Locating/Dislocating the Post-colony
In an interview published in The Hindu recently (May 21,
2000), in response to a routine question about his postcolonial experience, the novelist
Amitav Ghosh said that he did not begin to write by thinking of himself as a postcolonial:
"Nor did I think that there was such a thing as post-colony. I grew up in India which
was a place—not a pre-something or a post-something". The theme for our next
annual conference (see page 7) grew out of a conversation sparked off by Ghosh’s
casual statement. Behind the much discussed and protean adjective ‘postcolonial’
lies a modest and infrequently used noun ‘post-colony’. While
‘postcolonial’ can include in its broad spectrum states of mind, qualities of
experiences, critical theory, actual historical processes, strategies of reading, and much
else, ‘post-colony’ is a relatively simple term—with only two axes of
connotation: spatial and temporal. We thought it may be a good idea to choose a topic for
our Jaipur conference that will force us to take a fresh look at concepts that are getting
somewhat worn out through overuse.
One could begin with the term
post-colony. Is this term acceptable? If it is, where is the post-colony situated? Can
only the territories which were once ruled by others be so designated, or does it permeate
much further, implicating the centres of imperial power which too underwent changes
through the experience of colonisation? Some of the countries which had once dominated
large areas in the world may now have become bit players in the global game. How do they
deal with their memories of power? The constant flux of population in the last
half-century, and a global revolution in communication technologies in the last decade or
two have rendered spatial demarcations of cultures and identities more difficult than
ever. Are there texts (literary or cultural) that we could analyse to probe the
psychological conditions and material circumstances of a world where older categories and
definitions no longer operate neatly?
One could of course also challenge the ‘post’ in post-colony
by focussing on the continuation of different forms of subordination—internal and
external—and new modes of subtle take-over of cultures. On the other hand, it may be
possible to argue, sometimes by going beyond the cognitive limits of English, that local
identities and cultures are too resilient to be flattened out altogether and that market
forces cannot always control creativity. It is hoped that in arguing their cases the paper
readers will bring in texts from different languages, and genres.
The act of locating/dislocating may pertain to physical site as well as
mind-sets. The term post-colony may apply more to certain activities in a civilization
than others. For example, many in India might see the domains of music, dance, food,
textile, and oral cultures as having never been entirely colonised, unlike print culture,
education and technology. Visual arts, literary activity, and the large film industry of
the country occupy spaces where the relationship between the indigenous and the adopted
elements may have symbiotically enriched these activities, or alternatively, reduced them
to the level of pastiche. The two processes may also be happening simultaneously.
Identifying these areas, and historicising them are among the tasks of the critic. We hope
the papers at the conference will open up many other ways of looking at the theme from the
perspective of literature and culture not only of India, but the world as well. Papers
focussing on Africa will be specially welcome.
At the Jaipur conference we will have a special session (or two, if the
response is good) on Africa because it is time we initiate the process of getting to know
this part of the world directly, without Anglo-American mediation. In this large and
diverse continent the attempts to address issues that cut across regional differences may
be of special interest to us in India. (See "The Asmara Declaration" on page
6–7).
M M |
