期刊名称：Researchers World - Journal of Arts Science & Commerce
印刷版ISSN：2229-4686
电子版ISSN：2229-4686
出版年度：2011
卷号：2
期号：4
页码：118-122
出版社：Educational Research Multimedia & Publication
摘要：The paper is an attempt to study V.S. Naipaul's A Bend in the River through the lense of Homi K. Bhabha's concepts like 'mimicry', 'ambivalence' and 'in-betweenness'. The entire postcolonial diasporic literature exhibits mixed feelings through the essential dichotomies marking the lives of ¨¦migr¨¦s. Love-hate relationships, contradictions between 'self' and 'other' native-alien clash of cultures, hybridity, creolisation, nostalgia, mimicking tendency, sense of alienation and ultimate disillusionment prevail throughout the novel in one way or the other. Here, the paper discusses the relevance of Bhabha's perception to understand the typical postcolonial 'halfness' which gets a fair handling in the hands of Naipaul. Seemingly commonplace postcolonial jargon makes it convenient to penetrate deeper into the predicament of the people living their lives in flux. The absurdity of so called civilizing mission is exposed in the novel by satirizing the concept of 'white man's burden'. The natives feel perpetually trapped and shipwrecked in their native land for the destined wretchedness making them embrace borrowed culture, language, fashion and style only to experience ever-prevailing and ever-tormenting ambivalence which destablises their lives in entirety. The research paper intends to explore the theoretical nuances which may be applied in the reading of the novel with special focus on one of the most prominent postcolonial thinker Homi K. Bhabha
关键词：'Mimicry'; 'Ambivalence'; 'hybridity'; 'self'; 'other' and 'civilising mission'. ; var currentpos;timer; function initialize() { timer=setInterval("scrollwindow()";10);} function sc(){clearInterval(timer); }function scrollwindow() { currentpos=document.body.scrollTop; window.scroll(0;++currentpos); if (currentpos != document.body.scrollTop) sc();} document.onmousedown=scdocument.ondblclick=initializeJournal of Arts; Science & Commerce ;¡ö;E-ISSN 2229-4686 ;¡ö;ISSN 2231-4172;International Refereed Research Journal ¡ö ;w;w;w;w;w;w;.;.;r;r;e;e;s;s;e;e;a;a;r;r;c;c;h;h;e;e;r;r;s;s;w;w;o;o;r;r;l;l;d;d;.;.;c;c;o;o;m;m ¡ö Vol.¨C II; Issue ¨C4;Oct. 2011 [119] ;INTRODUCTION: ;In general connotation; 'mimicry' refers to the imitation of one species by another. Webster's New World ;College Dictionary further defines the term as "close resemblance; in colour; form; or behaviour of one ;organism to another or to some object in its environment ¡ it serves to disguise or conceal the organism from ;predators." The disguising of the organism in the process of mimicry brings the term closer to the warfare ;device of camouflaging which; according to Webster's Dictionary; implies "the disguising of troops; ships; ;guns; etc. to conceal them from the enemy; as by the use of paint; nets; or leaves in patterns merging with the ;background." Jacques Lacan establishes the relation between mimicry and camouflage in his essay 'The Line ;and Light": ;Mimcry reveals something in so far as it is distinct from what might be called an itself that is behind. The effect ;of mimicry is camouflage¡. It is not a question of harmonizing with the background; but against a mottled ;background; of becoming mottled¡ª exactly like the technique of camouflage practiced in human warfare. ;(Bhabha 1994: 121) ;Bhabha's analysis of mimicry in his essay 'Of Mimicry and Man' is largely based on the Lacanian vision of ;mimicry as camouflage resulting in colonial ambivalence. He sees the colonizer as a snake in the grass who; ;speaks in "a tongue that is forked;" and produces a mimetic representation that "... emerges as one of the most ;elusive and effective strategies of colonial power and knowledge"(Bhabha 1994: 122). ;In postcolonial studies 'mimicry' is considered as unsettling imitations that are characteristic of postcolonial ;cultures. It is a desire to severe the ties with 'self' in order to move towards 'other'. Salim; the hero of Naipaul's ;A Bend in the River; expresses his penchant for colonial mimicry when he wishes to desert his roots. He says: "I ;wanted to break away. To break away from my family and community also meant breaking away from my ;unspoken commitment...." (Naipaul 1980: 31) ;For Homi K. Bhabha; "colonial mimicry is the desire for a reformed; recognizable 'Other'; as a subject of ;difference that is almost the same; but not quite" (Bhabha1994: 122). He is the foremost contemporary critic ;who has tried to unveil the contradictions inherent in colonial discourse in order to highlight the colonizer's ;ambivalence with respect to his attitude towards the colonized Other and vice versa. He continues: ;The menace of mimicry is its double vision which in disclosing the ambivalence of colonial discourse also ;disrupts its authority. And it is a double vision that is a result of what I've described as the partial ;representation/ recognition of the colonial object. (Bhabha1994: 126) ;However; most of the postcolonial critics agree that it is precisely mimicry that disrupts the colonial discourse ;by double vision; double articulation or the forked tongue. Bhabha finds mimicry to be characterized by ;indeterminacy and a sign of double articulation. The dichotomy between 'self' and 'Other' being most striking ;feature of colonial discourse; he justifies mimicry of the 'Other' because; for a colonial; 'Other' visualizes ;power. Salim acknowledges the significance of powerful 'Other' for the denizens of decolonised African ;colony when he asserts: ;When I was a child Europe ruled my world... Europe no longer ruled. But it still fed us in a hundred ways with ;its language and sent us its increasingly wonderful goods; things which; in the bush of Africa; added year by ;year to our idea of who we were; gave us that idea of our modernity and development; and made us aware of ;another Europe¡ªthe Europe of great cities; great stores; great buildings; great universities. To the Europe only ;the privileged or the gifted among us journeyed. (Naipaul 1980: 246-47) ;It is in this context that Bhabha finds the simple presence of the colonized 'Other' within the colonial discourse ;as sufficient indication of the ambivalence of the colonial text¡ª an ambivalence that destabilizes its claim for ;narcissistic authority through the repetitious slippage; excess or difference. Bill Ashcroft elaborates the ;destabilizing effect of postcolonial mimicry as: "The mimicry of the post-colonial subject is therefore always ;potentially destabilizing to colonial discourse; and locates an area of considerable political and cultural ;uncertainty in the structure of imperial dominance." (Ashcroft 2005: 142) ;In his essay "Of Mimicry and Man: The Ambivalence of Colonial Discourse;" Homi Bhabha locates 'mimicry' ;as one of the most elusive and effective strategies in colonial discourse which centres around civilizing mission ;based on the notion of 'human and not wholly human'. In the pretext of this civilizing mission Charles Grant ;propagates "evangelical system of mission education conducted uncompromisingly in English ;language"(Bhabha1994: 124) in his "Observations on the state of Society among the Asiatic Society among the ;Asiatic Subjects of Great Britain;" (1792) and Macaulay visualizes the bright future for the colonial rule in his ;"Minute on Indian Education" (1835) through "a class of interpreters between us and the millions whom we ;govern¡ªa class of persons Indian in blood and colour but English in tastes; in opinions; in morals and in ;intellect;" (Bhabha 1994: 124-25) in other words the mimic men. ;The elusive reformatory zeal among the colonials referred as "mimic men" by Bhabha and V.S. Naipaul is ;misleading and fatal. These postcolonial mimic men; Bhabha asserts; are authorized versions of otherness; and
