postcolonial imagination and postcolonial theory.doc

8/10/2019 Postcolonial Imagination and Postcolonial Theory.doc

1/11


2/11

new countr! b! appl!ing a wide range of practices including trade( plunder(

negotiation(

warfare( genocide( enslavement and rebellions "/oomba 499#: 4&. Practices such as

plunder(

warfare( genocide and enslavement would not have been necessar!( had the coloni;ers

not hadsomebod! to plunder( fight against( put to genocide or enslave.

Another problem stems from the word settlement and the agent settler which led

to a t!pe of 1uropean colonies usuall! known as settler colonies. Alread! in the mid

#$


3/11

spelling solutions( with or without h!phen( of the term postcolonialism. In the

beginning(

the term was used to denote the post?colonial state which had a clear chronological

meaning

and referred to the period following independence though such post?colonial nation?

stateshave usuall! been coterminous with the boundaries of the colonial administrative

units

"Ashcroft et al+ 4999: #$>& or remained economicall! dependent on the mother countr!.

'ut

from the late #$9s critics have been using the term postcolonial to discuss various

cultural@political@linguistic effects and e3periences triggered off b! coloni;ation which

gave

rise to the so?called colonial discourse theor!. To that effect( the term( as ambiguous as

it is(

became the site of disciplinar! and interpretative contestation. The authors of the

groundbreaking stud! The Empire Writes Back "#$%$& offer a definition ofpostcolonialism as

covering all the culture effected b! the imperial processfrom the period of

colonisation

onards "Ashcroft et al+ #$$#: 4( emphasis mine&. *ence( the post in postcolonial(

notwithstanding the application of the h!phen( does not impl! posterit! in regard to

colonialism( but is a product of it. 5n the other hand some authors( primaril! those into

colonial discourse theor! such as 1dward -aid( *omi . 'habha and )a!atri -pivak

insist on

the h!phen to distinguish postcolonial studies as a field from colonial discourse theor!

per

se( which formed onl! one aspect of man! approaches and interests that the term

postcolonial=

sought to embrace "Ashcroft et al+ 4999: #%( emphasis in the original&.Postcolonial *magination and Postcolonial Theory' *ndigenous (anadian and )ustralian -iterature

Fighting for

"Postcolonial& pace

#>

It seems that both spellings and both concepts often collapse one into the other which

has motivated +i8a! ,ishra and 'ob *odge to come up with the third possibilit! D

post"?&colonialism( with the significant h!phen in brackets( which can be used in plural

as

well. As the! claim( this form of postcolonialism is not a marker of somethingfollowing

something else( but is rather implicit in the discourses of colonialism themselves

",ishra

and *odge #$$>: 4%E&. The reason for accepting the plural form of postcolonialism is

that this

field comprises a set of heterogenous moments= arising from ver! different historical

processes "4%B&. -imon uring has concluded the same when he stated that the

postcolonial

affect= is specific to each e3?colon!. 5bviousl! 0ew Fealand postcolonialism is not

the

same as Australian postcolonialism( is not the same as 0igerian( is not the same as

Indian and


4/11

so on "uring #$%B: >


5/11

assumptions this term makes in relation to the indigenous cultural production.

According to the 0ative Canadian novelist( poet and anthologist Thomas ing( the

term postcolonial purports a method for anal!sing literatures which are formed out

of the

struggle of the oppressed against the oppressor( the coloni;ed and the coloni;er which

canimpl! that the initial point for that discussion is the advent of 1uropeans in 0orth

America

"ing 499E: #%E?B&. As ing notes( when interpreted in this manner( this method

neglects the

fact that before the arrival of 1uropeans( in other words notwithstanding coloni;ation(

there

were pre?e3istent traditions@cultures in Canada "or in other former colonies&. This in

turn

means that postcolonial( though striving to find new centres( remains( in the end( a

hostage to

*va Polak#>%

nationalism "#%B& D in ing=s case( Canadian nationalism. Though ing is ver! much

aware

of the multi?la!ered application of postcolonial methodolog!( he rightfull! claims that it

is

unfortunate that the method has such an albatross D the term 6itself7 D hanging around

its

neck "#%B&. This seems to be the reason wh! he remains sceptical that postcolonial

could

describe a non?centred method which can indiscriminatel! include ver! locall!

identified(marginal and( once( twice muted voices. Another problem that he perceives lies in

appropriating the term postcolonial literatures to suggest specific development stages(

a

notion of progress in a given literar! corpus of a former colon!. In case of native

literatures in

general( this would most fre2uentl! impl! transition from oral into written( or

appropriation of

the 1nglish "or rench& language or Hestern genres. 5f course( obvious problem arises

from

the notion of progress inscribed into development( as if primitivism has given wa! to

sophistication which is natural and desirable. As ing claims( 0ative literature has

become

written while at the same time remaining oral( and it has e3panded from a specific

language base to a multiple language base "#%B& which is wh! new descriptors should

be

found which avoid privileging one culture over another( which do not erase the former

imperial centre 8ust to construct a new one. *ence( ing replaces the prefi3 postcolonial

for

the 0ative literar! production and offers terms such as tribal( interfusional( polemical

and

associational to describe the range of 0ative writing. -uch terms( according to theauthor


6/11

avoid the notion of centreG the! do not impl! progress but render possible a cultural and

literar! continuum for 0ative literature. At the same time the! do not function as tags(

but

specific vantage points from which we can see a particular literar! landscape "#%


7/11

can include all 0ative literar! works( especiall! those( and there will be a growing

number of

them( which rel!( to a certain e3tent( on the so?called Hestern literar! genres or

techni2ues ofPostcolonial *magination and Postcolonial Theory' *ndigenous (anadian and )ustralian -iterature

Fighting for"Postcolonial& pace

#>$

writing. ing himself admits that his terminolog! cannot be readil! applied to the work

of

such 0ative writers as )erald +i;enor=s novels3arkness in t+ -ouis Bearheart "#$%&

which

he labels a postmodern novel( and Craig ee -trete=s The Bleeding 4an "#$& or*f )ll

Else

Fails "#$%9&( which he identifies as collections of surreal speculative fiction. Though his

terms more rightfull! include precolonial heritage of the irst 0ations in Canada( the!

cannotinclude comfortabl! a ver! important bod! of 0ative works which create a ver!

significant

0ative continuum D not that of the 0ative form( but that of the 0ative content wrapped

in

white forms. This writing which uses readaptations and transformations of the

established

genres( the 8u3taposition of st!les( numerous te3tual interpla!s even though being

absorbed b!

0ative content can also be read as instances of postmodernist pastiches and shiftings of

literar! forms whereas the ungrammaticalities of the te3t which threaten language as

mimeticrepresentation( the glossing over the te3ts claiming to present ob8ective realit! can be

read as

markers of postcolonial te3ts and as such can easil! fit into the term established b!

primaril!

white scholars D that of postcolonial literatures. Another problem arises from his claim

that

his terms do not depend on the arrival of 1uropeans for their raison d56tre "ing

499E: #%$(

emphasis in the original&. Lnfortunatel!( polemical literature( as he terms it( does not

depend

on but still is a product of the arrival of 1uropeans and their mechanisms ofcoloni;ation(

otherwise the basic theme( that of the clash of cultures( would not be in the focal point

of such

narratives. The same can be applied to the so?called first generation of Aboriginal

Australian

writers such as 5odgeroo 0oonuccal or evin )ilbert who produced the poetr!

engag7e.

ing ultimatel! admits that it ma! come out that his terms will not do in the end at all(

but still( he re8ects the term postcolonial because at its heart( it is an act of

imagination and

an act of imperialism that demands that he imagines himself as something he did not

choose


8/11

to be( as something he would not choose to become "#$9&.

The 0ative Canadian writer( /ee ,aracle claims that postcolonial presumes that

Indigenous people have resolved the colonial condition at least in the field of literature.

-he

asserts that even in the field of literature 0ative writing is 8udged not b! the standards

set b!the 0ative writing( but b! the Hestern one even though the 0ative writers themselves

have

criteria for their literature. As she continues:

Hith conditions as the! are( it is a lu3ur! for me to wander into m! dreamspace and

conceive of post?colonial. A multitude of faces( all white and too numerous to name(

gather around the edges of m! dreamspace. 6M7 And still I imagine new words to deal

with old dilemmas that still stand on the wa! to freedom. ",aracle 499E: 49B&

5bviousl!( what she has in mind is what -lemon has identified as postcolonial condition

which is not the same for the 0ative and non?0ative Canadians. This implies that the

sole

term postcolonial as a prefi3 to literature incorporating indigenous writing blurs socialhierarch! which is a direct conse2uence of colonial e3perience.

-imilar concerns regarding incorporation of Aboriginal writing in Australia into a

wider field of Australian "postcolonial& literature is shared b! Australian Aboriginal

writers.

The! also feel the sneaking suspicion that the term postcolonial has been framed b!

nonindigenous

scholars in wa!s which can still leave out indigenous peoples as well as conceal

the fact that neo?colonial and imperialist practices still have not been dismantled in

former

colonies( now democratic( even multicultural countries "'oth Canada and Australia

introduced the polic! of multiculturalism in the late #$9s&.

5ne of the ma8or Aboriginal literar! critics and writers( ,udrooroo( whose identit!

was placed in the limelight in #$$( wrote two e3tensive studies in which he tried to

name

that area of Australian postcolonial discourse that refers to literar! production of

Australian

Aborigines. The collective denominator he came up with was either Aboriginal

writing(*va Polak

#E9

writing from the fringe or Indigenous literature of AustraliaE( but nowhere did he

use the

term postcolonial in relation to Aboriginal te3ts. ,oreover he reserved the term

postcolonial for new Hestern te3ts ",udrooroo #$$:


9/11

0evertheless( in the conte3t of settler colonial states( such as Australia( colonial

structures have never been dismantled. Colonial wa!s of knowing are not historical

artefacts that simpl! linger in contemporar! discourse. The! are activel! reproduced

within contemporar! d!namics of colonial power. Net this fundamental observation

does not reall! seem to have penetrated mainstream postcolonial theor!. "Anderson

499>: 4E&It seems that Indigenous authors believe that the term postcolonial when used in

relation to

indigenous cultural production attempts to take 8ust another t!pe of 1uropean theor! of

criticism and place it like a grid upon indigenous te3t thus creating a specific

postcolonial

inferiorit! comple3.

inall!( what can be done in this game of perpetual naming of native@indigenous

literar! publications which themselves def! simple categori;ationO 0aturall!( the sole

attempt

of naming the te3t of formerl! muted voices perpetuates bovarysme collectif( a t!pical

colonial trope of being fated to obe! suggestion of an e3ternal milieu( for lack of anautosuggestion

from within "Kules de )autier in )ates #$%E: %& if it does not include native

scholars( and@or writers. Hithout their contribution in the sphere of literar! criticism we

will

never be able to move further awa! from the stage in which indigenous literar!

production

remains the black monolith of -tanle! ubrick=s #$$8' ) pace 0dyssey+B In order to

reveal a revealable segment of this literar! -ignif!ing ,onke!( ma!be it is

worthwhile

telling the stor! of the elder=s bo3 told b! an Indian educator. An Indian elder presented

him

with an empt! bo3 and asked:

*ow man! sides do !ou seeO

5ne( I said.

*e pulled the bo3 towards his chest and turned it so one corner faced me. 0ow how

man! do !ou seeO

0ow I see three sides.

*e stepped back and e3tended the bo3( one corner towards him and one towards me.

Nou and I together can see si3 sides of this bo3( he told me. "td. in 'attiste 499E:

4#9&

The 2uestion is whether and how these si3 e2uall! valuable perspectives can be blendedinto

one. Lltimatel!( we ma! ask ourselves whether this 2uest to name is necessar! at all

because

there is alwa!s a possibilit! of supporting generali;ations about a supposedl! universal

colonial or postcolonial condition of all indigenous te3ts. The good thing( though( is

that

indigenous literar! production that has become ver! prolific owing to numerous less

literar!

conditions has not lost its heterogeneous nature. It has not become a transferable and

marketable discourse because one thing is sure: Indigenous writing throughout the

world canhardl! be appropriated and swallowed b! the mainstream which ma! bear the prefi3


10/11

Postcolonial *magination and Postcolonial Theory' *ndigenous (anadian and )ustralian -iterature

Fighting for

"Postcolonial& pace

#E#

postcolonial( because as the 0ative Canadian poet( pla!wright and anthologist aniel

avid

,oses concluded( mainstream is prett! wide but it=s spirituall! shallow. 6M7 If we

become

part of that mainstream we=re going to be the deep currents ",oses #$$%: 33i&.

Endnotes

# uestion appropriated from *all #$$&

4ongrel ignatures' 9eflections on the Work of 4udrooroo,&( Cross@Cultures


11/11

ing( Thomas "499E& )od;illa vs. Post?Colonial= in -ugars( C!nthia "ed& Unhomely

tates'

Theori;ing English:(anadian Postcolonialism( ,ississauga: 'roadview Press: #%>?

$9.

/oomba( Ania "499#6#$$%7& (olonialism>Postcolonialism, /ondon?0ew Nork:

Joutledge.,aracle( /ee "499E& The Post?Colonial= Imagination= in -ugars( C!nthia "ed&

Unhomely

tates' Theori;ing English:(anadian Postcolonialism( ,ississauga: 'roadview Press:

49E?%.*va Polak

#E4

,ishra( +i8a! and 'ob *odge "#$$>& Hhat is Post"?&colonialismO= in Hilliams( Patrick

and

Christman( /aura "eds& (olonial and Post:(olonial Theory' ) 9eader( 0ew

Nork@/ondon@Toronto@-!dne!@Tok!o@-ingapore: *arvester Hheatsheaf: 4

postcolonial imagination and postcolonial theory.doc

Documents