Author: Ifeona Fulani
Over the last ten years the G/LS curriculum has become more ‘global,’ seemingly in two important currents: firstly, the increasing wide circulation of discourses on globalization and globalism since the 1990s, and secondly, institutional awareness of the effects of globalization on all aspects of academic life, in particular (in the case of NYU) the increasing diversity of people and scholarly interests within the university and the university’s global ambitions, reflected in NYU’s change of identity to a GNU. Cultural and demographic changes within the university should require that our curriculum is responsive to those changes, to become less Eurocentric, more worldly and inclusive in content.
The influence of Postcolonial Studies and the work of prominent Postcolonial scholars has been a significant influence in this regard. Postcolonial criticism has prompted rethinking about scope of globalization in time and space, as well as its effects. Columbus’ arrival in the Americas marked the onset of the colonization of the Americas by Spain, Portugal, France and England, creating imperial peripheries and centers that are still in conflict today. The colonization of Africa, India and Asia followed, expanding the reach of Europe’s empires and seeding the imperial ambitions of the United States. ‘Postcolonial theory’ addresses a spectrum of interdependent concerns rooted in colonialism that encompass every curricular area. Widespread, violent colonization may be thought to be a thing of the past, but, the effects live on everywhere in the world under different political formations and with different social, economic and psychological consequences; ‘globalization’ is a term that conveniently bracket those consequences. Postcolonial studies and theory have emerged as an academic response to the persistence of colonialism’s oppressions, engaging with political, cultural, psychological, ecological and ethical consequences of colonization, with the objective of effecting liberatory change. Postcolonial studies encourage analysis of globalisation and globalism in political terms.
Postcolonial theory and criticism are therefore inherently political rubrics, calling for expansive rethinking of the histories, places and cultures that are amenable to postcolonial analysis – i.e. most of the world. A renewed focus on the unequal power relations that have shaped those histories and cultures is called for that should include scrutiny of the politics of cultural dominance and subordination. Edward Said, regarded by some as the father of postcolonial thought, argued that the domination of lands and peoples involves the forceful dissemination of ideas and images via literature and all forms of mass communication – an idea of deep significance for a program based on Great Books and canonical works, as G/LS is. Said’s critique has prompted re-reading of canonical literary texts through the lens of postcolonial theory, however his emphasis on literature and culture has obscured the wider, trans-disciplinary reach of postcolonial theory.
The African Cultures and Caribbean Cultures courses that I teach are deeply informed by Postcolonial theory and criticism. The majority of texts that form the cannons of African Literature and Caribbean Literature are explicitly anti-colonial and anti-imperialist in their politics; to teach such texts and the contexts of their production means engaging directly in the politics of colonialism and Imperialism. Recently the focus of my African Cultures course has been on issues of representation of the continent and its people. We review and interrogate colonial ideas and constructions of Africa: notions such as the “dark,” continent, “primitive” Africa where polygyny is normative and oppressive to women, and more recent notions such as “unspoiled” Africa and its opposite, “broken” Africa, the war-ravaged continent. We read canonical literature that explicitly contests such misrepresentations of African peoples and histories; Things Fall Apart, A Grain of Wheat, Ama Ata Aido’s novel Changes. We also read contemporary analyses of the impact of colonization and the trans-Atlantic slave trade on the societies and economies of specific African countries. Students often express surprise or shock that colonialism was an economic project that contributed substantially the wealth of the western countries: “why didn’t we learn this in high school?”, is a frequent question.
Resistance and conflict also arise, most often in discussions on issues race, power and representation. For example, feelings sometimes run high when we analyse the way the film Blood Diamond treats (or does not treat) these issues. Many students would have seen the film prior to the class and some would have some prior investment in its explicitly political agenda. The film is promoted as a protest against the trade in so-called “blood diamonds,” also known as “conflict diamonds,” i.e. diamonds mined and sold to finance the rebellion of the Revolutionary United Front of Sierra Leona. The film’s director Edward Zwick stated in an interview that his aim was to raise public awareness with a view to ending the trade. The film depicts a country torn apart by the struggle between the rebels, the RUF, and government forces, positioning the rebels as mindless savages who kidnap children to use them as soldiers. It quite graphically portrays many atrocities, including the rebels’ amputation of people’s hands to discourage them from voting in upcoming elections. But the film downplays the fact that the RUF were fighting against a corrupt and oppressive neo-colonial government, that was supported by the U.S. and U.K. The role played in the war by agents of the U.K. and U.S. arms dealers, who supply weapons in return for diamonds, is also minimized.
In discussion on the film I ask students to consider Hollywood tropes that reiterate negative images of Africa and Africans, e.g. broken Africa; helpless Africans; corrupt Africans; the white savior. Examples I highlight include:
-
- Representation of Sierra Leone and Sierra Leonians, who are voiceless in the film. Solomon moans in emotional pain more than he speaks and his only expressed opinion of the war that devastates his community and family is “why do we do this to each other?”
- Broken Africa, by exaggerated images of violence and brutality.
- Representation of the RUF vs representation of the forces of the neo-colonial government. The leader of the RUF is portrayed as bestial and horrifying – no details given about the motivation and political goals of the rebels.
- Power relations between Archer, played by Leonardo di Caprio and Solomon, played by Djimon Hounsou; Archer the “white savior,” who tells Solomon his trusty helper and local informant, “without me, you’re just another black man in Africa.”
I close the discussion by asking them to consider and respond to the following.
(a) To the proposition that Zwick’s good intention are compromised by its politics of representation and by the multiple ways the film prioritizes white, male, western, capitalist, Euro-American worldviews; and
(b) To Edward Said’s proposition that these negative representations legitimize the continuing intervention of the West in Africa – e.g. US AFRICOM has 50 bases on the continent – and persistent exploitation of Africa’s resources.
While some students respond positively to critical discussion of the film, others cling to their impression that the effect of the film was overall positive, and are hostile to a critique of the role and actions of Danny Archer. I suspect that these are the students who might comment that I am biased against white people on their course evaluations.
The Caribbean’s histories of conquest, genocide, slavery and colonization, are even more shocking to American students, whose ideas of the region are often shaped by spring break beach holidays or the Pirates of the Caribbean movies. Students educated in the Caribbean were more familiar with history of conquest and colonialism and less caught up in constructions of the Caribbean islands as paradisiacal. In this course students seemed uneasy with certain texts not so much because of their content but because of the nature of the text; for example song recordings, videos of dance performances and of folk traditions such as Jokanoo and Carnival parades. I discuss the importance of Cultural Studies and the study of popular culture and non-traditional, non-canonical cultural texts in examining cultures such as those of the Caribbean, that are oral and performative rather than scribal. I refer to the work of Caribbean historians and thinkers Sylvia Wynter, Kamau Brathwaite and C.L.R. James who have each articulated their belief that the new world demands… “a disciplinary inventiveness beyond that proffered by the Western academy or its Caribbean corollaries,” to quote C.L.R. James.
A significant number of students find it hard to regard a text that is not a ‘great book’ of European or American literature or of classical antiquity as a suitable object of study, however, the value to our students of non-Western epistemes and non-canonical texts is an issue our program needs to address. Societies persist over time by transmitting their intellectual and cultural capital, or else, logically, they would not survive. We cannot neglect non-traditional texts or forms of knowledge because the academy fails to recognize them; if we do so we risk compromising our aspirations to global study and learning. In a Global/ Liberal Studies program we should see these forms of knowledge as valuable resources.