Familial Feeling: Entangled Tonalities in Early Black Atlantic Writing and The Rise of The British Novel 1st Ed. Edition Elahe Haschemi Yekani
Familial Feeling: Entangled Tonalities in Early Black Atlantic Writing and The Rise of The British Novel 1st Ed. Edition Elahe Haschemi Yekani
Familial Feeling: Entangled Tonalities in Early Black Atlantic Writing and The Rise of The British Novel 1st Ed. Edition Elahe Haschemi Yekani
https://ebookmass.com/product/narratives-of-community-in-the-
black-british-short-story-1st-ed-edition-bettina-jansen/
https://ebookmass.com/product/tudor-empire-the-making-of-early-
modern-britain-and-the-british-atlantic-world-1485-1603-jessica-
s-hower/
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-rise-and-fall-of-communist-
parties-in-france-and-italy-entangled-historical-approaches-1st-
edition-edition-marco-di-maggio/
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-rise-and-fall-of-peacebuilding-
in-the-balkans-1st-ed-edition-roberto-belloni/
Chinese Writing and the Rise of the Vernacular in East
Asia Peter Francis Kornicki
https://ebookmass.com/product/chinese-writing-and-the-rise-of-
the-vernacular-in-east-asia-peter-francis-kornicki/
https://ebookmass.com/product/women-writing-the-neo-victorian-
novel-erotic-victorians-1st-ed-edition-kathleen-renk/
https://ebookmass.com/product/women-and-the-rise-of-nutrition-
science-in-interwar-britain-and-british-africa-lacey-sparks/
https://ebookmass.com/product/embryology-and-the-rise-of-the-
gothic-novel-diana-perez-edelman/
https://ebookmass.com/product/crown-and-charter-the-early-years-
of-the-british-south-africa-company-john-s-galbraith/
Familial Feeling
Entangled Tonalities in
Early Black Atlantic Writing and
the Rise of the British Novel
Elahe Haschemi Yekani
Familial Feeling
Elahe Haschemi Yekani
Familial Feeling
Entangled Tonalities in Early Black Atlantic Writing
and the Rise of the British Novel
Elahe Haschemi Yekani
Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
Berlin, Germany
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2021 This book is an open access
publication.
Open Access This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits
use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as
you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the
Creative Commons licence and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this book are included in the book’s Creative
Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the book’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the
publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect
to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.
This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
We acknowledge support by the Open Access Publication Fund of Humboldt-
Universität zu Berlin.
This book was supported by funds made available by the “Cultural Foundations
of Social Integration” Center of Excellence at the University of Konstanz,
established in the framework of the German Federal and State Initiative for
Excellence.
Acknowledgements
vii
viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Index293
ix
List of Figures
xi
CHAPTER 1
When I began working on this book in 2011, the 2007 bicentennial of the
abolition of the slave trade still felt recent.1 There were new films, exhibi-
tions, and a plethora of events commemorating and reflecting Britain’s
involvement in this global system of injustice on a larger national scale.
More than a decade after these events, the country appeared to have
moved on being consumed by the internal fallout and ongoing tensions
around Brexit. However, in 2020, the commemoration of enslavement
again entered the public spotlight invigorated by the anti-racist protests in
reaction to police violence in the United States and across the globe. More
and more vocal groups like Black Lives Matter no longer accept the
unchallenged adulation of slaveholders and those who profited from colo-
nial exploitation in the form of statues and monuments. In Bristol protest-
ers took matters into their own hands toppling the statue of Edward
Colston and throwing it into the harbour. Similar acts can be witnessed
worldwide. These demonstrations show how powerful cultural relics are in
shaping notions of national belonging and how they continue to impact
the devaluation of Black lives. This is why many believe such monuments
should no longer have an uncontested place in the public sphere.
For the (now revived) debate on memorial culture and racism, the
bicentenary of 2007 marked a turning point in Britain. In that context
many politicians struggled to find the right tone to commemorate slavery
and the transatlantic trade, specifically in relation to Britain’s (historical
and contemporary) self-understanding. Then Prime Minister Tony Blair
was criticised for not offering a proper apology by circumventing the word
“sorry”, instead speaking only of “our deep sorrow”. It seemed easier for
Blair to delegate the cruelties of slavery to the far-away shores of the
Caribbean and focus more on the abolitionist campaign at home. He also
avoided the topic of possible reparations by emphasising the “better times
of today”, showing little understanding of the ongoing global economic
repercussions that the trade in human beings and colonial exploitation in
its aftermath have produced in the Global South.2 Moreover, the simplify-
ing juxtaposition of the shameful slavers versus the noble abolitionists
overlooks the fact that historically there was often a much subtler amelio-
rationist discourse at work which, while indeed becoming increasingly
intolerant of chattel slavery during the eighteenth century, nonetheless
dehumanised people of African descent. The tension of addressing Black
agency and white benevolence is also palpable in The International Slavery
Museum in Liverpool, opened in 2007.3 The exhibition puts great empha-
sis on Black contributions to the fight against slavery and educates visitors
not only about slavery but also about West African culture. The celebra-
tory endpoint of the display is a so-called Black Achievers Wall. Visitors to
the museum and the museum’s website are encouraged to interact with
the exhibit by suggesting additions to the wall, be it “a sports person, a
writer, an activist, a television personality—anyone just as long as they are
inspirational”.4 Yet outside the museum, more recently, the achievements
of Black British inhabitants were once more violently overlooked. In April
2018, Theresa May was criticised heavily for the way in which children of
the so-called Windrush generation, Caribbean commonwealth migrants
who legally entered the country after World War II, had been targeted by
immigration authorities. Several people, whose documentation did not
meet official criteria through no fault of their own, were threatened with
or actually deported, despite having lived in Britain for more than fifty
years. In addition to Home Secretary Amber Rush having to ultimately
resign, this scandal also forced the then Prime Minister to issue an apology
that emphasised the valuable contribution of the Windrush generation
and their rightful place in the United Kingdom.5 This discourse, in turn,
seemed to rely heavily on conceptions of the “good migrant” who is never
simply accepted as belonging and worthy of the protection of the nation
state per se but continuously has to prove their “worth”.
I am using these three seemingly divergent examples—Blair’s failed
apology for Britain’s involvement in the slave trade, the celebratory “Black
Achievers Wall” in The International Slavery Museum, and May’s
1 INTRODUCTION 3
powers in the second half of the nineteenth century when the British
empire had, in fact, reached its greatest extent. Thus, the abolition of the
slave trade in 1807 and the Indian Rebellion of 1857 are indicators of
discursive turning points in these debates that mark the end dates of the
two sections in this book.
This particular spatio-temporal framework of Familial Feeling, I argue,
also promotes a reassessment of the so-called rise of the (British)6 novel
account that has been variously discussed ever since Ian Watt’s eponymous
path-breaking study in 1957. Reframed here as a story of entangled tonali-
ties, considering both the generic aesthetic ideals underlying the novel
form, understood first and foremost as prose writing that depicts realistic
affective individualism, and notions of Englishness and Britishness as
products of transatlantic negotiation. The rise of the novel can thus be
related to a process by which modern Britishness is consolidated as inclu-
sive of the formerly enslaved in the eighteenth century. This, however,
gives way to greater colonial ambitions in the course of the nineteenth
century. Accordingly, the novel form of writing prose that emerged in the
eighteenth century and became more established in the nineteenth cen-
tury modified the registers of how readers thought about families and
belonging and who was included in communities of the familiar. In order
to grasp these modified registers of familiarity in this book, I will discuss
four different tonalities in the work of eight authors that shaped concep-
tions of the human in relation to the debates around British national iden-
tity, the abolition of slavery, and the emergence of the British empire,
beginning with the foundational tone of Daniel Defoe and Olaudah
Equiano, followed by the digressive tone of Ignatius Sancho and Laurence
Sterne and the resisting tonality of Jane Austen and Robert Wedderburn
and finally the consolidating tone of Charles Dickens and Mary Seacole.
Literary scholar Sianne Ngai employs the concept of tone as a way “to
account for the affective dimension of literature” (2007: 44), to bridge
formal and political analysis of literary discourse, and I will return to this
idea in explaining entangled tonalities in greater detail.
This project is admittedly ambitious. It operates on at least three differ-
ent but interrelated levels. In concert with more recent approaches in the
historiography of the British empire, I firstly hope to foster a view of
British literature as part of a global network that can only be told as a story
of entangled modernities. Such a temporal framing stands in contrast to
the strong focus on the late nineteenth and twentieth century in postcolo-
nial studies and the model of “writing back”. Traditionally, English studies
1 INTRODUCTION 5
of the novel, on the one hand, concentrate on the aesthetic and narrative
development of the genre or, owing to Edward Said’s interventions that I
discuss in greater detail in the chapter on Austen and Wedderburn, exam-
ine colonial influences on canonical sources (or, as a third independent
branch of research, analyse the “new” global Anglophone literatures in the
former colonies). In this study however, the literature of marginalised sub-
jects is not to be simply added to the established canon. Rather, the focus
is on the simultaneous and intertwined marginalised and hegemonic claim
to literature as a transatlantic sphere of subjectification. Literature there-
fore functions as the medium of middle-class self-assertion and of the
emotive access to subject status by those who have been excluded from the
realm of the human, the “family of man”, or, as Henry Louis Gates, Jr.,
has famously phrased it, “The slave wrote not primarily to demonstrate
humane letters, but to demonstrate his or her own membership in the
human community” (1988: 128). Simon Gikandi likewise argues: “cul-
ture became the most obvious form of social mobility and self-making in
the century that invented the modern individual” (2011: 55).7 In his com-
prehensive study on Slavery and the Culture of Taste Gikandi elaborates:
class. I aim to interrogate how this formation was always reliant on inter-
action with Others and cannot be framed as a linear progress narrative.8
Thirdly and finally, on a methodological level, my goal is to bring into
dialogue the mainly separated spheres of (postclassical) approaches in
(transatlantic) narrative studies, addressing aesthetic dimensions of literary
tone and narrative identity formation, with those strands of affect theory
that emphasise the political mobilisation of affect and (often negative)
feeling, prevalent in postcolonial and queer theory as well as in African
American studies, which I take up in more detail in the conclusion, dealing
with contemporary memorial culture and the ethics of engaging with the
archive of slavery. I thus advocate a continued permeability for cultural
studies perspectives in literary studies instead of a re-canonisation in
national literary studies.
Bringing into conjunction these diverse perspectives on familial feelings
of Britishness, I argue, helps to systematically resituate the well-known
texts by Defoe, Sterne, Austen, and Dickens and defamiliarise the estab-
lished understanding of the rise of the novel. The similarities in political
bearing and aesthetic choices, the entangled tonalities, regarding the top-
ics of slavery and colonialism between the canonical authors and sources
written by those whose lives have been shaped by transatlantic crossings,
such as Equiano, Sancho, Wedderburn, and Seacole, are not considered
extraordinary or in binary opposition, but rather part and parcel of the
very rise of Britishness and its narratives. These texts are read side by side
as part of a larger “family history”; together they construct, circumvent,
contest, and consolidate the narrations of modern nation states and the
emergence of a British literary canon. Before expanding on these ideas in
the literary readings in the following four chapters, I will provide a more
systematic historical and methodological contextualisation for the under-
lying premises of this book. For the remainder of this introduction, I first
explain in greater detail what I call “familial feeling” in relation to the
intertwined histories of modernity and slavery. I then discuss how this idea
can be linked to and help reframe the “rise of the novel” account and
finally suggest looking for “entangled tonalities” as a way to capture the
dynamics between the British novel and early Black Atlantic writing.
1 INTRODUCTION 7
Familial Feeling
“The word ‘family’ can be used to mean many things, from the conjugal
pair to the ‘family of man’”, writes historian Lawrence Stone (1977: 21)
in his classical substantial account of the modernisation of family life, The
Family, Sex and Marriage in England, 1500–1800. It is specifically this
flexibility of the term family which covers both the micro structure of
societies as domestic units within one household as well as a much larger
conception of belonging to the human race in general that I wish to evoke
in the phrase “familial feeling”.9 It purposely echoes the expression “famil-
iar feeling” because the family, despite the vagueness of the concept itself,
is referenced time and again as the locus of supposedly self-evident com-
monality. No social sphere, it seems, is as saturated with affects and regimes
of feeling as kinship structures. They organise emotional belonging as well
as social intelligibility and the accumulation of wealth. They are familiar
to all of us.
Concurrent with Stone’s family history in 1977, Raymond Williams,
one of the founding figures of British cultural studies, considered the
affective importance of cultural artefacts as part of a “structure of feeling”.
In contrast to the more static concept of ideology, Williams emphasises
the emotional dimension in the emergence and shifts of social norms. This
is his well-known definition:
These structures in turn can “support, elaborate, and consolidate the prac-
tice of empire” and affect coloniser and colonised as postcolonial critic
Edward Said (1994: 14) has argued. Hence, the realm of what feels famil-
iar is to a large degree reliant on how emotional belonging is imagined in
art and literature. Familial feeling in this book then refers to the ways in
which “the family” and “familiarity” are overlapping spheres. This is also
one of the reasons why the notion of the family is especially attractive for
8 E. HASCHEMI YEKANI
those excluded from the realm of the human as a means to claim inclusion
into both the larger “family of man” and the micro level of the nuclear
family. The family is where the demarcation between self and Other is
challenged. The Caribbean plantation, for instance, becomes the physical
space in which interracial sexualised violence alters notions of who belongs
to Britain. This debate will be addressed in the chapter on Austen and
Wedderburn.
Stone describes in greater detail the processes that led to the modern
family unit becoming the predominant form of living together in Europe.
He recounts this development as a change from what he calls the “restricted
patriarchal nuclear family” to the “closed domesticated nuclear family”
which in Britain evolved in the late seventeenth century and predominated
in the eighteenth. “This was the decisive shift, for this new type of family
was the product of the rise of Affective Individualism. It was a family orga-
nized around the principle of personal autonomy, and bound together by
strong affective ties” (1977: 7). In more than one respect, Britain pio-
neered the development of this middle-class family ideal. Earlier than in
any other European state the so-called industrial revolution (and the con-
comitant urbanisation) gave rise to smaller family units and a rigid class
system, as Friedrich Engels (2010 [1884]) outlined not by coincidence in
relation to England in 1884 in The Origin of the Family, Private Property
and the State.10 The modern individual then is conceptualised as autono-
mous and social at the same time.
So, while the nuclear (bourgeois) family can be understood as the epit-
ome of modern belonging, it also becomes increasingly regulatory with
respect to gendered, racialised, and sexualised norms, as Michel Foucault
(1998 [1976]) has famously delineated in what he called the shift from the
“deployment of alliance” to the “deployment of sexuality”, which from
the eighteenth century onward complemented the former.11 This creates
ambivalence in the sense that the family can be considered to be both
inclusionary and exclusionary. Metaphorically, the variously gendered
family relations are extended to the very state itself in phrases such as
“fatherland” or the “mother country”.12 Accordingly, the conception of
modern nation states as “imagined communities” in the eighteenth cen-
tury superseded earlier systems of religious community and dynastic realm,
as Benedict Anderson has described in his well-known work of the same
name. Anderson stresses the importance of newspapers and novels, or
more generally “print-capitalism” in this process (1991: 9–36; cf. also
Bhabha 1990).13 Consequently, constructions of familial feeling and the
1 INTRODUCTION 9
Magnésie 27,80
Silice 60,87
Eau 11,27
Oxyde de fer 0,09
I
LA SITUATION DES AGRICULTEURS ET LE CRÉDIT AGRICOLE
II
LA PRODUCTION DES CÉRÉALES
Dans un rapport adressé par le consul d’Autriche-Hongrie à
Brousse, en octobre 1872, au chevalier Schwegel, consul général,
nous trouvons sur la production des céréales dans le vilayet de
Hudavendighiar des renseignements approximatifs, — étant donné
le manque absolu de statistique qui distingue l’administration turque,
— et qu’il y a lieu de tenir pour à peu près exacts.
Cette production peut se répartir ainsi :
Sandjak de Brousse
Blé 2,500,000 kilés [12] .
Orge 1,000,000 —
Seigle 20,000 —
Vesce 5,000 —
Sésame 10,000 —
Haricots 10,000 —
Pois 10,000 —
Sandjak de Kutahia.
Sandjak de Kara-Hissar.
Blé 10,200,000 kilés qual. sup.
Orge 2,300,000 —
Seigle 40,000 —
Vesce 35,000 —
Pois 10,000 —
Avoine 7,000 —
Sandjak de Karassi.
III
LE BÉTAIL
Sandjak de Brousse.
Chevaux et juments 20,000
Bœufs et vaches 600,000
Moutons et chèvres 500,000
Chameaux 600
Sandjak de Kutahia.
Sandjak de Kara-Hissar.
Chevaux, juments et mulets 43,000
Bœufs et vaches 150,000
Moutons et chèvres 750,000
Chameaux 5,000
Sandjak de Karassi.
Les moulins à Brousse. — Les blés et les farines du vilayet. — Les moulins turcs
dans l’intérieur.
I
LES MOULINS A BROUSSE
II
LES BLÉS ET LES FARINES
Dîme 10 %
Droit de vente 2,5 %
Douane 8 %
Total : 20,5 %
III
LES MOULINS TURCS DE L’INTÉRIEUR
II
SANDJAK DE BROUSSE
SANDJAK DE KARASSI
891,500 Aiyour-Dah Le pin noir, blanc et Une forêt dont les produits se
(commune) jaune, le chêne, consomment sur les lieux
le hêtre et le mêmes.
charme.
585,900 Balat Le pin noir et jaune, Une forêt dont les produits se
(commune) le chêne, le consomment sur les lieux
hêtre et le mêmes.
charme.
673,200 Bohaditz Le pin noir et jaune, Une forêt dont les produits se
(commune) le chêne, le consomment sur les lieux
hêtre et le mêmes.
charme.
1,479,910 Guebsoud Le pin et le chêne. Quatre forêts dont la production se
3,630,510 (commune) consomme sur les lieux mêmes.
SANDJAK DE KUTAHIA
SANDJAK DE KARA-HISSAR
RÉCAPITULATION
I
LES ROUTES
MOURADIEH
Tombeaux des sultans, à Brousse.