Postcolonialism: A Very Short Introduction
The scholastic tradition in which I’ve most recently been trained is analytic philosophy, indebted to the logical and mathematical perspicuity of Bertrand Russell and his peers. When faced with a question, my instinct is now to break out the logical-inference-making part of my brain, tracking premises, conclusions, and distilling reality to propositions.
I recognize that this is only one way to engage with the world, and has its limitations. Postcolonialism: A Very Short Introduction describes, through narrative and history, what those limitations might be, in the eyes of others.
The “Other” is an important theme in postcolonial thought, as is the problem of knowledge and boundaries. The form that the book takes resists my normal approach of refuting premises or responding with thought experiments. This is intentional.
Rather than beginning with foundational definitions, the introduction works its way through major postcolonial themes and figures using history. Beginning with the Bandung and Tricontinental Conferences, the author, Robert C. Young, moves through Castro’s visit to Harlem, the British occupation of Iraq, the politics of India and the Hinduvata movement. Along the way he discusses rai music and the imagery of the veil, talks about landless and nomadic people, fair trade and globalization.
Subaltern Epistemologies
What is he circling around? Ways of seeing the world that are at odds with Western epistemology. He gets at these subaltern epistemologies (women’s knowledge, local knowledge, etc.) through narratives rather than analysis. Since I can’t reproduce the book here, even though it is short, below is a snippet that describes the trajectory of his wide-ranging arc:
…what is important is that postcolonialism involves first of all the argument that the nations of the three non-western continents (Africa, Asia, Latin America) are largely in a situation of subordination to Europe and North America, and in a position of economic inequality.
Postcolonialism names a politics and philosophy of activism that contests that disparity, and so continues in a new way the anti-colonial activities of the past.
An example of how epistemology and power are interrelated is the notion of land ownership. Young points out that John Locke declared colonial lands to be terra nulla because the nomadic natives did not “possess” land. The idea of owning land is not an innate one for human beings. Earlier in the year, I heard Lord Colin Renfrew speak about how he thought the idea of property emerged. The implication is that there is a development from lower to higher cognition, and that without the Western conception of land ownership, humans are at a lower cognitive level.
Nomadic peoples are problematic for colonial powers as well because they are resisting the state’s controlling reach. They do not see the boundaries that the state sees (back to epistemology again) and live in defiance. However, this celebration of resistence by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, in particular, is not necessarily part of the daily existence of Palestinian or Afghan refugees.
Postcolonialism and Violence
More importantly, I was bothered by this comment that Young makes in passing: “…’Terrorism’, now being rapidly codified as operating through transnational networks, would be an extreme example of the characteristic political activity that such nomadism involves.” Notice the scare quotes around terrorism. He doesn’t flesh out his assertion that terrorism’s major feature is transnational networking (rather than subversive violence), nor does he justify the link between nomadism and terrorism.
The connection between postcolonial resistance and violence is documented in the book: the violent actions of Frantz Fanon and Che Guevara, who were both trained physicians, is characterized as parodoxical, “an ethics of healing through revolutionary violence” and contrasted with Ghandi’s “therapeutic ayurvedic medicine.” Like the mention of terrorism, no criticism or alternate view is offered.
In personal and political terms, the most eye-opening chapter of the book concerned the bombing of Baghdad. Like many other Americans (I assume), my Middle Eastern colonial history is sketchy. The chapter describes the “independence” that British forces gave to Iraq in 1920, and followed with Royal Air Force Bombings, mustard gas attacks upon Kurds, and economic control over Iraqi oil fields. The present American “liberation” or “occupation” of Iraq and the subsequent bloody response makes more sense set against this background.
Postcolonialism and Feminism
Another way to understand the relationship between the colonial and subaltern is by examining the Western fascination with the Islamic veil. Young claims, “No one can read the veil from a neutral, disinterested space” and goes on to examine a postcard from around 1910. The image is of an Egyptian woman in a veil, and Young interprets her as a stereotyped image, using Edward Said’s notion of ‘Orientalism’ as a guide. She is objectified, unable to represent herself, and is designed to evoke certain ideas (like Christmas imagery requires snow, for example). Her veil is understood as a confinement that the Western cultures ought to free her from.
In contrast, Young argues there is no Veil, no single thing that her image really represents. Rather, there are different garments in different cultures at different times. Reality is more fluid (back to the idea of resisting boundaries) than Western epistemology allows. As well, veils can be powerful for women wearing them: Alergian women carried weapons under them during the Algerian War of Independence; some Muslim women choose to wear veils for privacy. Intepreting the veil requires reading it “in terms of its local meanings…within its own social space.” A Western reading, looking in, misunderstands the veil.
Critical Response
This introduction doesn’t give me much to dissect. Rather than explicitly setting forward premises, Young couches them in narrative and history. That said, I’ve tried to show how there are implicit assumptions that ought to be examined more carefuly.
Is it the case that a “Westerner” necessarily misunderstands the subaltern, always and everywhere? Young, by writing this book and making such a claim, is interpreting the postcolonial experience from a Western framework. And is the problem with the veil that stereotypes always prevent us from seeing reality? Or can listening, understanding social context, and reading local meanings open up a space which–if not “neutral” or “disinterested”–is shared?
Young, to his credit, does point out the difference between the academy’s postcolonialism and the lives of refugees and the oppressed. While he rightly emphasizes the fluid meanings in the veil, I wonder if he could do more in his analysis of the subaltern epistemologies. Must local knowledge (herbal healings, shamans etc) and women’s knowledge (midwives, environmental activists) be contrasted with Western knowledge? Cultures contain many kinds of knowledge within them, and–to take India, for example–highly rigorous and “Western” systems of logic existed in Hindu and Buddhist thought, alongside of other forms. Further, Western culture is at risk of being “Orientalized” by being presented as a monolithic essence, made up of the capitalist drive for hegemony.
While the point that Europe and North America have economically dominated the non-western continents is valid, is that a valid blanket statement today? What about the emerging dominance of China and the role of India? Without defending the violent and repressive regimes of the past (and the present), it’s possible to apply nuanced interpretation to both sides.
That said, this short introduction did open my eyes to the realities of the postcolonial struggle, in concrete terms. It has made me reflect upon the limitations of theory to tell stories and interpret history. In my next critical response, I’ll take up the book The Truth about Stories by Thomas King, which has to do with precisely this problem.
Image: Arab woman in beaded veil. (Not the image referred to in the book, but from the same postcard genre.)