Exam #3: Postcolonial Play-Acting

Even though this is being assigned early, treat it like a normal final exam: sit down and give yourself 1-2 hours to complete it.  Of course, you can do it early or work on it on and off during the week.  However, the exam is due by 5:00 on Tuesday.  Just don't look at this as a paper per se; it's not a paper, just a long-answer question on a typical exam. 

Choose ONE of the following scenarios to write a developed response, approximately 3-4 pages double spaced…

1.          You are a high school teacher, and want to teach Kim to your advanced English Literature class.  Unfortunately, the administration, which only knows Kipling from the poem “The White Man’s Burden” (www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/Kipling.html), claims he is a politically incorrect, racist writer who has no place in a modern classroom.  Defend Kim as a colonial text that is critical of colonialism and plays into many important postcolonial ideas and writing.  Use the book for support and be as persuasive as possible—and don’t give in, even if it does cost you your job! 

2.         You are the director of the Indian Ministry of Tourism, and V.S. Naipaul’s book, An Area of Darkness, has just been released to tremendous acclaim.  A great danger of this book is that it can hurt tourism and make the country synonymous with caste injustice and excrement.  Write a response to specific passages of Naipaul’s book challenging his biases and national identity.  For example, many have accused Naipaul of being too “English” and seeing India as simply not English enough.  As an Indian, what cultural arguments can you make against his work that could not only promote tourism, but challenge his indictment of India’s “medieval mind”? 

REMEMBER, make a persuasive argument for Kipling or against Naipaul, and support this with a close reading of the text.  Don’t generalize or gloss over tricky issues; try to confront them head-on using Kipling or Naipaul’s actual language.  Also consider who you are as you write this: an educator who believes in the power of Kipling’s thought…or a government official who is outraged when an “outsider” tells the world the “truth” about India. 

Good luck! 

For Tomorrow: Gracefully (or not) Wrapping Up the Course

Instead of reading more of Naipaul's An Area of Darkness, let's end at Chapter 7 and use tomorrow's class to wrap-up some of the course's ideas.  While I can't hope to provide a last word to the colonial/postcolonial debate, I want to suggest a general sense of what we can take away from the readings and where the issues of a postcolonial society remain to be explored.  I hope to avoid the common misconception that classes are taken "for a grade" and are simply a series of questions and answers; this class, like many of your English classes, is real...the ideas literally shape who writes and how they write, and how other people (in this country, in others) understand what is read.  Any book written in the 21st century can be arguably considered a 'postcolonial' text, as issues of identity, nationality, and power run through every word, character, and chapter.  So we'll do our best to sum up this immense and never-ending debate. 

REMEMBER: your paper is due on Friday IF you want comments by our final exam date; otherwise, it's due ON the Final Exam day, next Tuesday. 

For Tuesday: An Area of Darkess, Chs. 6 & 7 (The Medieval City & Pilgrimage)

 

We're rapidly approaching the end of our class and our journey through colonial and postcolonial literature (though we've barely scratched the surface!).  Here are a few ideas to consider with the following chapters....

* How does Naipaul define the "medieval mind"?  Why might this be his greatest critique of Indian and many related postcolonial societies? 

* What view of history (both ancient and recent) is expressed by the people he meets in Chapter 5?  Why does this upset Naipaul?

* Why does Naipaul write that "religious enthusiasm derived, in performance and admiration, from simplicity, from a knowledge of religion only as ritual and form"? 

* Why is Naipaul continually unable to find the "Trinidadian India" in India itself?  What has changed from one world to the next?  What does he expect to find in India, and does he feel one is more "real" than another?  Is Trinidad more pure because it exiled itself from the mainland and stayed true to its values? 

* How does Naipaul feel about the other tourists--particularly American--that he meets on his travels?  How does he distinguish his travels from theirs?  Are they "tourists" in the perjorative sense? 

* Why does Naipaul go on the pilgrimage to see the sacred "lingam"?  What does he hope to see/experience there?  What does he experience?

For Tuesday: An Area of Darkness (Chs.3-5)

Naipaul today, signing a book...

Some ideas to consider...

* How does Naipaul understand/analyze Gandhi's legacy in India?  Why does he write, for instance, "“He looked at India as no Indian was able to; his vision was direct, and this directness was, and is, revolutionary.  He sees exactly what the visitor sees; he does not ignore the obvious" ? 

* According to these chapters, does Naipaul believe the tradition-bound world of India can make a transition to the 20th century?  Can a postcolonial society use its cultural past to forge links to the modern (and perhaps, Western) world? 

* Why is shit important in India?  How does it help Naipaul "read" India? 

* Where does Naipaul find colonial relics and outright British behavior in India?  What does India 'mimic' from Britain and why? 

* In general, how does Naipaul appreciate such fundamental Indian texts such as The Bhagavad Gita, the Kama Sutra, etc.?  Does he respect the cultura/spiritual authority of these texts?  Or do they, too, create an "area of darkness" for those who read/follow them? 

* What is the significant of the servant, Aziz, to Naipaul?  How does it help him understand Indian culture and the power dynamic of colonialism? 

For Thursday: V.S. Naipaul, An Area of Darkness (pp.9-67)

NOTE: V.S. Naipaul won the Noble Prize in Literature in 2001, and is one of the most famous (and to some, most hated) of "postcolonial" writers.  He is originally from Trinidad (in the Caribbean), but comes from an Indian/Hindu background.  As a young man he successfully passed exams to obtain a scholarship to study in Oxford, where he recieved a BA degree (studying under Tolkein, among others!).  He quickly became a famous novelist through his works about Trinidadian society, particularly with his most famous book, A House for Mr. Biswas, a semi-autobiographical novel about his father.  After this he turned to writing about the world at large, exposing the postcolonial world's tendency to cling to tradition and imperialist beliefs.  Naipaul became increasingly interested in non-fiction, focusing on works of travel writing (such as An Area of Darkness) which mix travelogue, history, and fiction into a new and exciting genre.  In the last ten years he has returned to novel writing, reworking many old themes into a shorter, more focused critique of the postcolonial world.  His collected papers and manuscripts are deposited at the University of Tulsa (like Rhys!), and he has visited TU to give talks in the past (where I was lucky enough to attend one).  So he has a bona-fide connection to Oklahoma! 

When reading An Area of Darkness, consider some of the following...

* Does Naipaul seem "Indian"?  How does the narrative betray his own issues of identity?  (think of Kim!)

* How does India remind him of his upbringing in Trinidad?  Consider the following passage: "And in India I was to see that so many of the things which the newer and now perhaps truer side of my nature kicked against—the smugness, as it seemed to be, the imperviousness to criticism, the refusal to see, the double-talk and double-think—had an answer in that side of myself which I had thought buried and which India revived as a faint memory (35-36). 

* How does the opening Prelude allow him to examine issues of caste in modern India? 

* Where does he find vestiges of colonialism in his travels? 

* How does the traveler's perspective allow him to see or experience India from a unique perspective?  Why might this technique be more suitable for a postcolonial writer than, say, simply writing a novel about India? 

* Why is the work called "An Area of Darkness"?  Is the same "darkness" we find in Conrad's Africa?  Consider the following quote, "And it was clear that here, and not in Greece, the East began: in this chaos of uneconomical movement, the self-stimulated din, the sudden feeling of insecurity, the conviction that all men were not brothers and that luggage was in danger" (10). 

For Tuesday: Finish Kim if possible!

Tomorrow will be our last day on Kim.  I want to focus specifically on what happens in the end, how other critics view this, and how we read Kim's ultimate "career"--as a chela (Indian) or as an agent (Sahib).  Consider how some of the previous questions are resolved--or not--in these final chapters.  Also note the appearance of the 'Woman of Shamleigh,' who resembles ' 'Lisbeth' from Kipling's earlier story...what is her role in the plot?  What role/voice do women have in this predominantly male adventure narrative? 

I plan to start Naipaul's An Area of Darkness on Thursday, so make sure you have it handy.  A lot of Naipaul will speak to issues in Kipling, and indeed, in a later chapter he even talks about "Kipling's India" and makes references to Kim and other stories.  Indians have a long and very ambivalent relationship to Kim, with some writers more or less admiring his achivement (such as Rushdie, Narayan), while others are critical of the man but find selected truths in his fiction (Naipaul). 

Paper Assignment: "The Great Game": The Colonial/Postcolonial Audience

In Reader-Response Criticism, critics often refer to an intended reader that is implied by the narrative voice.  This is a reader who is more or less created by the text, and who we must in some sense become to understand the work.  As Ross C. Murfin explains in “What is Reader Response Criticism?” (in our edition of Heart of Darkness):

“Only “by agreeing to play the role of this created audience,” Susan Suleiman explains, “can an actual reader correctly understand and appreciate the work”…Gerard Genette and Gerald Prince prefer to speak of “the naratee,…the necessary counterpart of a given narrator, that is, the person or figure who receives a narrative,”…Iser employs the term “the implied reader,” but he also uses “the educated reader”… (120). 

Using your take-home exam as a basis (I fully expect you to incorporate this reading into the final paper) I want you to choose one colonial work (Oroonoko, Heart of Darkness, Kim) and one postcolonial work (Wide Sargasso Sea, Kim, An Area of Darkness) to analyze on the level of writer & audience.  Who is he/she writing to?  What is the implied audience the author creates, and that we, in a sense, have to become (or reject)?  What things are supposed to be understood to this audience, and what is supposed to stand out as exotic and/or disruptive?  This is especially interesting with postcolonial writers, who are often writing within native traditions and languages, yet are being published in England and read by an English/American audience.  How does this audience shape the work and the author’s material (the plot, characters, denouement, etc.)? 

REQUIREMENTS:

• You MUST use two books from class.  You can bring in another book as support, but the focus should be readings of one colonial and one postcolonial text.
• The books can be from different regions; for example, Oroonoko and The Palm-Wine Drinkard.
• You should have 2-3 critical sources in addition to the primary sources.  Critical sources could include handouts such as Ngugi’s “The Language of African Literature” and Freud’s “The Uncanny,” or books and articles found via the library or JSTOR, etc. 
• Close reading is very important!  Don’t skim, don’t summarize more than necessary, and don’t generalize.  Cite all sources according to MLA documentation.
• AT LEAST 4 pages, though more is welcome.  Remember—you have a good 2 pages written already!  Try to develop your take-home essay with sources and perhaps a closer reading (if necessary). 
• DUE FRIDAY, DECEMBER 3^rd (if you want it back with comments by exam day); OR EXAM DAY (if you don’t want it back until next semester). 

Good luck!  Please e-mail me with questions or concerns. 

For Thursday: Kim, pp.150-203

The gun Zam-Zammah (featured in Ch.1) today

NOTE: We will spend two more days on Kim, since it is a harder and longer read than the previous books.  Try to finish the book for next Tuesday.  Here are some questions to consider for Thursday's chapters:

* How does Kim continue to grapple with his own identity, particularly regarding the two "paths" that his life seems to take--the chela and the Sahib?  Consider also the famous passage in Chapter 11, "Who is Kim--Kim--Kim?"

* What does Kim learn from the lama?  While he seems eager to learn the ways of the Game from Mahbub and Lurgan Sahib, he is less enthusiastic (initially, perhaps) about the lama's teachings.  Does he seem taken with any of his stories, sayings, or lessons?  Does the lama change Kim in the same way that the Game does?

* Consider the imperialist critique in Chapter 13, when Kim overhears the French and the Russian speaking of India.  What is he commenting on specifically here?  Is it a blanket condemnation of imperialist views, or just aimed at non-English ones?  Consider the Russian's statement, "It is we who can deal with Orientals."

* If we take the lama seriously as a character, how is he "tested" and how does he grow in the same manner as Kim?  What revelations (or disappointments) does he find on his quest?

For Tuesday: Kipling, Chs. VI-X (pp.79-150)



Delacroix's Women of Algiers (1834)

 Some ideas to consider...

* How does Kipling take to the Great Game and becoming a Sahib?  Does he begin to lose his 'Indian' identity in the face of colonial knowledge?

* Related to this, how does Kim begin to understand his own identity?  Consider the passage in Chapter XII, "No; I am Kim.  This is the great world, and I am only Kim.  Who is Kim?" (96). 

* What is the purpose of the lama's stories and sayings, particularly the 'Jataka' in Chapter IX?  Are these symbolic/allegorical of Kim's journey?  Or are they simply 'Oriental' embellishments of the narrative?

* How does Kim's relationship with the lama progress throughout these chapters?  Why does Kim want to find him again? 

* Discuss the character of Hurree Chunder Mookerjee (or R.17): what role does he seem to play in the work?  How does the narrator (and others) view him and his pursuits? 

* Similarly, who is Lurgan Sahib?  How is he portrayed by the narrator, and how do Kim and others regard him?  Is he another colonial stereotype (like Bennett and others)?  Or is he more like the curator at the museum in the opening chapters?

* How does the narrator continue to comment on the characters and landscape of India, and where do we see a more tolerant (native) view vs. a more condescending ('Orientalist') view?

For Tuesday: Kipling's Kim, Chs. I-V (pp.1-78)

Artwork by Kipling's father based on Kim

Kim is Kipling's best known novel and the only one to gain complete critical admiration (his first novel, The Light That Failed, is largely considered a failure, and his other big one, Captains Courageous, is considered children's lit and rarely discussed).  The novel follows the education of Kim, a half Indian, half Irish orphan who attaches himself to a Buddhist lama who adopts Kim as his "chela" (pupil, but in a religious sense).  Kim eventually ends up in English hands and becomes an agent in "The Great Game," which was the struggle between England and Russia for control of Asia (Russia threatened to invade India for some time, and like England, was mired in endless skirmishes in the mountains of Afghanistan--sound familiar?).  One general thing the novel asks is what path will Kim (as a representative of India, half "English," half "Indian) ultimately take: will he choose the East or the West?  England or India?  Tradition or Empire?  

Other ideas to consider...

* How is the lama portrayed in the early parts of the novel?  He is seen by some critics as wise, representing Kipling's deep love for Indian/Eastern spirituality; to others he's a clown, a buffoon, and mere comic relief.

* Why is Kim drawn to the lama?  What does he see in him? 

* How does Kipling contrast the lama with Mahbub Ali?  Why do they both appreciate Kim--but for different reasons?

* Examine the narrator's tone/perspective in these opening chapters; do we hear an imperialist giving a condescending 'tour' of India, or is it more in the style of Kipling's travel writings such as "Edge of the East?"  Consider this passage from Chapter II: "All India is full of holy man stammering gospels in strange tongues; shaken and consumed in the fires of their own zeal; dreamers, babblers, and visionaries: as it has been from the beginning and will continue to the end" (Longman, 27).  Note that Chapter II opens with a quotation from the poem featured in "Edge of the East."

* How does Kim respond to the Indian landscape/people?  Is he aloof from it like an Englishman, or does it, as Kipling writes in "Home," "[speak] with a strong voice, recalling many things; but the most curious revelation to one man was the sudden knowledge that under these skies lay home and the dearest place in all the world" (Longman, 256)? 

* What do you make of the poems heading each chapter, all of which are drawn from Kipling's own verse?  How do they comment on the themes/actions of the chapter? 

* Why does the lama give up Kim to the English?  Is this part of the 'comedy' of his character, or there something else at work here? 

For Thursday: Kipling and Kim (readings in Longman edition)

Kipling in his study, writing "Kim"

For Thursday's class, I want you to read some supplementary readings introducing Kipling and the background of Kim (1900).  You will find these readings at the end of the Longman edition beginning on page 255.  Here are the readings I want you to read and respond to for Thursday's class:

* from "Home" (255-258)
* from "The Edge of the East" (258-261)
* from "Something of Myself" (262-263)
"Lispeth" (281-285)
"The Mark of the Beast" (286-296)

In responding to these writings, consider Kipling's role as an English writer who is from India and intimately understands its languages, characters, and customs (unlike Conrad, for example, who came to Africa as an outsider).  Where does an imperialist voice clash with a 'native' voice?  Are his works 'racist'?  How does he depict Englishmen?  Indians?  What tone or point of view does the narrator offer? 

Exam on Tuesday: The Take-Home Essay

For your essay on Tuesday, you will have 3 short answer questions and one longer essay question.  The topics will be focused on Conrad, Tutuola, and the theoretical ideas that inform their work, such as Ngugi wa Thiong'o, Brantlinger, and Freud.  Below is the take-home essay question which you can get a head start on now if you wish.  It will be due the Tuesday after you take the exam. 

PART III: Take-Home Essay (or, a rough draft for the Final Paper)

For your take-home essay question, I want you to basically lay the groundwork for your final paper.  This will ultimately be a 5-6 page paper using at least two works from class along with secondary/theoretical sources.  But that’s for later.  For now, I want you to respond to the following prompt in a 2-3 page essay that will form the rough draft of your future paper, meaning it will be the basis for what you adapt into a larger, more researched paper. 

THE QUESTION:

In Reader-Response Criticism, critics often refer to an intended reader that is implied by the narrative voice.  This is a reader who is more or less created by the text, and who we must in some sense become to understand the work.  As Ross C. Murfin explains in “What is Reader Response Criticism?” (in our edition of Heart of Darkness),

“Only “by agreeing to play the role of this created audience,” Susan Suleiman explains, “can an actual reader correctly understand and appreciate the work”…Gerard Genette and Gerald Prince prefer to speak of “the naratee,…the necessary counterpart of a given narrator, that is, the person or figure who receives a narrative,”…Iser employs the term “the implied reader,” but he also uses “the educated reader”… (120). 

Using either Conrad or Tutuola, consider what the narrator assumes or asks of the reader: who are “we”?  Are we English?  Male?  What ideas, biases, assumptions, fears, or desires do we have?  What knowledge do we share?  What insights and secrets are we privy to?  What do we know that other characters in this world do not?  What relationship do we share with the narrative voice?  Conversely, who might not be addressed by this narrator…and how intentional is this? 

No sources are required for this, but you must quote from the book in question to support your reading.  Also, be specific; the less specific you are, and the more you generalized, the less points I can give you for your essay.  Good luck! 

For Tuesday: Finish The Palm-Wine Drinkard

I want you to find your own way through the maze of this mythic dreamscape as much as possible; however, following from our discussion on Thursday, consider some of the following ideas:
* Other colonial symbolism in the work (along the lines of the "complete gentleman")

* Elements of traditional oral epic and myth: what parts of the work seem to reach back into a prehistoric past before books and European colonization

* Addresses and asides to his audience: who IS his audience? 

* Recurring imagery, especially babies, eyes, feet, etc. 

* The overall moral or "quest" of the work: how might the work be a modern attempt to explain the world (much as ancient epics used myth to explain the seemingly supernatural)?  How do things come together through the storyteller's art? 

REMEMBER...

The Amos Tutuola book most of you purchased has TWO novels in it.  The first one is called "My Life in the Bush Of Ghosts."  DON'T read this one.  Read the SECOND novel, "The Palm Wine Drinkard."  I mentioned this a few times in class, but I want to remind you just in case.  The other novel is great, too, but it's not the one we're reading. 

For Thursday: The Palm-Wine Drinkard (read to roughly page 67-ish, when it says "The Work of the Faithful-Mother in the White Tree"

NOTE: This is a potentially difficult text, since it is so outside English/European novelistic traditions.  Indeed, it seems to exist in a world where the English novel never existed, so unaware is the author of the narrative conventions of the genre.  Some approach the work as a transcribed folk-tale, full of unstranslatable ideas and imagery; others consider it a wildly modernist work that dives into the collective pool of myth and the collective unconsciousness.  The ultimate question is how conscious was Tutuola of writing within (or against) the English tradition, or if he was more or less oblivious to this tradition's existence.

Some questions and ideas to consider...

* What passages or sections of the text seem to be calling attention to themselves as translations?  Why might Tutuola want this to read like a translation? 

* In what way is this story like a folk or fairy tale?  Consider the main character, his quest, and his relations/conversations with other characters along the way. 

* What kind of character is the narrator?  Is he reliable—do we believe he truly has superhuman powers and abilities?  Or is this merely a “tall tale” spun out to amuse local villagers and those gullible enough to listen?  


* Where do English/European ideas and words intrude into the text?  How do we understand these seeming anachronisms?  For example, time is often mentioned in English terms, as is distance.  Why not remove this European frame of reference?

* How might this work respond to Ngugi’s arguments about language and nationalism in “The Language of African Literature”?  What do you feel is Tutuola’s view on the purpose of African fiction in preserving indigenous culture? 

* What do we make of the demons and spirits the main character encounters on his journey, such as the “Skull” that borrows human body parts, or the demonstrative and all-powerful baby?  What do these horrors reveal about cultural values, morals, and terrors? 

No Class Tomorrow (Thursday)

I've become increasingly ill today, and would rather not stumble through class tomorrow in a haphazard fashion.  So take the day off and plan to discuss Ngugi on Tuesday (the post below gives you some reading suggestions--and the handout is in my box if you need it).  You might also want to start reading Tutola's The Palm Wine Drinkard which we'll officially start next Thursday.  See you next week! 

For Thursday: Handout: Ngugi Wa Thiong'o's "The Language of African Literature"

Read this work in light of Achebe's criticims of Conrad and Kincaid's A Small Place, both of which works are informed by Ngugi's ideas.  The except is part of Chapter 1 of his book, Decolonizing the Mind (1986).  If you missed class, you can find the handout in the box on my door, 336C.  As usual, here are some ideas to ponder or write about:

* What is the true power of language for him?  Why is language so important to a child (or a culture's) mental universe?  What, to him, is the danger of speaking and writing in the colonizer's tongue? 

* Related to this, what does he mean when he writes, "Learning, for a colonial child, became a cerebral activity and not an emotionally felt experience?" (17).

* How does he enter into the debate as to what constitutes "African" literature?  For him is it birth, race, nationality, language, or some other quality? 

* Related to the above, how might he disagree with Achebe's views on literature and art?  How does he criticize Achebe specifically?

* Why, to him, is learning the colonizer's tongue tantamout to betraying one's culture and values? 

* How does storytelling change when you remove one's native tongue?  Why might a story in English not have the same resonance or "lessons" for a child who grew up speaking Gikuyu? 

* What does he mean when he writes, "Language as culture is thus mediating between me and my own self; between my own self and other selves; between me and nature" (15)?

Daniel Defoe, Pirates & Colonialism

 


Captain Avery, infamous English pirate

  
NOTE: The reading assignment for this week is in the post below this one. 

Do you ever wonder what we professors do with our spare time?  Do we read books?  Write essays?  Or just make you guys do it?  Well, here's your answer...

I've just published an article related to our class, in that it explores colonialism, English nationalism, and trade/slavery in the 'pirate novels' of Daniel Defoe.  If you're interested in seeing how I use the very arguments/ideas we discuss in class in my own critical writing, this essay may somewhat somewhat interest you, especially if you like pirates!  In general, the article is about how Daniel Defoe used real-life pirates to create a model for the English tradesman, as someone who had the "artistic license" to plunder both domestic and foreign ships in the interest of trade (a trade that would ideally open up foreign markets in "dark" places).  In one work, The King of Pirates (1719), he writes two letters based on the real-life exploits of Captain Avery, a notorious English pirate who raided the treasure ships of the Great Khan and founded a pirate 'utopia' on Madagascar.  In the other work, Captain Singleton (1720), he creates a fictional pirate who rises through the ranks to become one of the most ruthless, yet economically sensible of English pirates with the help of his right-hand mand, William the Quaker (a Quaker pirate!). 

Click here to read the article in Digital Defoe: http://english.illinoisstate.edu/digitaldefoe/

And yes, you can even grade it and offer me comments for revision!

For Tuesday: Brantlinger's essay, "Heart of Darkness: Anti-Imperialism, Racism, or Impressionism?" (277-296)

Patrick Brantlinger: critic of Darkness

Brantlinger's essay sums up some of the modern readings of Heart of Darkness, most notably Chiuna Achebe's charges of HOD as being a racist text that participates in an imperialist discourse.  As you read, consider some of the following ideas and questions:

* What does Brantilinger mean when he calls Conrad an "impressionist" writer?  How does this help us understand the composition/meaning of HOD?

* Can a writer be somewhat racist in real life yet as an artist write free of racial bias, and indeed, critique the very institutions of racism?  How does the essay discuss this?

* In the story Conrad wrote with Ford Madox Hueffer, The Inheritors, he writes that "The old order of things had to live or perish with a lie" (281).  How might this statement inform how we read parts of, if not much of, HOD?

* How does the essay define "commodity fetishism," and how might this relate to the events and characters of HOD?

* Why does Brantlinger argue that "evil is African in Conrad's story" (285)?  How might Conrad's use of imagery and symbolism suggest racist tendencies and, according to Achebe, an underlying imperialist agenda?

* Why does Brantlinger, citing the words of Fredric Jameson, call Conrad a "schizophrenic" writer?  What specifically does this term explain about his writing?

* Brantlinger quotes the philosopher Hannah Arendt, who implicates 19th century imperialism in the rise of Fascism and the Nazi party.  Why might this reading work well with Conrad's depiction of Kurtz?

* On page 291-292, Brantlinger quotes critic Lionel Trilling, who sees Kurtz as something of a heroic, Nietzchean figure.  Does Brantlinger agree with this characterization? 

* Brantlinger suggests that Kurtz is not only a mirror for Marlow but for Conrad (and his story) himself.  Why is this?  How might there be a little of Conrad--and his ideas--in Kurtz? 

For Thursday: Part III of Heart of Darkness

More questions/passages/ideas to chew on...

* Toward the end of the work, Marlow is discussing Kurtz with the manager, who dismisses Kurtz’s madness as the result of an “unsound method.”  Marlow counters with “No method at all.”  In other passages of the work, Marlow discusses his method—or the need for one.  What does he mean by this?  What quality does he feel he has that Kurtz lacks? 

* A passage to consider, page 74: "But the wilderness had found him out early, and had taken on him a terrible vengeance for the fantastic invasion.  I think it had whispered to him things about himself which he did not know, things of which he had no conception till he took counsel with this great solitude—and the whisper had proved irresistibly fascinating.  It echoed loudly within him because he was hollow at the core…”

* And on page 75: "I seemed at one bound to have been transported into some lightless region of subtle horrors, where pure, uncomplicated savagery was a positive relief, being something that had a right to exist—obviously—in the sunshine."

Re-read the famous passage, where Kurtz, ill and nearly insensible, cries out “the horror!  the horror!”  What does Marlowe believe he has “seen” to provoke this outcry, and has he seen it himself?


Related to the above, why does Marlow lie about Kurtz’s last words to his fiancée?  This passage seems to relate to an earlier statement Marlow made about women…what is he protecting here? 

From Freud's The Uncanny (1919)

Below are the passages from Freud's "The Uncanny" we discussed in class relating to Heart of Darkness.  Consider how images of Africa, the natives, and Kurtz himself play into "the uncanny," which is both alien and familiar (hauntingly so) to Marlowe.  This reading suggests that the voyage is less into physical than mental "darkness," uncovering a past which has been sublimated beneath the spires of culture and British civilization.  And yet, it lurks there still...

"However, after considering the manifest motivation behind the figure of the double, we have to own that none of this helps us understand the extraordinary degree of uncanniness that attaches to it, and we may add, drawing upon our knowledge of pathological mental processes, that none of this content could explain the defensive urge that ejects it from the ego as something alien.  Its uncanny quality can surely derive only from the fact that the double is a creation that belongs to a primitive phase in our mental development, a phase that we have surmounted, in which it admittedly had a more benign significance.  The double has become an object of terror, just as the gods become demons after the collapse of their cult…this phase did not pass without leaving behind in us residual traces that can still make themselves felt, and that everything we known find ‘uncanny’ meets the criterion that is linked with these remnants of animistic mental activity…”

For Tuesday: Heart of Darkness, Part II (46-71)

NOTE: Even though I said we would finish Heart of Darkness for Tuesday, it's so incredibly rich that I think we should go slower and only focus on Part II for Tuesday.  That said, if you feel compelled to finish the work for Tuesday by all means do so; we will tackle Part III on Thursday. 

A few passages to consider a close reading (or at least a further examination of ):

Page 51: "The earth seemed unearhtly.  We are accustomed to look upon the shackled form of a conquered monster, but there--there you could look at a thing monstrous and free.  It was unearthly, and the men were--No, they were not inhuman.  Well, you know, that was the worst of it--the suspicion of their not being inhuman."

Page 61: "then suddenly, as though a veil had been removed from my eyes, I made out, deep in the tangled gloom, naked breasts, arms, legs, glaring eyes--the bush was swarming with human limbs in movement, glistneing, of brozen colour.  The twigs shook, swayed, and rustled, the arrows flew out of them, and then the sutter came to..."

Page 64: "They say the hair goes on growing sometimes, but this--ah--specimen was impressively bald.  The wilderness has patted him on the head, and, behold, it was like a ball--an ivory ball; it had caressed him, and --lo!--he had withered: it had taken him, loved him, embraced him, got into his veins, consumed his flesh, and sealed his soul to its own by the inconcievable ceremonies of some devilish initiation."

Page 65: "He had taken a high seat amongst the devils of the land--I mean literally.  You can't undetrstand.  How could you?--with solid pavement under your feet, surrounded by kind neighbors ready to cheer you or fall on you, stepping delicately between the butcher and the policeman, in the holy terror of scandal and gallows and lunatic asylums--how can you imagine what particular region of the first ages a man's untrammeled feet may take him into by the way of solitude..."

Page 69: 'Don't you talk with Mr. Kurtz?' I said.  'You don't talk with that man--you listen to him,' he exclaimed, with severe exaltation...'I tell you,' he cried, 'this man has enlarged my mind.'  He opened his arms wide, staring at me with his little blue eyes that were perfectly round."   

For Thursday: Conrad's Heart of Darkness, Part I (pp.17-46)

Joseph Conrad, writer of darkness

Ideas to consider for Part I of Heart of Darkness:

* How does the narrator describe Marlowe in Part I?  What might be significant about these descriptions?

* What role does nature play in the work?  How is it described?  How does it seem to affect Marlowe?

* Why does Marlowe say of the Thames that "this also...has been one of the dark places of the earth?" (19)

* What colonial projects does Marlowe witness in Africa?  What might these say about 'progress,' or 'Englishness'?  

* Related to the above, how to the English maintain their identity from their "dark" surroundings?  How is one to tell the English from the 'savage'? 

* Why is his trip to the "heart of darkness"?  How is the idea of darkness explored/explained in this first part of the book?  How does Marlowe define "darkness"--and is this belief confirmed in Africa? 

For Tuesday: Exam #1

If you missed class today, you missed a discussion on how all literature can be nationalistic and/or colonialist, meaning that it exhibits a distinct set of values unique to that culture...values that are often defined against an "other," be in a race, a group, or an idea.  We discussed this in relation to Jane Eyre, and I gave examples from widely divergent works such as The Lord of the Rings and Robinson Crusoe.  For your exam on Tuesday, I will give you a two part exam: Part One is in-class, followed by Part Two, which is a take-home essay question.  I let students begin writing on this question in class, which is pasted below:

Thinking about one of your favorite books or films, consider how it might be “national” or contain a national/racial point of view that defines itself against “others,” whatever those others might be.  Consider who it’s heroes are, where they live, how they act, and what world(s) they function in.  What is the “norm” in this world, and consider if this norm is universal or national in a way that would exclude or possibly leave out other “norms.” 

This essay question will be due on Thursday, either in-class or by 5pm via e-mail or my box (336C).  I will not accept late papers, so please get it in on time! 

For the In-Class portion of the exam, you MUST read one of the following essays in the back of Oroonoko or Wide Sargasso Sea:

Brown, The Romance of Empire: Oroonoko and the Trade in Slaves (Norton, 232-245)

OR

Rody, Burning Down the House: The Revisionary Paradigm of Jean Rhys' Wide Sargasso Sea (Norton, 217-225)

You will answer questions on ONE of the essays for your In-Class exam.  The In-Class portion will be a series of short essay questions that will challenge how you can analyze the two works from a different perspectives (colonial, feminist, etc.).  As long as you read the works, responded to the daily responses, and listened in class, you should do amazingly well.  If not, then...

Please e-mail me with questions or concerns. 

Readings/Writing for Tuesday

Finish Part Three of Wide Sargasso Sea (105-112) if you haven’t already

Then read BACKGROUNDS (119-156):
* Bronte, from Jane Eyre
* Rhys, Selected Letters
* Rhys, Selected Excerpts (The Bible is Modern, etc.)

For Tuesday’s class, I want you to read the above excerpts, and use them to “read” some aspect or passage of the novel. How do Rhys’ other writings, or Bronte’s original novel shed light on what Rhys wrote or how she may have wanted us to see it? How do her letters reveal her own creative struggle to bring the “madwoman in the attic” to life, as well as discuss her own identity as a “postcolonial”/Caribbean writer in English? Also consider how the short essays may “rewrite” or expand upon ideas that are implicit in Wide Sargasso Sea itself. Be SPECIFIC and use these background writings as theory: that is, as a way to decipher and understand the subjective and mercurial nature of a literary work.

For Thursday: Wide Sargasso Sea (finish Part Two)

Painting of Jean Rhys and Antoinette Cosway (2006)

Questions and ideas to consider for Thursday’s reading…

• Why does Rochester insist on calling Antoinette “Bertha” in the story? What might this change signal for him, especially in a novel where, as Antoinette herself says, “names are important”?
• Do you feel Rochester is a reliable or an unreliable narrator? Is he supposed to be sympathetic or unsympathetic? Is anything he records or presents to the reader “true”?
• What role does Daniel Cosway play in the novel? Why does Rochester ultimately agree to meet him, and what is the result of this meeting?
• Christophine says to Rochester that “You young but already you hard. You fool the girl. You make her think you can’t see the sun for looking at her” (Norton, 92). Was it Rochester’s plan to destroy her—to punish her? And if so, for what reason?
• Why does Rochester allow himself to be seduced by Amelie? Is this a simple fling, as gentlemen were expected to have, or is there something more allegorical behind this seduction?
• Is Antoinette “mad”? Does she suffer from a family illness, as evidenced in her mother and brother…or is her madness merely the result of the ‘colonial gaze,’ which sees her as alien and ‘other’? Is her ‘madness’ simply characteristics that are not valued in England?

A Note of Interest: Modern Library's 100 Greatest Novels

As a curiosity, I came across Modern Library's highly subjective list of the 100 greatest novels published in English.  What you might find interesting is that two of the novels in this class, Wide Sargasso Sea (#94) and Kim (#78) made the list, and two other writers did as well V.S. Naipaul (represented by A House for Mr. Biswas and A Bend in the River) and Joseph Conrad (for Nostromo and Lord Jim).  And you thought you weren't getting an education!  You can find the complete list here: http://www.randomhouse.com/modernlibrary/100bestnovels.html

For Tuesday: Rhys' Wide Sargasso Sea (read to around page 50 or so)

Jean Rhys as a young woman

NOTE: See the post BELOW for more discussion and ideas about Kincaid's "A Small Place" (if you're not already exhausted by it).  It was our best discussion yet, so I kind of want to prolong it.  Remember, I'm not trying to offend anyone, but to complicate our views about the 'postcolonial' world, which may or may not even exist!

Some ideas to consider when reading/responding to Wide Sargasso Sea:

1. How does the novel contrast Antoinette with the rest of her society, almost all of whom are recently liberated slaves?  Why do they call her "white nigger" and "white cockroach," and how might this hint at tensions in power structure of slavery itself? 

2. How does Rhys use the landscape as a character itself in the novel?  How is it described and how do individual characters, such as Antoinette and Rochester, respond to it? 

3. Examine the passage on page 23-25 when the estate is burned down.  What is the significance of this scene and what happens (and what is said)? 

4. Why does Christophine stay with the family when everyone else abandons them?  What role do you feel she plays in the novel?

Some Additional Thoughts on Kincaid

Nice, heated, but informed disucssion on Thursday!  I wish we had more time to discuss Kincaid specifically, but we can return to many of her ideas in future classes.  Here are some additional ideas to ponder based on points made in class (but not developed), and some of the responses I glanced at after class:

* Is colonialism truly over?  We talk about people getting over their situation and moving on, but is there a historical date for colonialism ending for any country?  And if so, what does it change?  Can a colonial country (Britain, France, etc.) still rule without ruling?  What does 'independence' really mean? 

* Is part of the outrage/insult we feel reading Kincaid based on the fact that the narrator (who is supposed to be limited or omniscient, but in both cases largely unaware of 'us') calls us out?  Traditionally, the narrator is supposed to be our 'guide' through a world, and here the narrator turns on us, making us complicit in the 'fictional' world she creates.

* Is she trying to make American/European readers feel the same outrage that indigenous people have felt for centuries in novels?  Remember, from Columbus onwards, most writing and novels have made no bones about calling natives "lazy, stupid, weak, unintelligent, inferior," etc.  Is she trying to take power back and call those who would be complicit in tourism "ugly"?  By mastering the language, is she also hijacking the genre itself and making it speak for her? 

* Even though many countries rely on tourism and many natives participate in it, does that make it right?  Can Kincaid still read it as an evil and colonialist institution even if most of Antigua disagrees with her?  (in a related argument, if a Native American writer, such as LeAnne Howe or Sherman Alexie, criticizes Native American mascots in sports, do other Native Americans have to agree?  Do they need a consensus?).

* Consider how many of the arguments we read about in defense of slavery can be equally applied against Kincaid's argument.  Like her or not, it's chilling how we can use many of the same 200/300 year-old arguments (we're protecting them, they need us, their lives are better, we're bringing them civilization and a chance at a market economy, etc.).   

* And finally, is being ignorant an excuse?  A 'tourist' doesn't know about the postcolonial issues of an Antigua or a Barbados, etc.  He/she only went there to escape from their own taxing lives.  Are you innocent if you simply didn't know?  And can you help the economy of a nation while destroying its soul?

And here's a final quote from Kincaid from a later part of A Small Place: "Eventually, the masters left, in a kind of way; eventually, the slaves were freed, in a kind of way.  The people in Antigua now, the people who really think of themselves as Antiguans (and the people who would immediately come to your mind when you think about what Antiguans might be like; I mean, supposing you were to think about it), are the descendants of those noble and exalted people, the slaves.  Of course, the whole thing is, once you cease to be a master, once you throw off your master's yoke, you are no longer human rubbish, you are just a human being, and all the things that adds up to.  So, too, with the slaves.  Once they are no longer slaves, once they are free, they are no longer noble and exalted: they are just human beings."

For Thursday: Kincaid's A Small Place (from handout)

Jamaica Kincaid's short book, A Small Place, is a kind of postcolonial Oroonoko, as it offers a cynical travelogue to the would-be tourist (typically American) to Antigua.  Read Chapter One (from the handout in class) and try to be alert to her anti-colonial stance and how she depicts tourism as a kind of neo-colonialism that keeps the Antiguans in a slave/master relationship long after independence.  Also consider some of the following ideas in your response...

* Why does she write in second person, a seldom used narrative technique?  What effect does this have on the reader?
* What does the tourist see in Antigua?  What does she particularly want us to see on our tour?  Would the Travel Board of Antigua agree? 
* Why does she claim, on page 14, that a tourist is "an ugly human being"?  How do you think she defines this term?  Is it simply a traveler?  Or someone else?
* Why does she feel that everyone is potential tourist, and everyone is a potential native? 
* How does her postcolonial point of view contrast sharply with the narrator of Behn's Oroonoko?  What experience is she trying to "sell" to the reader? 
* To whom do you feel she is writing as a "Commonwealth" writer?  To a British/American audience?  To Antiguans?  Academics? 

For Tuesday: "Opinions on Slavery" (Norton, pp.159-185)

Famous portrait of Olaudah Equiano after the publication of his book

Here are some ideas to consider for each reading, though feel free to combine readings and approaches (or to apply questions for one reading to another):

“A Declaration By The Barbados Colonists” (1651): This declaration predates the publication of Oroonoko by several decades, making it an interesting counterpoint to the colonial perspective offered by the unnamed narrator. Based on this declaration, how might colonists feel themselves growing apart from the mother country and becoming “othered” themselves? In what way does being a colonist mean forsaking a traditional definition of Englishness?

John Locke, excerpts from Two Treatises of Government (1690): An influential thinker and writer, Locke’s ideas profoundly influenced the American and French revolutions of the 18th century. How might his argument for the “natural state of man” support Oroonoko’s own bid for freedom in the novel? On the same hand, how does Locke, despite his humanitarian impulses, define slavery within the construct of “the state of nature” and “the state of war”?

“The Speech of Moses Bon Sáam” (1735): Writings like this formed a genre of abolitionist writing written exclusively by white Englishmen trying to further the cause. Most likely, Moses Bon Sáam was a mask for one such abolitionist. Nevertheless, what arguments does he advance against Locke’s notion of slavery as a “natural” state for a certain class of people? Why might these arguments resonate with (and perhaps even be inspired by) the example of Oroonoko?

“The Answer of Caribeus to Moses Bon Sáam” (1735): This is the prototypical “apology” for slavery in the 17th/18th century. In essence, how is slavery defended as a necessary state of existence and even as a kind of blessing upon the slave him/herself?

Samuel Johnson, “To Boswell: Dictated Brief to Free a Slave” (1777): How does Johnson echo many of the sentiments from Moses Bon Sáam to attack a Lockean view of slavery? Why does Boswell feel the need to editorialize this sentiment at the end of the excerpt? Though he admits that Johnson’s views are “perhaps…in the right” (177), what crucial element does he feel Johnson overlooks?

Olaudah Equiano, from The Life of Olaudah Equiano (1789): This is one of the most extraordinary works of the late 18th century, as it is a polished, almost novelistic account of slavery from the inside—a slave who was captured as a child, served in the Royal Navy, and gradually bought his freedom (though few Englishmen believed in a freed slave). How do these excerpts contrast with the “white” perspective of slavery seen in Oroonoko, Moses Bon Sáam, and Johnson? Is Equiano able to write like an Englishman yet remain, in spirit, an African? In other words, how much does he conform to literary expectations—or how much does he remain an outsider sneaking in?

For Thursday: Behn's Oroonoko (be sure to finish!)

An 18th century depiction of slave torture

Other ideas and passages to consider in your second response to Oroonoko:

* Though Oroonoko has many elements of the "romance," particularly the sections in Africa, it also borrows from another popular genre of 17th/18th century literature, the travel narrative.  In what ways might you consider Oroonoko as a "travel guide" to Surinam...and furthermore, how might it function as a sales pitch for future colonists? 

* Consider how Behn depicts the Surinam natives when "she" and Oroonoko visit them in their village.  How does this jive with her earlier depictions of the natives as "Edenic" children? 

* Does the narrator betray Oroonoko toward the end?  Why doesn't she protect him, or at least use her great influence to dissuade him?  Why does she conveniently dissapear toward the end of the narrative?

* In Srinivas Aravamudan's famous book on 18th century colonialism, Tropicopolitans, he writes this about Oroonoko: "Oroonoko’s pethood is linked to earlier descriptions of the natives being “caressed,” as well as wild birds and animals being collected for the same purpose...Echoing this consumerist impulse, the narrator assimilates Oroonoko’s and Imoinda’s scarification to statuary…such ornamentation is relevant as a description of a potential pet and a variety of other mercantile objects, to elicit a collector’s desire to possess the “curios” that adorned the mantelpieces and cabinets of the leisured classes” (41).  Is the narrator's interest in Oroonoko simply that--a desire to possess a "curio" of this strange colony?  Is the work an allegory for the consumerist impulse of colonialism itself, the desire to own and possess the outside world? 

* Examine Oroonoko's great speech before his final battle: is this a theatrical set piece or a truly abolitionist argument?  How does this change or complicate or views of Oroonoko, the narrator, or Behn herself? 

* How does the narrator record Oroonoko's torture and death?  Does it seem to be heroically tragic, like his famous namesake, or has he turned into a colonial monster--similar to the natives whose dashing dismemberment Oroonoko seems to emulate?  How did she mean us to read this...and do we read it differently today? 

For Tuesday: Behn's Oroonoko Part I

At right: a portrait of Aphra Behn, one of the first women to make her living from writing (chiefly as a playwright), which inspired the following tribute from Virginia Woolf: "All women together ought to let flowers fall upon the tomb of Aphra Behn which is, most scandalously but rather appropriately, in Westminster Abbey, for it was she who earned them the right to speak their minds.  It is she--shady and amorous as she was--who makes it not quite fantastic for me to say to you tonight: Earn five hundred a year by your wits" (Chapter Four, A Room of One's Own). 

Remember that your first 1-2 page reading response is due in-class.  It can be about anything that interests, confuses, or excites you, but try to be specific and consider close reading a short passage to illustrate your ideas.  Here are a few ideas to consider as you start reading Oroonoko:

• How does the narrator depict the natives of Surinam? Look at her language and imagery.

• What makes Oroonoko stand out from the other slaves? Why is the narrator taken with him, and how does she describe him and his virtues in the novel?

• Does Oroonoko read like a novel? Some critics claim it is one of the first novels, though the term didn’t exist at the time. What elements are or aren’t like a more traditional (19th century) novel? 

• How are the British characterized in general in Oroonoko? Do you feel that Behn was more sympathetic toward the natives and the slaves, or her own people?

Welcome to the Course...

Thanks for enrolling in English 4553, Colonial & Postcolonial Literature.  Consult your syllabus for details about the course and the reading schedule.  Note that we will be reading our six books in pairs of two, each one focusing on a different colonial region starting with The Caribbean, and followed by Africa and India.  Our first book is Aphra Behn's Oroonoko, which we will start next Tuesday (questions and readings to follow).

For THURSDAY: Be sure to read the two short essays I gave out in class, Rushdie's "Commonwealth Literature Does Not Exist," and Hulme's "Columbus and the Cannibals."  If you missed class you will find the essays in the box on my door (336C).  There are no questions for these essays; simply come to class ready to discuss them and consider how they relate to our discussion of colonialism. 

I really, really look forward to sharing this class with you!