Part 2
The colonial forms assumed by the new subject of modernity and
the efforts of the modern episteme on the history of colonialism
Week 8: discourse analysis on the African ‘other’
FOUCAULT
There is an opposition between reason and madness. The madman was considered as
having neither truth nor importance, and his words represented the boundary between
reason and madness. The madman was only symbolically allowed to speak in theatre
because there he played the role of truth in a mask. The division between what is true and
what is false has its own discourse, and its own agenda of control.
At the turn of the sixteenth century - the Age of Discovery - there became an obsession
with knowledge and the ‘will to know.’ The emergence of the scientific method brought
about an incentive to observe, measure and classify objects so that knowledge could be
verifiable and useful. Knowledge was the way to truth, and anything that could not be
verified or understood lay outside the bounds of truth. For centuries, Western literature
sought to ground itself as the only true discourse. This is because, as Foucault explains,
is that discovering truth is grounded in the need for power and control. All that appears to
us is the truth conceived as a universal force and we are unaware of it as a machinery
designed to exclude. This procedure of control operates from the exterior and functions
as a system of exclusion, since it puts power and desire at stake. Anything that cant be
defined as truth is excluded from this ‘divine’ truth. External procedures exercise their
own control through classification, ordering and distribution that work to minimise
outliers.
MUDIMBE: THE AFRICAN OTHER
Colonialism and colonisation mean organisation and arrangement. These tended to
organise and transform non-European areas into fundamentally European constructs.
There are three main methods for colonial organisation: 1) procedures of acquiring,
distributing and exploiting lands in colonies; 2) the policies of domesticating natives; and
3) the manner of managing ancient organisations and implementing new modes of
production
Colonialism was believed to be the best method of fostering growth, and this discourse
suggests that colonialism was the best thing that could have happened to the African
continent. However the outcome of colonial organisation was that of underdevelopment
everywhere colonialism occurred. The capitalist world system is such that parts of the
system always develop at the expense of other parts, either by trade or the transfer of
surpluses. The underdevelopment of dependencies is not only an absence of
, development, but also an organisational structure created under colonialism by bringing
non-western territory into the capitalist world. And despite their economic potential,
dependencies lack the structural capacity for autonomy and sustained growth since their
economic fate is largely determined by the developed countries. Because of the colonial
structure, a dichotomising system has developed: traditional versus modern; oral versus
written; subsistence economies versus highly productive economies. The colonial
structure trivialised the whole traditional model of life, and the mere presence of this
‘lesser’ culture was a reason for the rejection of unadapted persons and confused minds.
Lifestyles and modes of thinking of the dominant nations tend to impose themselves on
the dominated nations. Moreover they are accepted - even sought after. This kind of
colonial organisation manifested itself in underdeveloped countries that characteristically
have high birth rates, illiteracy, economic disparities, dictatorial regimes functioning under
the cathartic name of democracy, demographic imbalances etc.
This marginality can also be understood through the organisation and classification of
beings and societies. The colonising structure organised society such that white people
were understood within the realms of reason, and black people were not. Doing this
excluded the African from modernity and the way they were portrayed and treated was a
reflection of the belief that they sat outside of society. White people were often given the
opportunity to give a portrayal of Africans without having ever seen or interacted with a
black person before. This gave them total freedom to create a person through their own
vision. This led to African bodies being portrayed as lesser than whites in terms of their
savagery or stupidity. Ignorance bred hate, and that hate bred ignorance. It was important
to the colonial structure to create the African as an ‘other’ because this meant they could
be exploited without question. Colonies were of value only insofar as they brought
material benefits to the mother country. The African was stripped of all human complexity
and reduced to a uniform set of traits. If the African could be seen as non-human, then
exploitation was acceptable - even helpful - because it brought the African into the
modern world, and allowed the African to share what the West had to offer. The scientific
method and ‘science’ - as it were - were used to justify the difference between the African
and the European. Since the modern period was so reliant on science, this was taken as
an absolute fact. The African became not only the Other who is everyone except me, but
rather the key to which, in their abnormal differences, specifies the identity of the Same.
There was the belief that scientifically there was nothing to learn from ‘them’ unless it was
already ‘ours’ or comes from ‘us.’
Religion was a major weapon of control, and Africans often questioned why missionaries
were so adamant about sharing the ‘Lords word’ in Africa compared to their apparent
apathy in the West. This was because religion was indoctrination and a method of control.
PETERSON
The perverted colonial logic demanded that the pasts of the natives be distorted,
disfigured and destroyed. It was by taking hold of the African’s body that his or her soul
The colonial forms assumed by the new subject of modernity and
the efforts of the modern episteme on the history of colonialism
Week 8: discourse analysis on the African ‘other’
FOUCAULT
There is an opposition between reason and madness. The madman was considered as
having neither truth nor importance, and his words represented the boundary between
reason and madness. The madman was only symbolically allowed to speak in theatre
because there he played the role of truth in a mask. The division between what is true and
what is false has its own discourse, and its own agenda of control.
At the turn of the sixteenth century - the Age of Discovery - there became an obsession
with knowledge and the ‘will to know.’ The emergence of the scientific method brought
about an incentive to observe, measure and classify objects so that knowledge could be
verifiable and useful. Knowledge was the way to truth, and anything that could not be
verified or understood lay outside the bounds of truth. For centuries, Western literature
sought to ground itself as the only true discourse. This is because, as Foucault explains,
is that discovering truth is grounded in the need for power and control. All that appears to
us is the truth conceived as a universal force and we are unaware of it as a machinery
designed to exclude. This procedure of control operates from the exterior and functions
as a system of exclusion, since it puts power and desire at stake. Anything that cant be
defined as truth is excluded from this ‘divine’ truth. External procedures exercise their
own control through classification, ordering and distribution that work to minimise
outliers.
MUDIMBE: THE AFRICAN OTHER
Colonialism and colonisation mean organisation and arrangement. These tended to
organise and transform non-European areas into fundamentally European constructs.
There are three main methods for colonial organisation: 1) procedures of acquiring,
distributing and exploiting lands in colonies; 2) the policies of domesticating natives; and
3) the manner of managing ancient organisations and implementing new modes of
production
Colonialism was believed to be the best method of fostering growth, and this discourse
suggests that colonialism was the best thing that could have happened to the African
continent. However the outcome of colonial organisation was that of underdevelopment
everywhere colonialism occurred. The capitalist world system is such that parts of the
system always develop at the expense of other parts, either by trade or the transfer of
surpluses. The underdevelopment of dependencies is not only an absence of
, development, but also an organisational structure created under colonialism by bringing
non-western territory into the capitalist world. And despite their economic potential,
dependencies lack the structural capacity for autonomy and sustained growth since their
economic fate is largely determined by the developed countries. Because of the colonial
structure, a dichotomising system has developed: traditional versus modern; oral versus
written; subsistence economies versus highly productive economies. The colonial
structure trivialised the whole traditional model of life, and the mere presence of this
‘lesser’ culture was a reason for the rejection of unadapted persons and confused minds.
Lifestyles and modes of thinking of the dominant nations tend to impose themselves on
the dominated nations. Moreover they are accepted - even sought after. This kind of
colonial organisation manifested itself in underdeveloped countries that characteristically
have high birth rates, illiteracy, economic disparities, dictatorial regimes functioning under
the cathartic name of democracy, demographic imbalances etc.
This marginality can also be understood through the organisation and classification of
beings and societies. The colonising structure organised society such that white people
were understood within the realms of reason, and black people were not. Doing this
excluded the African from modernity and the way they were portrayed and treated was a
reflection of the belief that they sat outside of society. White people were often given the
opportunity to give a portrayal of Africans without having ever seen or interacted with a
black person before. This gave them total freedom to create a person through their own
vision. This led to African bodies being portrayed as lesser than whites in terms of their
savagery or stupidity. Ignorance bred hate, and that hate bred ignorance. It was important
to the colonial structure to create the African as an ‘other’ because this meant they could
be exploited without question. Colonies were of value only insofar as they brought
material benefits to the mother country. The African was stripped of all human complexity
and reduced to a uniform set of traits. If the African could be seen as non-human, then
exploitation was acceptable - even helpful - because it brought the African into the
modern world, and allowed the African to share what the West had to offer. The scientific
method and ‘science’ - as it were - were used to justify the difference between the African
and the European. Since the modern period was so reliant on science, this was taken as
an absolute fact. The African became not only the Other who is everyone except me, but
rather the key to which, in their abnormal differences, specifies the identity of the Same.
There was the belief that scientifically there was nothing to learn from ‘them’ unless it was
already ‘ours’ or comes from ‘us.’
Religion was a major weapon of control, and Africans often questioned why missionaries
were so adamant about sharing the ‘Lords word’ in Africa compared to their apparent
apathy in the West. This was because religion was indoctrination and a method of control.
PETERSON
The perverted colonial logic demanded that the pasts of the natives be distorted,
disfigured and destroyed. It was by taking hold of the African’s body that his or her soul
