LITR 5734: Colonial & Postcolonial Literature

Sample Student Midterm 2005

Aaron Morris
09/20/05        

Respect for All Humanity?

Colonial and Post-Colonial Literature Midterm Exam

            One of the primary tenets of the Colonial and Post-Colonial Literature course is that the natives in colonized lands do not have a voice in traditional literature.  Wealth gained by the colonizers was at the expense of natives who were exploited under the now considered unjust philosophies of European colonization.  There is little doubt that the colonizers actions permanently damaged native societies.  We now understand that these voiceless, damaged societies resulted, in part, from the disrespect for humanity that was displayed by some of the colonizers.

            This understanding occurred after examining the dialogue between Conrad’s Heart of Darkness  and Achebe’s Things Fall Apart.  However, the guilt of all European colonizers, particularly Conrad, is not as evident as Achebe asserts in his essay “An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness,” where he states, “Joseph Conrad is a thoroughgoing racist” (257).  Racism, in most definitions, is a belief that one race is superior to another and it results in discrimination based on this belief.  It is unreasonable for us to judge the innermost thoughts and beliefs of Conrad including his supposed belief of racial superiority.  However, we can examine his work and the intent of his novel shows moral outrage resulting from his impression of the conditions faced by the African natives and Heart of Darkness was Conrad’s desire to portray that negative impression of colonized Africa.  Kristi Pawlak eloquently defended Conrad’s intent in the summer 2003 semester of Colonial and Post-Colonial Literature, where she wrote,

Achebe is unwilling to accept the fact that men are a product of their time and the society which educated them. This does not necessarily excuse them, but it does explain them. Every now and then a thinker, a writer, a philosopher comes along and asks a hard question of himself and his society. Conrad was engaging in a discourse that was contrary to the predominant thinking of his day. Rather than condemning him for not taking his realizations further, Achebe would be better served to recognize the fact that Conrad was not maliciously perpetrating racist culture, but honestly evaluating his own assumptions. Granted, Conrad did not turn into a famous civil rights moralizer, but he most certainly did not, as Achebe accuses, write a novel which celebrates dehumanization. Frankly, as emphasized repeatedly here, Conrad merely sought to write a book to relate his impressions, not to make grand social statements either way. His social statements came out of the dawning awareness gained as he processed these impressions.

It is unjust and arrogant for today’s society to judge the actions of a previous society based on contemporary knowledge and values.  It is simple, in retrospect, to condemn the poorly chosen actions of the past and pontificate moral values upon our ancestors.  The more difficult critical thinking exercise that we must face today involves examining our own society and trying to project decades or even centuries into the future which of our actions will be judged as immoral or indecent and an even more arduous task would be correcting and changing our actions to conform to tomorrow’s morality.

Achebe seems to have missed the boat in his opinion that disrespect for humanity set sail from Marlowe’s harbors and that irreverence for human beings beached itself upon white sand beaches of innocence found along the African coast.  Blatant disrespect for the humanity of disadvantaged persons and women resulting in the oppression of half of Africa’s native population existed long before the arrival of Europeans.  No one today will claim that enslaving an entire continent and race was just, however, the evidence of native African men disregarding African women’s humanity and elevating the status of strong, wealthy males to absolute supremacy is deplorable.

A caste society, which by definition involves the oppression of certain people in favor of others, was evident in pre-colonial Africa.  The Achebe novel illustrates the existence of titles, which rank the citizen’s (men’s not women’s) authority and right to govern.  We also understand that Unoka failed to take a title and is considered a failure while Okoye was going to take the Idemili title, the third highest in the land, and as a result he is considered very successful.  Is this societal segregation any different than the class system of Conrad’s time where the English were granted a higher “title” than the native African’s?  Furthermore, blatant disrespect for women is evident in Achebe’s novel.  This is described quite nicely in Dendy Farrar’s summer 2003 paper, which states,

Achebe’s Okonkwo is so preoccupied with appearing strong and masculine that he sacrifices his allegiance to tribal law in order to prove his strength. He equates weakness with femininity, and therefore, he avoids being perceived as weak at all costs. In chapter four, Okonkwo beats his youngest wife, Ojiugo due to her failure to prepare supper. Okonkwo is reprimanded for this; however, as Kirsten Holst Petersen points out in her essay “First Things First: Problems of a Feminist Approach to African Literature,” Okonkwo was punished, “not for beating his wife, but for beating her during the weak of peace” (254). While the Ibo culture is fairly democratic, it is, in fact, profoundly patriarchal. Wife beating is an accepted practice and it is perfectly acceptable for a man to control his wives.

            The attitude toward native women in Africa continues in present times.  This is chillingly depicted in the New York Time’s article “Entrenched Epidemic: Wife-Beatings in Africa.”  Some alarming statistics from that article include,

In Zambia, nearly half of women surveyed said a male partner had beaten them, according to a 2004 study financed by the United States - the highest percentage of nine developing nations surveyed on three continents.

In South Africa, researchers for the Medical Research Council estimated last year that a male partner kills a girlfriend or spouse every six hours - the highest mortality rate from domestic violence ever reported, they say. In Harare, Zimbabwe's capital, domestic violence accounts for more than 6 in 10 murder cases in court, a United Nations report concluded last year.

Yet most women remain silent about the abuse, women's rights organizations say. A World Health Organization study has found that while more than a third of Namibian women reported enduring physical or sexual abuse by a male partner, often resulting in injury, six in seven victims had either kept it to themselves or confided only in a friend or relative.

            From a modern American viewpoint, these statistics are gut wrenching and the wave of moral indignation is amplified by the horribly misogynistic statements by two of today’s Africans recorded in the aforementioned New York Time’s article.

To Kenny Adebayo, a 30-year-old driver in Lagos, the issue is clear-cut. "If you tell your wife she puts too much salt in the dinner, and every day, every day, every day there is too much salt, one day you will get emotional and hurt her," he said. "We men in Africa hate disrespect."

Emmanuel Osibuamhe, 36, now says he was wrong to beat his wife. But in a two-hour interview in his office, which doubles as barber shop, he insisted that she drove him to it by deliberately provoking him. Pacing the floor in freshly pressed pants, polished shoes and yellow shirt, he grew increasingly agitated as he recalled how she challenged his authority.

"You can't imagine yourself beating your wife?" he said. "You can't imagine yourself being pushed to that level? But some people just push you over the edge, and you do things that you are not supposed to do."

"For God's sake," he added. "You are the head of the home as the man. You must have a home that is submissive to you."

            The men in Africa hate disrespect yet it is a clear example of disrespect to get emotional and hurt another person.  It is difficult to think of many examples where the humanity of a subject person, African women in this instance, is less respected.  This subjugation of women demanding that they become “submissive” existed long before European’s arrived in Africa.  Are we to fault Conrad’s societal morals and perception while simultaneously excusing all of the wrongs that African’s perpetrated upon each other?  The ugly word of racism connotes judging one race by a different standard than we judge another race.  Are we not committing a different brand of racism by faulting Conrad’s characters and society for their disrespect of humanity but excusing the same level of disrespect in Achebe’s characters and society?

It is apparent that all people are capable of disrespect for humanity, regardless of race, religion, or colonization status.  Indeed, there exist good and evil intentions within colonial Europeans, native African’s and modern American’s alike.  Rather than making blanket accusations regarding evil European’s and innocent natives, a more reasonable approach for today’s scholar would be to understand that each race is made up of individuals and individual’s have actions guided, in part, by their societal beliefs.  Our duty today is to use this understanding to examine our own actions and societal perceptions.

Other post-colonial works, such as the Walcott poem, “A Far Cry From Africa,” portrays the advantages and disadvantages to be had with every society.  In this poem, the actions of the English government are unconscionable while the benefits of the language and education system enable Walcott to pursue a career and influence the conditions of his fellow man.  This is best stated by the passage,

            I who have cursed

            The drunken officer of British rule, how choose

            Between this Africa and the English tongue I love?

The conflict that Walcott speaks of is trying to reconcile some inhumane English policies with the writers and education system that he admires.  Again, there exist good and evil intentions, admirable and deplorable traits with all people in all nations, regardless of race, religion, or colonization status.

Nations, society, and all of humanity have a complex interrelatedness throughout our globe.  From the preceding dialogue it is apparent that Conrad’s racism is not as obvious as Achebe would assert.  This is a complicated world and it is our duty to understand the actions of the past and to examine our own actions and perceptions so that we may continue to improve the living conditions and brotherhood evident in our society, lest we, like Conrad, be judged too harshly by posterity.