Post-colonial Theory

Fanon; Said; Bhabha; Bhabha; Young

The study of post-colonialism helps to reveal the hidden structures that continue to reference themselves as they organise and legitimise thoughts and discourse. The danger of post-colonialism is that many believe it is the study of what was. They fail to realize the depth to which post-colonialism has shaped their very approach to the subject – and subjects - they are studying.

The study of post-colonialism is one of subtlety as it involves the study of the psyche, and thus of the structure of an individual. To study post-colonialism is to look into the psyche of the created other, whether the other is the creation of the subjected or the creation by the subjected of the subject.

With post-colonialism, both sides of humanity are necessarily dealing with creations/ illusions before they come into the contact with the individual, who may forever remain elusive if that individual does not survive intact the de-veiling of their psyche. This fear may be what stops individuals from exploring further, preferring out of fear to remain comfortably couched in the upper echelons of post-colonial thought that allow the thinker to seem enlightened as he holds onto an identity into which much has been invested and without which too much would be feared to be lost. The presence of this fear best highlights Bhabha’s opinon that theory is the indispensable backbone to politics as well as post-colonial studies because it provides a guiding line of thought in an area littered with potential pitfalls and unintentional slides back into the comfortable framework of colonial thinking.

Bhabha also speaks of hybridity, of how there is no unity within a nation because a nation, particularly one such as India, is composed of so many elements that unite to form the country. Hybrid best addresses that which comprises nations. And hybrid helps to describe an aspect of post-colonialism and why it may be so elusive to fully grasp, especially from the perspective of the subjected.

Is not the aim of post-colonial studies to try to make former colonialists and their descendants understand what was wrought under their reign? And to make descendants of subjects understand what has happened, to open their eyes? The opening of eyes can create anger at the past, and at what may still be happening in the present. This is, it would seem, the most sensitive aspect of post-colonialism: addressing its reach into the present and beyond. It is the insistence upon addressing this aspect that can send descendants of one-time colonialists back into themselves, shutters down, for self-protection.