Student Midterm submissions 2015 (2015 midterm assignment)

LITR 5831 World Literature Colonial-Postcolonial Model Assignments

Jan Smith

Slave to Language: Colonial and Postcolonial Use of English

Looking back at previous submissions, Heart of Darkness and Things Fall Apart offer opportunities to discuss how language is used in Colonial and Postcolonial literature. In their midterms, Pauline Chapman, Samantha McDonald, and Allison Coyle, show not only how authors use the English language to conveys attitudes and portray characters, the novelists, Conrad and Achebe, also use language to emphasize the impacts of English on the colonized society.

Most of the Colonial literature I have read thus far has been written by English men about English men. Therefore the attitudes and perspectives of the writers reflect a certain population. Because I bring a 21^st century interpretation to a colonizer’s novel, I am faced with the challenge of comprehending foreign historical perspectives. What I seek to understand is the writer’s perspective and how he regards Colonialism.  Pauline Chapman feels that “colonial writers are not necessarily supporters of [the] system. What they can bring to the discussion is an insider's view of the imperialists--their greed, prejudices, fears, pettiness, arrogance, and attitude of entitlement” (2005).  Allison Coyle suggests “the purpose [of] sitting down to write is to tell a story and create a visual picture with words. In Heart of Darkness, Conrad wanted readers to become enthralled in the story” (2008).  I agree with Coyle and Chapman in their interpretations of the author’s intent. Furthermore I will attempt to extend that interpretation to include characterization as a means of conveying Colonialist attitudes.    

 “The language used in novels, whether they are colonial or postcolonial, can set a tone that the reader can identify certain characters with” (Coyle 2008). Take for instance the character Marlow in Heart of Darkness. “Marlow views the natives as savages because of their race and their lack of culture, both in language and written word” (Samantha McDonald 2005). Marlow passes judgement on the natives with regard to many things including their lack of an established language.  Allison Coyle supports this characterization in her essay and points out how Marlow refers to the native languages as “a violent babble of uncouth sounds”. She sees this judgement as a conflict of first world vs. third world.  Both writers agree that Marlow is the demonstration of Colonialist attitudes. In my opinion, he embodies the traditionally arrogant Colonizer that feels superior to the rest of the world simply because he speaks English.

In the novel When Things Fall Apart, the English language is used to bring to light cultural attributes that had previously been dismissed in Colonialism. In an attempt to destabilize the racial nature of Colonialist literature, Achebe “adopts the traditionally European art form of the novel for his response. Writing in English reinforces the dialogue concept— he is responding to decades of misinformed or under informed European writers on the subject of African culture” (Chapman 2005).  In this case the language is used to enlighten rather than enslave. Coyle says that “Achebe shows readers how the Igbo language is in fact a beautiful, complex, and comprehensible language. Among the Igbo, the art of conversation is regarded very highly, and proverbs are the palm-oil on which words are eaten” (2008). Where Conrad’s Heart of Darkness barely gives his natives intelligible speech, Achebe's people speak in proverbs. (Chapman 2005). This is an example of what McGowan likes to refer to as “writing back into history” (582).

In his attempt to present us with an accurate depiction of history in Things Fall Apart, Achebe identifies the colonizer (the British) as essentially giving the natives the only culture they consider civilized, their own.  With regard to language, the oral traditions of the tribe are wiped out and replaced with a culture that is founded on written laws and religion.  Achebe describes the systematic destruction of traditions ranging from the priest’s denouncement of beliefs in the sacred serpent to the enforcement of written British laws with complete disregard for the tribe’s traditional laws. (McDonald 2005). 

All in all these three essays gave me insights into how language is used to within the colonial/postcolonial traditions. For better or worse I feel that interpretations of such texts requires more than what I have provided here. Reading essays from an accurate historical perspective takes years of research and experience, neither of which I have. Therefore I can conclude based on what I present here that language is situation specific and it either serves the master that wields it or confines the slave to submission.

Gugelberger, Georg M. “Postcolonial Cultural Studies”. The John Hopkins Guide to Literary

Theory and Criticism. Groden and Kreiswirth, Baltimore 1994. (581-584)

Colonial and Postcolonial Literature: Power Dynamics 

I respectfully say that upon entering this course my knowledge of Colonial and Postcolonial material was limited at best. After studying a few of the selections in dialogue, the historical perspectives became clearer to me. This exercise, in and of itself, is proof of how Historicism enlightens the reader. Through the interplay of genres, the contrasting perspective build historical content for the reader; a nice change from studying an isolated text that provides a limited view of the past.  With that being said I have come to the conclusion that this literature is situation specific and therefore the author’s point of view is intended to shape my interpretations as the reader.  With that in mind I find myself moving beyond the impact of experience to the critical content, paying close attention to how both classifications of literature demonstrate components of the “self and other” theme. In class, Objective 2a has been addressed in many ways: master/slave, colonizer/colonized, and finally, us and them. I will attempt to discuss these concepts, as well as portions of Objectives 1, 2, and 3 from the syllabus, relating them to the characters in the books, then demonstrate how those characters relate to each other. Furthermore I propose that the relationship between us and them exposes the themes of power and control so prominent in Colonial and Postcolonial literature. The authors then use this tension to demonstrate how humans struggle to control the environment around them.

The character of Robinson Crusoe has come to symbolize the embodiment of the colonizer, a wealthy, English male dissatisfied with his station in life who takes off to seek wealth wherever he may find it. This symbol will serve as the initial characterization for further comparisons. In Chapter 11, Crusoe makes several comments on his status by referring to himself as “majesty” and “prince”. More importantly he refers to the natives as “my subjects” and “my servants”. Defoe uses this language to establish, in the mind of the reader, the self and other dichotomy. Undoubtably these words associate Crusoe with royalty and any 18^th century English citizen reading the novel would make the same connection; especially how it relates to wealth and status. With regards to Friday, it’s apparent in the photos from class that Crusoe embodies the superior English persona. He is pictured standing up while Friday kneels at his feet. This artwork implies Defoe’s intent. Once the shooting match is over and Friday bows to Crusoe, Defoe has clearly established the master/slave relationship. Thus leading me to believe that the author was promoting the dominance of the culture and establishing the superiority of the colonizer.   

It appears that Crusoe isn’t the only Englishman seeking status and power. In The Man Who Would be King, Daniel Dravot demonstrates a restless discontent at serving the English Army in India so he sets off with Peachy to find adventures in a foreign land.  Just as Crusoe dreams of owning lands and procuring slaves for profit, Dravot seeks to rule the entire nation of Kafristan, and is intent on taking all its wealth. All of these male characters display an elite arrogance so prominent in the characterization of the colonizer.  Not only that, they possess a determination for conquest and accumulation. These exploits cause pain and suffering for the human beings caught in the wake of colonization. Both Crusoe and Dravot are driven by their desires for status and control. Regardless of the cost to humanity, their behavior is destructive and obtrusive. With that being said, Robinson Crusoe and The Man Who Would Be King do villainize the main characters with regard to how they affect other characters and impact the reader.   

The Englishmen are not the only characters seeking independent means in the literature of this course. Jamaica Kincaid’s, Lucy depicts a young woman coming from Antigua to America who works as an Au Pair in an attempt to escape her mother and the past. Postcolonial Lucy offers an interesting study in comparison to the Colonial Crusoe.  Like Crusoe she is discontent with her life. So much so that she complains ceaselessly about the mother she left behind. Whereas Crusoe worries about cannibals devouring him, Lucy’s past life consumes her thoughts.  In both novels, the characters contemplate almost to access, second-guessing with every step how to engineer the best possible outcome for the future by not repeating past mistakes. Crusoe agonizes over the discovery of the footprint, blockading himself and even destroying his work so that natives can’t get to it. Exhausted he finally resorts to a bit of beer and resigns himself to God, dreaming of the day he will be wealthy.  Lucy struggles with the elite nature of the family she lives with. Moved by the fact that there are people who can be upset by the weather, she wishes she could be like them. Anxious and isolated, she befriends Peggy and they binge on drugs and sex to relieve the stress brought about by up rootedness and isolation.

 With every new experience Lucy qualifies her encounters with references to home. These accounts lend insight into the transnational migration experience as discussed in Objective 1b from class. For example, she references the snow upon arrival and how it contrasts to her home that never drops below a certain temperature. She also makes comments about Mariah’s cheating husband, Lewis, saying that in her country most men are expected to act that way and says that Mariah should have known better. Along the same lines, Crusoe struggles with adjusting to life on the island. He is faced with not having the comforts of home yet he manages to create for himself a nice garden complete with animals and even pets. Far from home and without resources, he manages to find his way off the island and ends us selling his land to the Spaniards making a profit; which according to him means success.  These experiences are just small reminders of how moving from one cultural expectation set to a totally different set of expectations can bring both exciting and challenging encounters. It seems that the perspectives of these characters leaves the reader with a different interpretation as to what it means to be a colonizer and the colonized.

Lucy’s experience and development in the novel lends insight into the life of an immigrant. This type of literature can be difficult for a natural citizen of American, especially if that person has never had the experience of changing cultures. Opening up a dialogue with Lucy as an American women, I would have to say her experience was enlightening to me as a reader. She brings to mind aspects of American living that I wouldn’t have acknowledged. She references how having hot running water in the shower and the use of a private bathroom are learned luxuries. It is easy to forget the comforts of living in an industrialized country with plumbing and privacy.  She mentions how she hates daffodils because of the childhood experience at school, memorizing an English poem about the flowers. If I were to encounter these flowers, I would have to admit, my reaction would probably mimic Mariah’s response, insufficient and disillusioned. Yet knowing how both characters reacted, I am ever mindful of how immigrants, especially children, struggle with experiences, good or bad. (Objective 3)  Incidentally the encounter with the flowers is another example of how the main character, Lucy (colonized) is forced to control her emotions in a given situation so as Mariah (colonizer) is not adversely affected.  This particular scenario demonstrates the control dynamic on two levels. On one level Lucy if forced to control herself. The second level shows Lucy at odds with her past experience; one of which she has no control over because it is gone.  Both of these are examples of the self and other relationship. In both cases Lucy is the “other”. Incidentally this pressure is part and parcel to the change that will eventually lead her to break out of the slave role and establishing herself as a free woman. Thus she then becomes the representation of Postcolonial historicism, in that she has reinvented herself within the transmigration experience and is no longer seen as a victim.( Objective 2a)

The self/other perspective is the driving force behind Kincaid’s essay titled A Small Place. This short piece drives home the effects of colonization on the people of Antigua. Kincaid speaks out on growing up in a culture that was not her own. She feels as if her history was robbed from her and the only history she has to speak of is English; one which she prefers to be rid of.  Her sentiments about growing up in a place with English streets, English schools, and an English government are leveled with sharp rebukes and malevolent retorts. She scoffs at the English saying that they must be sad now that they don’t occupy over half of the world. From her perspective, the English should be repenting for what they did to her country. This essay with its strong language and accusatory tone definitely places the colonizer in the villain role. It also screams at the powers that took control out of the hands of the Antiguans and usurped an entire culture along with its history. Which brings to mind the essay written by George Orwell titled Shooting An Elephant.

In this essay it is not as easy to villainize Orwell as it was Crusoe and Dravot. Without a doubt, he is the colonizer and the killer, yet somehow his language is one of regret and anguish and in that aspect I can feel sorry for him. He speaks of the rank conditions and the sickly environment that is India. He describes the anguish of living in a place where the natives hate him, and how this emotional dynamic between colonizer and colonized thwarts his conscience. Within the narrative he describes an opportunity that arises for him to be the spectacle of admiration in the eyes of his captors, but it turns south quickly. At the onset of the matter it seems simple enough to kill the intruder, the elephant. In this aspect he is like Crusoe charging into save Friday. And for all intent purposes he feels justified in killing the elephant for destroying the village because at that moment he is still the policing body. It is at the moment when he gets his gun and the villagers turn into an angry mob that he realizes dynamics change. He is no longer in control of the situation. The mob is now in control. This flip of power is a reversal of the self and other dynamic. Orwell must kill the elephant in order to maintain control of the mob and maintain his status as colonizer.  This moment is very similar to the marriage moment between Dravot and Roxanne. Whereas Orwell can exercise power to maintain status, Dravot is unable to exercise power to regain status because the mob realizes that he is a fraud. In the end both Dravot and the elephant die because they both represent an element of society that no longer has control of the situation. They are the “other”.

By demonstrating the intertextual relationships between characters in Colonial and Postcolonial literature, I expose the control paradigm and interpret the historical significance of a situation as it relates to historical perspectives. Studying the shifts of power among the characters is an interesting way to study the course of history. If there is one thing I’ve learned from this course, it’s that the characters never have total control of the environment. There is always something that shifts in the situation allowing for change to come about.      

Research Proposal

The interplay of text and the ongoing opportunity for comparisons between Colonial and Post-Colonial Literature have brought to light two options for my research proposal.

The first of which is to present a research post on the conceptualization of women roles in both genres. I will attempt to write an essay that both describes, compares, and interprets women from both types of literature. This idea first presented itself while reading Lucy and The Man Who Would be King. By reading text in dialogue, it seems an opportunity to investigate the changes in conceptualization from then to now has sparked an interest while reading. It also began to come about after watching the movie White Teeth.  Incidentally, this attraction to women’s roles in Colonial and Post-Colonial texts has lead me to formulate the subject of my second research post.

The second post for investigation will involve women’s sexuality as presented in Post-Colonial literature. I like to think that the first bit of research will provide the background for what the second post will develop. This essay is not an attempt in comparisons but rather an investigation of sexuality as seen through Post-Colonial criticisms. As such I hope to include perspectives from a variety of commentaries: feminist, African-American, Latin, etc. After reading Kincaid’s Lucy, I want to see how other critics are interpreting women’s sexuality as portrayed in literature after 1974.