Post Colonialism
Post Colonialism
Post Colonialism
com
Post-colonialism
Table of Contents
Chapter 1:Post-Colonial perspective on Colonialism
1.1: Introduction.
1.1.1: Discussion on Post-Colonial perspective.
1.1.2: 1.1.2 Understanding Post-Colonial theory in the context of India
1.1.3: Critics of the Post- Colonial School of Thought.
1.1.4: Concluding Remarks.
Objective
Summary
Exercises
Glossary
References
1.1 Introduction
After the Second World War, post-colonial school of thought developed in response to the
Liberal and Marxist understanding of colonialism. Post-colonialist theorist primarily criticised
the argument of the Liberal school, which believes that the countries of ‘Orient’ are
uncivilized, barbaric and savage. According to the post-colonial perspective, as it is
commonly known, the justification of colonial occupation as ‘civilising mission’ was a farce
and an ethnocentric idea (Said.E. 1978). Basically, Edward Said criticised the whole project
of “civilizing mission” of colonial countries and argued that by furthering the notion of the
civilizing mission, Imperial historians tried to depict a picture of eastern countries as
‘backward’ and ‘pre-modern’, so that they can legitimize
their rule over the countries of the Orient (East). Edward
Said tried to view “civilizing mission” in the context of
Broadly, post-colonial state refers ‘knowledge-power relationship’. This school of thought
to those kinds of state who fought studied western writings and practices and tried to
their freedom struggle and establish that the so-called claims of superiority of the
achieved their independence after West, which led it to occupy the East, were nothing new.
Second World War. However, the This was a fall-out of the Industrial revolution. In post-
very term ‘post-colonial’ is industrial Europe, the myth of backwardness of the Orient
debatable. In general, the term was purposefully created by colonialist historiography to
‘post-colonial’ refers to post- justify the need of the ‘capitalists’ to establish various
independence period after Second colonies around the world on the basis of absolute force
World War. or advancements of their war-machine.
Since 1970s, the term has been
used by literary critics. The term The founding work in this tradition was brought by the
‘post-colonial’ per se was first used Edward Said’s book, ‘Orientalism’. This led to the
to refer to cultural interactions development of new discourses on colonialism. This
within literary circles of colonial school of thought believed that ‘power discourses’
societies. However, the term, ‘post- shaped the understanding of colonialism at large.
colonial’ commonly refer to the Basically, post-colonial approach deals with the impact
“political, linguistic and cultural of colonialism over the culture and society of post-
experience of societies” of former colonial states. Scholars, associated with this school of
European colonies. thought, adopted the discourse analysis method of
post-modernist/post-structuralist scholars. For
example, Edward Said has used the style of Michael
Foucault, Homi Bhabha style was influenced by
Althusser’s and Lacan’s and Gayatri Spivak adopted the
method of Derrida.
In order to get legitimacy for their rule, they have created several kinds of binaries like
rational-irrational, mind-body, self-other, civilized-native, order-chaos and so on.
This whole issue of creating binaries were rooted in the power and knowledge discourses.
Edward Said argues that the whole business of ‘knowing the orient project’ was nothing but
a way to control the masses of the Orient by showing that their culture is subordinate to
European culture. To quote Edward Said, “the most formidable ally of economic and political
control had long been the business of ‘knowing’ other peoples because this ‘knowing’
underpinned imperial dominance and became the mode by which they were increasingly
persuaded to know themselves: that is, as subordinate to Europe (Ashcroft, Griffiths and
Tiffin 2000/2007, 29). ” It means the subject of the colonisers’ countries were persuaded or
taught to believe that the culture of ‘occidental’ countries is far superior to their culture. So,
for Edward Said, the sustainability and endurance of colonialism or imperialism was based
on their knowledge of the ‘other’.
In a way, unlike other studies which focused only on either economic or political logic of
colonialism, Said tried to draw the attention to the relationship between ‘knowledge’ and
‘power’. By doing this, Edward Said was able to “undermine the ideological assumption of
value-free knowledge” of the colonial powers and argued that this was part of their
dominating project. Edward Said has used Michael Foucault’s understanding of discourses as
a “form of knowledge that is not used instrumentally in service of power but rather is itself a
form of power”. Therefore, according to Said, by representation of the ‘oriental’ culture as
‘other’ was nothing but the product of “western epistemology and colonial projects of
power” (Stanford encyclopaedia of Philosophy).
Another major contribution to the post-colonialist theory is related with the Gyatri Spivak’s
writings. In her famous work ‘Can subaltern Speak’, Spivak tries to question the
‘autonomous voice’ of subaltern people, independent from the mainstream voice. She falls
in to the ‘problem of representation’ and argues that “representation has not withered
away”. She pointed out that it is hard to find the idea of transparent subaltern speech and
those who are expecting that by removing the intermediary like the expert, the judge, the
So, here also, Spivak tried to point out that how the culture and language of dominant
power shaped mainstream voice, where there is no say of subaltern or the marginalised. In
line with this tradition of post-colonial interpretation of colonial text, Homi Bhabha has taken
up further the importance of the written text as an instrument of control. He argued that
the “emblem of the English book is one of the most important of signs taken for wonders by
which the coloniser controled the imagination and the aspirations of the colonised, because
the book assumes a greater authority than the experience of the colonised peoples
themselves (Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin 1995, 02).” At the same time, such authority also
“renders the colonial presence ambivalent” since it only
replaces those imaginary which was acquired by the
colonised society during colonial rule. The people of the
‘Knowing the Orient project’ colonised society experienced that their relationship with
had helped in the consolidation of imperial presence becomes one of “constant, if implicit,
empire in India. Establishment of contestation and opposition”. Bhabha repetitively points
the ‘Asiatic society’, in 1784, by to the fact that colonial discourse was obliged to put into
Sir William Jones for the learning rehabilitating stereotypes that were constantly subject to
of Oriental culture was nothing historical change. Bhabha’s term ‘Hybridity’, which
but their part of ‘knowing the means “colonial discourse with the threat of recognition;
Orient Project’. At the Asiatic the other is like, but only partially” like, self-“almost the
Society, many of the Indian same but not quite/white (Wolfe, Patrick 1997: 399)”.
religious texts were translated He argues that on the one hand, it strove to
first in Persian and later into “domesticate-to assimilate- the native; on the other, it
English, just for the sake of Indian was undone-de-authorized, disavowed-by the partial
culture and society. resemblance”, the “difference between being English and
Colonial scholars criticised the being Anglicized” that was thus produced (Ashcroft,
concept of ‘absolute monarchical’ Griffiths and Tiffin 1995). It was nothing but a kind of
culture of ancient India, where racial essence that underpinned the domination of
people had no right against colonial power.
monarchy. By doing this, the
coloniser tried to defy the ancient
Indian culture. However, later 1.1.2 Understanding Post-Colonial theory
notion of absolute monarchy was in the context of India
criticised by the nationalist
historiographer just to counter
If one views the British policy towards its Indian colony
the colonial narrative of the
then one can see that their belief in savageness of the
Indian past. Against the colonial
Easterners led to the bitter oppression of the latter’s
narrative, the nationalist
cultural and social practices during colonial occupation.
historiographer tried to show
The so-called ‘social-reforms’, like bringing legislation
that in ancient India, Monarchy
against Sati system (1829) or for the cause of widow
was not ‘absolute’- in fact, there
was ‘limited monarchy’, where remarriage (1856) were reforms guided by a superiority
‘king’ was bound by performing complex of the colonial administrators. For them, the
his dharma. Not only this, by local beliefs and faith was not worthy of consideration
conducting census, Britishers while initiating these reforms. In fact, the physical
came to know about the Indian occupation of resources and political institution came
society and one can see how their later. For them, education was one of the strategies of
knowledge of Indian society control like war and conquest. The purpose of
(caste structure) helped in their introducing English education can be seen in the
recruiting policies. statement of Lord Macaulay: to make “poor and rude
Indian into a class of persons. Indian in blood and
colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in
intellect”. It means, that for colonizers, education was
primarily meant for creating a class of English speaking Babus (clerks), who can serve the
need of the British rule. In a way, through their education policy, they colonised the mind of
Indian people and gradually the knowledge of English became synonymous of “modernity”.
Apart from that, their ‘knowing the orient project’ had also helped in the consolidation of
empire in India. Establishment of the ‘Asiatic society’ in 1784, by Sir William Jones, for the
learning of Oriental culture was nothing but their part of ‘knowing the Orient Project’. At the
Asiatic Society, many of the varied Indian religious texts were translated first in Persian and
later into English, just for the sake of Indian culture and society. Colonial scholars criticised
the concept of ‘absolute monarchical’ culture of ancient India, where people had no right
against monarchy. By doing this, the coloniser tried to defy the ancient Indian culture.
However, later notions of absolute monarchy were criticised by the nationalist
historiographer just to counter the colonial narrative of the Indian past. Against the colonial
narrative, the nationalist historiographer tried to show that in ancient India, Monarchy was
not ‘absolute’-- in fact, there was ‘limited monarchy’, where the ‘king’ was bound by
performing his dharma. Not only this, by conducting census, Britishers came to know more
about Indian society and one can see how their knowledge of Indian society (caste
structure) due to census, helped in their recruiting policies. So, one can see how their
knowledge of the Orient, consolidated their empire in India.
Therefore, the post-colonial school adopted the post-modernist and post-structuralist style
to analyse the whole colonial project and criticised the hegemonic project of imperial
powers. Looking from knowledge and power relationship, this school of thought brought a
new perspective to view colonialism. However, complexities of the post-colonial societies
put some limitation before this school of thought. The portrayal of the ‘Orient’ as weak and
backward has been continued even after the end of formal colonies. In many of the Western
films and literatures, the ‘Orients’ have been portrayed as backward and underdeveloped
(one can see movies of the James Bond series or the film starring Peter Sellers called ‘The
Party’). That is why, post-Colonial theorists, are in favour of the insurrection of local culture
and beliefs. Most of them argue strongly in favour of celebration of local practices and
history and deny the existence and need of “modernity” totally. Thus, the Post-Colonial
project questions each and everything coming from the West. The problem with this school
of thought is that in order to establish the equality of the East and its independence, it
refuses the need for any change and becomes an apology for retaining the status quo. Thus,
a critique of the Post-Colonial perspective is it justified anything and everything in the name
of the local or the native and refused the need for change. In a way, it can be a justification
for the status of the oppressed sections in society and reinforces that values such as
equality and democracy have originated in the West.
By contesting both the old understanding of colonialism, of both the Marxist and the Liberal
tradition, the post-colonial thinkers moved closer to post- modernism. For them, the entire
tradition of progress through rationale was to be rejected as being part of Euro-centrism.
This attitude would obviously thwart the cultural journey of mankind.
On its theory of knowledge, critics argue that though the cultural dimensions of the post-
colonial approach is laudable, but the human dimension or the struggles of the victims of
colonialism is missing from current discourses of post-colonialists. The political dimensions
of an economy based on capitalism is totally segregated and left untouched by this school of
thought. This school displays a limited understanding of capitalism. Scholar and critics have
argued that by concentrating excessively on the cultural dimension of colonialism, post –
colonial school of thought underplays the role of the revolutionary movements of that
period. Hence some critics call this a past-revolutionary project rather than a post-colonial
school of thought. Some put this differently by saying that by an over-emphasis on the
cultural aspect of the suppression faced by the natives, post-colonialists real battle that was
waged by oppressed societies against world capitalism. Leading historian, Sumit Sarkar,
disagrees with the complete rejection by the post-colonialist historiography of European
Enlightenment and modernity in the mere guise of indigenous tradition and native culture.
However, what cannot be denied is that post-colonialism has looked afresh at traditional
thinking on colonialism and imperialism. This thinking, now known as post-colonial
approach, has nonetheless focused on the problems of the dispossessed and of internal
colonialism signifying marginalization. Moving closer to post-modernism, this approach has
become refined and subtle, but as a theory of practical knowledge the attitude is verve and
ineffective. Slowly its uni-dimensional character is coming to the fore, but it has enriched
greatly the intellectual discourse on colonialism and imperialism.
Objectives
The e-lesson gives a better understanding of post-colonialism
It will enhance the practical aspect of post-colonial theory.
Summary
Post-Colonial perspective primarily criticized the colonial and the Marxist interpreta-
-tions of colonialism.
This perspective defined the whole project of colonialism in the context of knowledge
and power relationship.
This school tried to show how the depiction of ‘orient’ countries as ‘backward’ and
‘savage’ helped in their expansion in the name of ‘civilizing mission’.
For their rule, the colonizer created many binaries like ration-irrational, order-chaos,
for its legitimate rule.
This school criticized the “modernist” argument of liberal scholars and argued in
favour of local culture and history.
Exercises
1.1 Discuss the post-colonial perspective on colonialism.
1.2 Critically examine Edward Said’s idea of “Orientalism”.
Glossary
Orient means ‘East’.
Occident means ‘West’.
Orientalism is about the study of Eastern countries. Edward Said’s work ‘Orientalism’
became the founding work for Post-colonial approach towards colonialism .
Post-Colonialism discusses study of the society and politics of post-colonialist state, which
got their independence after Second World War.
References
Works Cited
Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin (1995), (ed.), ‘The Post-Colonial Studies Reader’,
London: Routledge.
Wolfe, Patrick (1997), ‘History and Imperialism: A Century of Theory, from Marx to
Post-colonialism’, The American Historical Review, 102(02):388-420.
Suggested Readings
Patrick, Williams and Chrisman, Laura(1993) ed, ‘Colonial Discourse and Post
Colonial theory: A reader’, Essex, Harlow.
3. Web Links
Image 1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orientalism_[book]
Image 2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postcolonialism
Image 3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postcolonialism