What happens when French authors start to write about colonialism and its discontents... and when they write about the marginalization of those exotic cultures that are affected by French dominion?
Edward J. Hughes explores the tensions that arise in the works of six modern French writers: Pierre Loti, Paul Gauguin, Proust, Montherlant, Camus, and Jean Genet. In the "Introduction," he explains that his "chosen authors explore, anecdotally or theoretically, an often anxious exoticism, drawing out the social, ethical and sensual tensions that this anxiety entails."
Marginality was their subject. They wrote about cultures that were (and are) exotic in some way. Of course, it wasn't exactly the exoticism that made the culture and people marginalized. Hughes explains that "marginal cultures are perceived as deviant, foreign, dark, impenetrable, and Other... " It was this very perception of "otherness" and deviance that these writers attempted to shatter with their words.
Their works sometimes took on the "documentary function," as Loti and others charted "the massive colonial expansion that facilitates exoticism." In 1869, Loti decried "the remains of a powerful nation that today succumbs," though his dramatic accounts of the death of thousands of French soldiers were silenced.
Although Loti spoke eloquently about "the disfigurement of local culture," instances of racism can be found in his fiction. Hughes later says that "within late nineteenth-century French culture, we have these eccentric, ambiguous voices, decrying colonial excesses while simultaneously articulating the crude prejudice of their day."
Marginality was their subject. They wrote about cultures that were (and are) exotic in some way. Of course, it wasn't exactly the exoticism that made the culture and people marginalized. Hughes explains that "marginal cultures are perceived as deviant, foreign, dark, impenetrable, and Other... " It was this very perception of "otherness" and deviance that these writers attempted to shatter with their words.
Their works sometimes took on the "documentary function," as Loti and others charted "the massive colonial expansion that facilitates exoticism." In 1869, Loti decried "the remains of a powerful nation that today succumbs," though his dramatic accounts of the death of thousands of French soldiers were silenced.
Although Loti spoke eloquently about "the disfigurement of local culture," instances of racism can be found in his fiction. Hughes later says that "within late nineteenth-century French culture, we have these eccentric, ambiguous voices, decrying colonial excesses while simultaneously articulating the crude prejudice of their day."
Of course, writers are human. We don't like to think about the contradictions that can be found during the course of any great body of work, but many inconsistencies can usually be found. In studying the prejudices that these writers had, we are able to gain "access to the late nineteenth-century colonialist mind-set."
We also see how the writers constructed themselves. Gauguin, for instance, exiled himself from Europe. In leaving, he said: "I leave to find tranquility, to be rid of the burden of civilization... I need to immerse myself in virgin nature, see only savages, live as they do, with no other preoccupation than to render, as a child would, the conceptions of my brain with the sole aid of primitive means of art... which are the only true ones."
As Hughes explains, "Colonialism provides opportunities for extravagant myth-making." It all appears to be part of some age-old story. In 1930, Montherlant wrote, "The colonies are made to be lost. They are born with the cross of death on their forehead." It's as though the ending was known before the story every began.
If the fate of the colonies is set, at least there are pleasant moments along the way. Montherlant writes, in "La Rose de sable," "Often the vibration of the flute... hangs over the city as it sleeps... You feel that all is not lost."
We also see how the writers constructed themselves. Gauguin, for instance, exiled himself from Europe. In leaving, he said: "I leave to find tranquility, to be rid of the burden of civilization... I need to immerse myself in virgin nature, see only savages, live as they do, with no other preoccupation than to render, as a child would, the conceptions of my brain with the sole aid of primitive means of art... which are the only true ones."
As Hughes explains, "Colonialism provides opportunities for extravagant myth-making." It all appears to be part of some age-old story. In 1930, Montherlant wrote, "The colonies are made to be lost. They are born with the cross of death on their forehead." It's as though the ending was known before the story every began.
If the fate of the colonies is set, at least there are pleasant moments along the way. Montherlant writes, in "La Rose de sable," "Often the vibration of the flute... hangs over the city as it sleeps... You feel that all is not lost."
Hughes ends his discussion by saying: "Nostalgia, uneasiness, curiosity, and transracial fantasy are no substitute for relationality, nor are they preludes to it. Yet the authors considered here articulate important ambiguities that both define colonialism's culture and holds a capacity to dismantle it."
If all is not lost, then there must be some bit of hope. Perhaps, there is a way to resist fate, to change the course of history.
If all is not lost, then there must be some bit of hope. Perhaps, there is a way to resist fate, to change the course of history.
