Reference no: EM133627117

Assignment:

Here is a problem: Cesaire says all colonialisms will result in their own Hitler. He then goes on to identify the tendency towards violence and egomania as a result of colonialism that manifests in novelistic characters and has helped to develop European literature as symptomatic of the evils of colonialism. Fine, a little difficult to follow but it makes sense. Characters like Byron are not a lot different in the literary realm than characters like Hitler are in the real world. They each sort of go crazy, but in their crazy allow the dominant narrative to flourish ("the non-crazy" is created to justify the "crazy"). But, such violent characters also exist in post-colonial literature that critiques colonialism.

So the question is, if a critique of colonialism never escapes the aesthetic forms of colonialism (i.e. novelistic hyper-violent characters), can such a critique be effective for change or does the critique actually reinforce the colonialist system? (Please reference one or two of the following: Manmuswak and Mene, Ivan from The Harder they Come, or one of the songs the Dancehall Calypso material.)