal gain.  By this point in the poem the tone seems almost fatalistic and frustrated.  Perhaps Walcott feels that he has betrayed his own homeland by leaving to study and teach abroad.  He has sacrificed his principles for personal gain of fame and fortune that might not have been his if he had stayed at home.

8)      From here I want to quickly talk about the issue of immigration vs. exile.  This has a lot to do in my mind with the connotations words have and how that clouds our reading and writing.  Remember, by definition, exile can be either self imposed or forced.  Immigration really by definition also doesn’t specify either.  The difference is in connotation.  Exile somehow seems to convey a sense of unwillingness to be there.  “Exile” today had a negative connotation.  Even if you’ve gone voluntarily, “exile” serves to identify you with the place you left and resists a permanent classification with the new place.  In addition, I feel that exile has taken on the connotation of someone who feels uncomfortable or unwelcome where they are though in actuality the meaning of the word is only concerned with where you live, not what it’s like there.  Immigration on the other hand implies a permanency.  It implies that the new place is now home.  You have left the old and are not returning.  You must make a bond with the new place.

9)      I wanted to relate this to our discussions of American culture.  America is an example of a place struggling between the difference in being an exile and an immigrant.  Early immigrants, who were mostly from Europe, thought of themselves as immigrants.  They wanted to move here for a better way of life and they have no intention of going back.  To a large extent they also forfeited a great part of their culture when moving here—they became a part of the great melting pot—they melded into an “American” culture. I think that this is why culture and race have become so entwined in our thinking as well.  Americans of European descent immigrated in a time when the thing to do was to assimilate and give up parts of your culture that kept you from fitting in.  Therefore, it is easy to make sweeping comments about culture and group all white people together in a cultural group.   Anyway, in recent years, it seems that more of the people coming into America are more like exiles.  They are coming here because America can offer them things that their own countries cannot—education, employment, money, even healthcare.  The difference is that many of them intend to go back to their homeland.  This group of people combines with one other—the children of earlier generation immigrants—to form the exiles in America.  I include this last group because I feel that there are a lot of people in America now who are here as a result of pervious generations’ immigration and they tend to be very critical and vocal about America’s weaknesses and therefore romanticize the homeland that their ancestors left.  In doing my research I read that one criticism of poco criticism is that it tends to romanticize the homeland or colonized lands prior to colonization.  This carries over into the discussion of the image of exiles in poco works.  My classifications up to know obviously neglect a large portion of the population—many black Americans—whose ancestors did not choose to immigrate, but fall under the definition of forced exiles.  They perhaps are in the hardest position of all because they cannot think of themselves as exiles because for the most part their place here is permanent—they don’t really want to go back to Africa and yet they have to come to terms with the fact that neither they nor their ancestors chose to be here.  This is where the connotation of exile as somewhere that feels unwelcoming fits in

10)   I know that this got a little away from the poem, but it is an idea that is central to Walcott.  He will always have his internal struggle because he always thinks of himself as an exile—from Europe, from Africa, from St. Lucia, from Jamaica, even from America now.  In fact, Walcott’s self-identification as an exile extends into other areas of his life.  In her presentation, April Patrick quoted Walcott as saying that he was an “exile of divorce” due to three failed marriages.  This identity as an exile permeates his entire self.  In terms of postcolonialism, all hybrid people at some point have to stop having to choose one side of their nature, culture, etc over the other.  At some point we will have to meld it all into a new culture and keep the best from each individual one.

I really had a hard time narrowing my question, so I’m going to throw out a few and you can address them as you like—they’re all inter-related.

My questions are in three sections—

First, can a person of a hybrid background like Walcott ever really establish permanency and come to terms with who they are without feeling like they have betrayed one aspect of their culture?  Since immigration implies permanency and possibly a rejection of the mother culture, does Walcott use the term “exile” to allow himself to exist in both worlds?

Second, does it have to be a betrayal of your native land to feel at “home” in a new culture like the student in the poem did or can we chose to absorb ourselves into a new culture that fits us better without fear of judgment from our “old culture”?

Third, why is America only looked at as a nation rather than a culture exclusive of race that can combined with the cultures of immigrants' motherlands?  Will people of all races in America ever define themselves as American, not just nationally or patriotically, but culturally?

Response

In response to the questions, Rosalyn brought up the point that sometimes you have to be outside America looking in to realize that we do indeed have an American culture in the eyes of others.  Robert agreed and asked in turn if we only had a “consumer” culture in America.  Natalie felt that other cultures look down on America for being so consumer oriented.  Rosalyn then refocused on the issue of blacks as exiles and pointed out that many contemporary black writers do indeed see themselves as exiles i.e. Toni Morrison.

The respondent, April Davis, said that she also saw part of Walcott’s identity as an exile owing to the fact that he was an artist and artists are often “islands.”  She also related the cultural question to her experiences in Brazil where she asserted that though there are many diverse races there is also a sense of national culture as seen in their language, holidays, and food.  She agrees that America’s culture is capitalism and wonders why America hasn’t developed a more cohesive culture in other areas. 

Rosalyn brought up the fact that America as a whole does not celebrate Juneteenth, but we do celebrate the fourth of July.  Cynthia added that she saw several Juneteenth celebrations.  Kristy asked how you create a balance between celebrating everyone’s individual cultures and creating a new hybrid culture.  Dr. White added that we seem to want the best of both worlds.

Cynthia brought up the point that Americans as a whole seem to have a need to classify people and she is always asked, “What are you?”  Rosalyn wondered if it is the search for difference that keeps everyone separate.  She wondered how race classification takes on other forms in other countries.

Dr. White returned to the Rosalyn’s point about not knowing your culture until you were out of it by pointing to the student in the poem.  He said that when the student came to England something happens to his “Indianness,” but then as a result of being in England he doesn’t belong in India any more either.

Kristy feels that Walcott seems frustrated overall.  Greg says that in his interviews he comes across as at peace. 

Kristy returned to the poem by comparing the student in the poem to Sophie Mol’s mother.  She left her parents’ home and found herself on her own following all the cultural standards she was trying to break with.  Likewise, the Indian student leaves India, but then finds himself writing idyllic poems about it.

Dr. White brings up the point that exiles or cosmopolitan people often face the dilemma, “If you can be at home anywhere, where do you belong?”  Charley said that you could see the poem as a warning of sorts—you should think hard about leaving home because once you do nothing will ever be the same.  Kristy closed by saying that it isn’t always a bad thing to “reject” your culture or meld with another.  It depends on the individual.