LITR 5734: Colonial & Postcolonial Literature

Student Midterm 2008

Brouke M. Rose-Carpenter

February 23, 2008

Not About Us? The Ignorance Existing in Colonization,
and Where Do we go From Here?

Before beginning, I must admit my ignorance when entering this course.  Being an American, I automatically associated “Post-Colonial and Colonial” to the colonization of America.  I know, and knew before I entered this class, of the colonization of many countries, but I just assumed it would be in terms of the United States.  I am a bit ashamed to admit my narrow-minded approach, but I feel it is important to address the fact that it was my initial reaction.  Sadly, I know that I am not the only one that has entered with this somewhat biased mind set, but I believe it is a perfect example of how the operation of Colonialism is contrived. 

            We live in a huge world, were as human beings we have a hard time remembering the vastness and diversity that exist.  I would like to hope that it is not due to a self-centered culture, but more to the complexity of fathoming the existence of every culture, and the numbers that make up the human race. Which brings me to my questions:  Can we really interpret and understand each other’s cultures?  Is there a “correct” way to understand each other without a bias from our own culture?  Why do others feel that “they” can “fix” other people, and why do they “need” to be “fixed”?

            As we have discussed in class, the culture differentiation does not only exist between countries, but can also exist within different regions of one country.  Looking at the United States as an example, because this is the culture I am familiar with, people from the Northern region of the United States do not understand people from the Southern.  They tend to think of us as ignorant, backwoods, racist, with subservient women and abusive/possessive men.  This is not just a one-way street; Southerners do the same thing.  They tend to think of Northerners as rude, disrespectful, unsocial, ext., but is that the case?  No, we may act different in some aspects but we are functioning off of our regional, self-righteous, stereotypical, North vs. South divide.  This separation within sects exist not only as a North vs. South, but East vs. West, and then travels down into states, counties, cities, and even neighborhoods, why does this separation exist?   It is due to the pompous and close-minded idea that “I am better than you, and you should change to my ways”.  Even though we are all human beings there is a greedy, pretentious need to control others by some people. Giving us the birth of Colonialism.

            Greed becomes a great motivational strength for many, but where does greed stop and control begin? In Joseph Conrad’s novel, Heart of Darkness, the greed to control Africa motivates the British to Colonize.  Conrad demonstrates the mentality of the Colonizers and the perspective they have on Africa and its residents.  As we see in Heart of Darkness, the Colonizers do not see the Africans as people of tradition, or people at all, but a place that is underdeveloped intellectually, financially, and industrially, which makes them an easy target for domination.  They then take control over them and cause their world to turn up side down.  They do not see an opportunity to learn about a new and different culture, but they see “savages”.  By calling them “savages” the Colonizers now feel as if they have justified their take over, and have formulated a defense as to why they’re destroying them and their world.  They can now force them to their will with a guilt-free conscience, while all the while gaining a country and its people with the defense that they were “savages”, and they can now tell the world how they helped and humanized them, looking like saviors. 

            This is quite a big message being put out there, and it is no wonder that it would upset Chinua Achebe, but I would not go as far as Achebe when he states in his article, “An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness”, “Joseph Conrad is a thoroughgoing racist” (343), because I have to agree with Aaron Morris in his 2005 Midterm, “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.”  As stated, I do agree that we are not at liberty to judge Conrad as a racist, but in Heart of Darkness we do bare witness to the dehumanization that is inflicted onto the Africans by the Colonist.  Conrad is merely acting as the storyteller, he becomes the medium, providing us with a new approach to a colonize Africa, and shedding light on a mortifying situation, which without his story may never have been revealed in such a way.  

            It is almost as if Conrad was playing devils advocate.  As Conrad portrays the story from Marlow’s perspective, he still leaves the European prejudices intact, but questions imperialism just the same.  It is through Marlow’s eyes that we see this representation of Africa.  Conrad seems to appease the Europeans by keeping those prejudices, but getting his message out there, that people need to know the situation in a Colonized Africa, and to question the authority behind it.  Conrad was writing in a different world than we live in today, and even in today’s society people still have to be discreet at times to get important messages out there.  As people of the 21^st century it is easy for us to look at Conrad’s work and yell racist purely on his choice of words, but as 21^st century people we should be more educate than that.  Another moment in Morris’ midterm that I agree with is when he is pretty much fighting a similar argument, “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”.

            Even though I do not agree with Achebe’s accusation of Conrad, himself, as a racist, I can still see how he would be motivated to write the article, and his book, Things Fall Apart.  Achebe presents the opposite perspective by shifting point of view between the different African characters.  We now see the rational and reasoning behind the African traditions, and way of life. I have to agree with Michael A. Russo, in his 2005 Midterm, “Literature and the Complexity of the Human Story: A Better Understanding of Colonialism through the Study of Fiction”, when he credits Achebe, “he doesn’t do a lot of sugar coating in Things Fall Apart.  His characters are flawed and, in many ways, create an opening for the missionaries and colonialists who destroy their culture.” Achebe does not try to make the African’s situation seem appealing, but he keeps to the reality of the situation.  There are multiple situations throughout the book that would give the Colonialist plenty of ammunition to possibly make the world think Colonization was the only solution.  For instance, the murdering of twins, the compensation for the death of one life is to be given the lives of two people, tying the sick to a tree, and the list goes on and on, but this is only “wrong” to us because that is not what we do in our society.  Does it gives us the right to strip them from their traditions? 

This is the problem I am having with Colonization.  Who is right?  No, it is not right to kill babies because they were born twins, but how do we explain what is right or wrong without pressuring a culture to convert into our culture? This battle between traditions and cultures seems to be the toughest fight.  Derek Walcott is a victim of this battle with what and who is right or wrong.  In his poem, “A Far Cry from Africa”, he says:

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?

He battles with the roots of his ancestors and the traditions he is familiar with, or the new British Colonist ways, which may seem to have advantages, but may cause him to lose the tradition he has always known.  He is unresolved, and seems to be distancing himself from the situation.  This is a common battle for colonized people: the future or the past.

            The New York Time Article, “Entrenched Epidemic: Wife Beatings in Africa”, by Sharon LaFraniere, discussed multiple incidents where African woman have been beat by their husbands.  One particular story about Ms. Isimeto-Osibuamhe and her husband beating her states, “Ms. Isimeto-Osibuamhe. A University Graduate and Founder of a French school, she packed her clothes and walked out as soon as she got back from the hospital.  So far, although her resolve sometimes wavers and she does not want a divorce, she has not gone back.”  She is a woman raised in a traditional home, but with a very untraditional educational background, and battles with tradition and change. She was beat for years out of the normalcy of the traditional husband/wife abuse relationship that she grew up with, but because she is educated she knows that she does not deserve the abuse, but refuses to divorce out of tradition.  Yet another instance where the Colonial and traditional aspects collide. 

            Colonialism and Post-Colonialism teeter on a thin line of good or bad.  Since typically countries are colonized out of greed for control, it becomes bad.  Once there they tend to want to change everything of that country so that it works best for them: bad.  But then there are those situations were people are traded, beat, raped, etc. were you wonder if Colonization would be good for them, but would any of that change.  I am sure it is obvious that I am having a hard time coming to terms with whether Colonialism is a blessing or a curse.

As I have reconciled with myself for the ignorance that I walked into the classroom with about Colonialism, I realized I needed to evaluate what I know.  That is why I chose to do the objective titled “Self-other” dialogue between yourself and the course.  How has the course spoken to your profile or identity as a reader or student of Literature?”  The concept of Colonialism and Post-Colonialism is so much broader than I imagined.  I guess it is something we tend to take for granted, but I have never considered all of the colonization’s that have taken place over the course of history. 

 In attempting to decide the best way people should “handle” each other in regards to Colonization I thought about a class discussion.  During Talli Ortiz’s presentation over Walt Whitman’s poem, “A Passage to India” the comparison between the poem and Achebe and Conrad’s novels was brought up.  It was concluded that the difference is “a lyric poem is always unified”, were as a novel always has conflict.  Perhaps life is like a novel and it cannot exist without conflict, and our idea of “peace” and the “right” way of doing things is like a lyric poem: always unified but could never be a novel.