Postcolonial Theory & Postmodern Features

 Download as pdf document.

Today the postmodern theory and the postcolonial theory are numbered among the major contemporary discourses. In fact, the two theories share common counter discursive processes, a factor that leads some critics, like Linda Hutcheon, to consider postcolonial theory as a manifestation of postmodernism. However, some other scholars, like Wole Soyinka, disagree totally with this view. For them, the postcolonial theory is distinct and different from the Western theories, modern and ancient. To find a middle ground between these two views, I will argue in this paper that the postcolonial theory is both a continuity of the postmodern theory and a shift from it. The present paper tries to define the two theories. It also puts the emphasis on some of their similarities and differences. As a conclusion, I propose a strategic technique for the postcolonial societies to find a voice within the hybrid atmosphere of postmodernism.

A- Postmodernism and the Postmodern Theory:

Nowadays postmodernism manifest itself in different cultural fields: architecture, literature, photography, cinema, to name but a few. There are two major problems in approaching postmodernism: working out a clear-cut definition and determining distinct principles of its theory. Carolyn Brown indicates that postmodernism refers to “a changed status of knowledge” triggered off by “information technology, and the cumulative transformations in representations in the twentieth century.”¹ Ihab Hassan, one of the most imaginative theorists of postmodernism, states that “he can propose no rigorous definition of it (postmodernism)”² Indeed, this lack of clarity gives birth to a number of postmodernisms³: Frederic Jameson’s postmodernism, a general condition in the contemporary informational regime, Linda Hutcheon’s paradoxical postmodernism of historicity, Sherry Wolf’s postmodernism, gay liberation and so on. No one of these postmodernisms is more appropriate or inappropriate than the others; each one is essentially part of the postmodern project that favors plurality. Trying to find a unitary definition would certainly be a very un-postmodern thing.

Although it can not be defined emphatically, postmodernism, according to Ihab Hassan, can be theorized in order not to be a “derelict cliché” with “no cultural concept”⁴. Ironically, to theorize postmodernism is forcibly to acknowledge its ambiguity and indeterminacy. In his article, “Postmodern Perspective”, Ihab Hassan gives a list of features of postmodern theory. Through a number of examples, he deduces that indeterminacy and ambiguity pervade most of postmodern works in different fields; this ambiguity, as a matter of fact, is the result of favouring fragmentation and antitotalization, hence the use of montage, collage and metonymy. It is also a by-product of the process of denaturalization, or in Ihab Hassan’s term, carnivalization. Concepts of the center like family, capitalism, patriarchy and religion are denaturalized and subverted. Ihab Hassan affirms: “We decanonize culture, demystify knowledge, deconstruct the languages of power, desire, and deceit”.⁵

Equally important, the postmodern theory insists on difference which suggests plurality and heterogeneity. The postmodern difference is both plural and provisional. That is, it exists within challenging discourses as well as against the center. In a postmodern work, this difference is achieved through a set of techniques such as parody, travesty, pastiche and irony. As a result, the old hierarchy of high and low culture completely dissolves in the postmodern discourse. For the sake of setting a difference from the established order, the once- marginalized is now, thanks to postmodern theory, heard and given full credence. According to Ihab Hassan, the postmodern text, verbal and non-verbal, invites performance and participation from everybody. The postmodern discourse, to be sure, is characterized by the multiplicity of voices and dissolution of all canons. A further characteristic of postmodern theory is its rejection of basic spiritual and natural truths and in its emphasis on material and physical pleasure.

B- Postcolonialism and the Postcolonial Theory

In the past, postcolonialism referred to the national culture after the departure of the colonized. But now the term means the culture affected by the intrusion of an imperial power from the moment of colonization up to now. In order to contradict the Western ideological leadership in politics as well as in culture, postcolonial writers put forward a postcolonial theory that aims at rejecting Western universalization and dignifying their national cultures. Dennis Walder defines this theory:

Postcolonial theory is an area of literary cultural study that has come into being as part of the decentering tendency of post-1960s thought in the West. But it was also part of a metropolitan, left-wing response to the increasingly visible and successful struggles for independence of colonized peoples worldwide from the 1950s onwards.⁶

Postcolonial theory has a subversive posture toward the Western canon. This subversion is implemented through different techniques. A number of key themes, such as the theme of celebration of independence, the theme of otherness and the theme of the influence of foreign culture on the life of postcolonial societies, pertain to most postcolonial works. Additionally, the postcolonial discourse gives full weight to the once- neglected and “decentered” by focusing on their achievements in different domains. This new discourse tries to spot out the injustices of the past, practiced by the colonizer. Two main movements are highly active within the field of postcolonialism: The postcolonialist culturalist movement and the postcolonial materialist movement. The former, related to poststructuralist and deconstructuralist views, lays the focus on the flow of immigrants to the West and its result in cultural clashes. The second movement, mainly linked to Marxism, puts the emphasis on the economic problems and the effects of globalization on postcolonial societies.

Edward Said’s Orientalism (1978) marks the real beginning of postcolonial theory. In this book, Said is mainly subversive of how Western cultural domination of other cultures and experiences is processed. In another seminal work entitled Culture and Imperialism (1993), Said urges the postcolonial nations to stop blaming colonialism for what happened to them. They should try to find a distinct voice in the multicultural world, based on toleration, democracy and reconciliation. Nativism, according to Said, reinforces the distinction between “us” and “them”, similar to the way of orientalism. Acting this way, nativism is totally exclusivist. Other works, like Aschcroft’sThe Empire Writes Back, and Ngugi’s Decolonizing the Mind, to name but a few, are also vey influential in theorizing postcolonialism. In fact, a brief survey of some of these works will immediately makes the reader aware of the ruptures that exist in postcolonialism, which are similar, in a sense, to the indeterminacies of postmodern theory.

C- Affinities in the Two Posts

Although they do not share the same historical or ideological backgrounds, postmodern and postcolonial theories reveal some similarities in their techniques. However, their objectives remain the main difference between them.

Both postcolonial and postmodern theories permeate different domains. They do not confine themselves to written materials. Oral media and visual art are also subjects of their interests. Both of them focus on the marginal. They celebrate the culture of minority groups and they dissolve all languages of power. In search of diversity, the two discourses favor difference. Elleke Boehmer sums up the common features between the two:

Postcolonial and postmodern critical approaches cross in their concern with marginality, ambiguity, disintegrating binaries, and all things parodied, piebald, dual, mimicked, borrowed and second-hand.⁷

To question the metropolitan and centric systems of language and thought, the two theories resort to subversion as their overriding principle. Subversion in literary works, for example, is often done through the use of parody, irony and fantasy. Indeed, poststructuralist and deconstructuralist counter discursive strategies intersect in both theories, a factor that is highly contested by some postcolonial critics like Simon During and Wole Soyinka. For them, poscolonial writers “need to define themselves both against the identity given them by the colonial past as well as against international postmodernism.”⁸

D- Differences in the Two Posts

In fact, differences between the two theories are quite obvious. Deconstruction, as an approach, aims at different purposes. For postmodern critics, it is a way to create a mess in the world by virtue of negating the existence natural truths. Unlike the postmdernists, the postcolonial writers seem to have a legitimate rationale behind adopting deconstruction as their main strategy. Their goal is to expose the past errors and to dignify their native cultures. Though they reject the colonial history, postcolonial scholars firmly preserve their own. Equally important, postmodern notions of meaning as arbitrary or of identity as provisional are hardly relevant to postcolonial theory.

Hybridity, an invention of postmodern thought, is viewed as a way out of binary thinking, which permits to destabilize the center. Poscolonial theorists, like Ngugi and Soyinka, think that hybridity is a negative discourse to copy. This idea is further discussed by Homi Bhabha, who defines it as “the sign of the productivity of colonial power”⁹, that results in a hybrid identity or, to borrow his own phrase, “the third space of enunciation”. A group of postcolonialist critics advocate the need to reconsider the notion of this term, which is actually perceived as another way of Western domination. They insist, thus, that postcolonial societies should preserve their own distinct cultural features and reject the myth of universalism. However, some scholars such as Bhabha and Spivak are critical of “the epistemology and politics of cultural nationalism or separatism”^10. They insist on giving respect for both the cultural difference and heterogeneity.

E- Conclusion: A way-out

A common ground between the postmodern theory and the postcolonial theory is their insistence on difference. The move off-center is indeed laudable; and it is highly appreciated by the once-marginalized voice. However, the postmodern theory seems to have no goal and it does not know where it is really leading. The postcolonial theory, on the other hand, is aware of its objectives, but it dwells too much on the past; and some of its radical movements are separatist and even racist (Negritude is a case in point). In Eurocentrism, Samir Amin condemns eurocentrism as anti-universalist because it does not seek to construct possible general laws of human evolution; rather it presents the Western view of the world as the only legitimate and triumphant consciousness. For Amin, Islamic fundamentalist as well as the nationalists act in the same vein. That is, they insist on “the affirmation of irreducible ‘unique traits’ that determine the course of history.”¹¹

Modernity requires from the postcolonial societies to have a sense of optimism and to be active agents in the postmodern project. Through acting as a vehicle for progression and inventing in different domains, the countries of the “periphery” will certainly find a sense of real identity in the postmodern era. Their works should not be characterized by opposition, rather by creativity and competition with the Western thought. Postcolonialists should try to benefit from the West in different fields; following, thus, the steps of some renowned scholars such as Ibn Rushd, Edward Said, Chinua Achebe, to name but a few. These multicultural, not to say postcolonial, theorists dealt with the West; they criticized and learned from its intellectual assumptions.

As a strategic move postcolonial theorists should preserve their cultural identity. They should actually affirm that they are economically and technologically postmodern; but, culturally speaking, they should protect their cultural distinctions. Additionally, having a sense of identity should not be an obstacle in dealing with the Western culture. Having an opened-minded attitude will clearly result in a brave new world that asserts both local independence and global interdependencies.

Notes

1. Brown, Carolyn. “Feminist Literary Strategies in the Posrmodern Condition”. Carr Helen. ed. From My Guy to Science Fiction: Genre and Women’s Writing in the Postmodern. (London: Panda, 1986), 113.
2. Hassan, Ihab. “ Pluralism in Postmodern Perspective” in Critical Inquiry 12 ( Spring 1986) , 503
3. Different postmodernisms are put forward by Brian Mc Hale in his book :

Mac Hale, Brian. Postmodernist Fiction (London and New York: Methuen, 1988), p. 11; quoted in Linda Hutcheon, (The Politics of Postmodernism), 11.

4. Hassan, Ihab. “Pluralism in Postmodern Perspective”. p 504.
5. Ibid. 505
6. Walder, Dennis. Postcolonial Literatures in English. (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1998), 59.
7. Boehmer, Elleke. Colonial and Postcolonial Literature. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 244.
8. Ashcroft, Bill, Gareths Griffths, Helen Tiffin, ed. The Empire Writes Back: Theory and Practice in Postcolonial Literatures. (London and New York: Routledge, 1989), 164.
9. Ashcroft, Bill, Gareths Griffths, Helen Tiffin, ed. The Postcolonial Studies Reader. ( London and New York: Routledge, 1995) , 34
10. Gilbert, Barth Moore. Postcolonial Theory. ( London and New York: Verso, 1997), 191
11. Amin, Samir. Eurocentricism Translated by Russell Moore. ( London and New York: Zed Books, 1988) , 135

Works Cited

1. Amin, Samir. Eurocentricism. London and New York: Zed Books, 1988
2. Ashcroft, Bill, Gareths Griffths, Helen Tiffin, ed. The Empire Writes Back: Theory and Practice in Postcolonial Literatures. London and New York: Routledge, 1989
3. Ashcroft, Bill, Gareths Griffths, Helen Tiffin, ed. The Postcolonial Studies Reader. London and New York: Routledge, 1995
4. Brown, Carolyn. “Feminist Literary Strategies in the Posrmodern Condition”. Carr Helen. ed. From My Guy to Science Fiction: Genre and Women’s Writing in the Postmodern. London: Panda, 1986
5. Boehmer, Elleke.Colonial and Postcolonial Literature. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995
6. Gilbert, Barth Moore. Postcolonial Theory. London and New York: Verso, 1997
7. Hassan, Ihab. “ Pluralism in Postmodern Perspective” In Critical Inquiry 12 Spring 1986
8. Hutcheon, Linda. The Politics of Postmodernism. London and New York: Routledge, 1989
9. Walder, Dennis. Postcolonial Literatures in English. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1998