Committed without hope: Miserable postcolonial monks
Monday, November 16, 2009
This piece was sent to me by Johan Thom. ArtHeat is, as always, proud to publish any ideas anyone wishes to share. (Clarification: This piece is by Johan Thom, performance artist, not Johan Thom, university lecturer.)
Today there seems to me a huge problem that appears the moment one actually suggests that contemporary Africa, despite all that has gone wrong there, is actually a place where one can really learn something about humanity.
For one thing, there now exists a host of professional idiots who call themselves 'postcolonial scholars'. These leeches have made their careers based on the fact that contemporary Africa exists only as the bastardized, silent horror that cannot speak of anything but Europe's ongoing failure to deal with its 'others'. These so-called theorists have forgotten that postcolonialism actually starts on the street - that it does not only belong to them and their highfalutin, moral ideas and neat categories but to the people who actually live, work, love, laugh, die and generally have to make sense of these contexts in real time.
These 'theorists' are a bunch of miserable monks who actually have no love or any real hope for Africa to rise from the ashes and say anything of real value (other than regularly reporting the shitty news from the margins). Stuck as they are in their oh-so postmodern discursive frameworks where everything is relative and ultimately disempowering (like the very halls of dis-empowerment they traverse on a daily basis), they simply cannot allow Africa to speak itself as anything more than this. They base this idea on the certainty that the west has in its failed attempt to find something of universal value exhausted all the avenues whilst consciously shitting all over Africa and its people.
Yup, these fuckers will spend their careers in European art, philosophy or literary departments without ever 'setting foot' in Africa again. There they will have stellar careers telling westerners how fucked up they all are and how they have fucked up Africa beyond repair. And pity the poor arsehole that dare challenge this depraved, perverse vision of Africa with something positive. For to do so, to think of contemporary Africa in positive terms and discover something of real human value there today, would mean:
1. they lose the moral right to claim this suffering as uniquely theirs (to speak on behalf of...to represent)
2. and they lose their miserable fucking jobs (who the hell are you representing?)
There are of course people who realize this.
Just take a look at anything the photographer Santu Mofokeng has produced and allow yourself a moment to consider his artworks outside the complacent postcolonial and neo-colonial western framework of Africa-as-godverlate-fuck-all. Mofokeng's work touches a raw nerve left exposed and under-explored by most contemporary theory. That is to say, it cuts through all the bullshit and reminds you of the simple fact that human beings are fallible, vulnerable, hopeful, surprising material creatures that can on the rare occasion also rise above the limited expectations much contemporary discourse has of them.
To make of these rare occasions something more commonplace would require real hope and commitment to something bigger than your own personal ambitions and misery. Hope is of course the something which I would suggest is exactly what most contemporary postcolonial scholars and African politicians no longer have. In a nutshell they are committed without hope: After all, to have hope is to seriously entertain the notion of change (whereas one may be seriously committed to just keeping your kak, hopeless job).
So what I am suggesting is that the most urgent project today is not to ‘re-claim’ knowledge through the ceaseless deconstruction of the west, but rather to claim contemporary Africa in all its diversity as a vibrant space of knowledge production. The former still tacitly acknowledges the west as the sole referent whereas the latter simply views the west as a relational framework - as one amongst many. In short, I am sick and tired of seeing a hand go up every time one speaks about humanity in Africa..."Yes BUT humanity is a 'western construct' and Africa was never included in its scope". I get ok. But to deny that Africans have any concept of humanity by suggesting that it is only through the west that contemporary Africans can understand this idea is tantamount to telling a horse it does not know what a horse is. Kiss my horsey ass.
Also, I should mention that there are a number of African theorists/ scholars/ curators that are addressing the issue with real insight and clarity - Achille Mbembe immediately comes to mind but there are many others.
And no, I will not publish a list of names shaming said miserable monks - it is counterproductive as it will only make them more defensive and stale than they already are.
Today there seems to me a huge problem that appears the moment one actually suggests that contemporary Africa, despite all that has gone wrong there, is actually a place where one can really learn something about humanity.
For one thing, there now exists a host of professional idiots who call themselves 'postcolonial scholars'. These leeches have made their careers based on the fact that contemporary Africa exists only as the bastardized, silent horror that cannot speak of anything but Europe's ongoing failure to deal with its 'others'. These so-called theorists have forgotten that postcolonialism actually starts on the street - that it does not only belong to them and their highfalutin, moral ideas and neat categories but to the people who actually live, work, love, laugh, die and generally have to make sense of these contexts in real time.
These 'theorists' are a bunch of miserable monks who actually have no love or any real hope for Africa to rise from the ashes and say anything of real value (other than regularly reporting the shitty news from the margins). Stuck as they are in their oh-so postmodern discursive frameworks where everything is relative and ultimately disempowering (like the very halls of dis-empowerment they traverse on a daily basis), they simply cannot allow Africa to speak itself as anything more than this. They base this idea on the certainty that the west has in its failed attempt to find something of universal value exhausted all the avenues whilst consciously shitting all over Africa and its people.
Yup, these fuckers will spend their careers in European art, philosophy or literary departments without ever 'setting foot' in Africa again. There they will have stellar careers telling westerners how fucked up they all are and how they have fucked up Africa beyond repair. And pity the poor arsehole that dare challenge this depraved, perverse vision of Africa with something positive. For to do so, to think of contemporary Africa in positive terms and discover something of real human value there today, would mean:
1. they lose the moral right to claim this suffering as uniquely theirs (to speak on behalf of...to represent)
2. and they lose their miserable fucking jobs (who the hell are you representing?)
There are of course people who realize this.
Just take a look at anything the photographer Santu Mofokeng has produced and allow yourself a moment to consider his artworks outside the complacent postcolonial and neo-colonial western framework of Africa-as-godverlate-fuck-all. Mofokeng's work touches a raw nerve left exposed and under-explored by most contemporary theory. That is to say, it cuts through all the bullshit and reminds you of the simple fact that human beings are fallible, vulnerable, hopeful, surprising material creatures that can on the rare occasion also rise above the limited expectations much contemporary discourse has of them.
To make of these rare occasions something more commonplace would require real hope and commitment to something bigger than your own personal ambitions and misery. Hope is of course the something which I would suggest is exactly what most contemporary postcolonial scholars and African politicians no longer have. In a nutshell they are committed without hope: After all, to have hope is to seriously entertain the notion of change (whereas one may be seriously committed to just keeping your kak, hopeless job).
So what I am suggesting is that the most urgent project today is not to ‘re-claim’ knowledge through the ceaseless deconstruction of the west, but rather to claim contemporary Africa in all its diversity as a vibrant space of knowledge production. The former still tacitly acknowledges the west as the sole referent whereas the latter simply views the west as a relational framework - as one amongst many. In short, I am sick and tired of seeing a hand go up every time one speaks about humanity in Africa..."Yes BUT humanity is a 'western construct' and Africa was never included in its scope". I get ok. But to deny that Africans have any concept of humanity by suggesting that it is only through the west that contemporary Africans can understand this idea is tantamount to telling a horse it does not know what a horse is. Kiss my horsey ass.
Also, I should mention that there are a number of African theorists/ scholars/ curators that are addressing the issue with real insight and clarity - Achille Mbembe immediately comes to mind but there are many others.
And no, I will not publish a list of names shaming said miserable monks - it is counterproductive as it will only make them more defensive and stale than they already are.





6 Comments:
This is seriously appalling – to think Thom actually 'lectures' others....
Wouldn't it be awesome if Johan Thom was Australian?
cause then people like you could just ignore what he has to say?
In twenty words or less, can anyone tell me what Thom's point is? Anyone? You in the back...oh, you were just stretching...
'appalling' lol...my grandmother speaks like that. mr roundtree drop your weak ass cyber identity and admit that you are my granny.
a point is normally the end of a sharp stick but in this case its more like a hedgehog...pointy.
(Aw shucks can't we all just get along grrrmpfffha ha ha...granny we really miss you)
careful evwybody... johan thom gettin angwy!!!
Okay, if good ol' Thom, Johan won't show you his (list of monks), I'll show you mine (my list of monks):
Julia Kristeva: that bitch. Seriously. So bodily-fluid-negative. And yet probably doesn't shave her pits. Also, has made me question my use of the phrase 'abject poverty' every time I'm about to use it... A monk in all the worst senses of the word.
Michel Foucault: dead now, and thus leass offensive, but alive he could be a right little ponce. Spending all his hard-earned academia money in S&M clubs and then hastily attributing it to an interest in 'the fluid interplay of power': sure, Michel, we believed you. But now that I think about it, he's not very monk-y...
Roland Barthes: beloved of dewey-eyed girl photography undergrads the world over: something about death and blah, the photograph memorializing blah, and the intangibility of blah. Unbelievably monkish. Yet, boys take note: if you can work Barthes quotes into casual conversation at a party in the 'burbs during first year, there will guaranteed be one girl there who will like you, despite your acne. The rest will, of course, consider you a complete prat. But sometimes it's a numbers game...
Edward Said: exhibits monkish levels of restraint for never having attacked or sued even one of the legions of first years EVERY YEAR who mispronounce his surname 'sed' in their first Postcolonialism tut. Also notably monkish for a program of laudable but ultimately boring criticism of Western ideology as it pertains to the colonies, or 'postcolonies'. Blah. But quite dapper when he's had a haircut.
Okwui Enwezor: terribly monkish, but with a touch of rebellious Afro-rock star about him. Gains points for taking on white South African women artists and their penchant for appropraiting/representing the black female body (Penelope? Pippa? Should we turn this up for you?). Loses points for writing about Africa while residing comfortably in Western academia. Wins points again for great taste in suits (seriously: Google Images him: you'll see what I mean)
Jean Baudrillard: Often called the Pimp of Postmodernism, the late Baudrillard thus cannot be considered at all monkish: pimps cannot be monkish, all women who float are witches, and E=around R100-R150, depending on who you're buying from. However, ol' JB has the distinction of being the sort of thigh-slapping raconteur who would make fun, outrageous claims like 'the first Gulf War never happened'. In that sense, he exhibited a tenuous grasp on reality rivalled only by the Catholic Church, and thus, by association and a certain amount of lateral thinking, could be considered at least partially monk-like.
That's all I've got for now: tune in again soon for my next installment, when we see who is more monk-like: your local priest or your local gallerist from Woodstock. (Hot tip: it's not the priest...)
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home