jm coetzee atwell

8/17/2019 JM Coetzee Atwell

1/57

Attwell, David. J.M. Coetzee: South Africa and the Politics ofWriting. Berkeley Cape Town: University of California Press David Philip, c199 199. http:!!ark.cdli".or#!ark:!1$$!ft%k&$$'(!

Introduction

) 1 ) *. +. Coetee-s rst si/ novels constit0te a for of postodern etactionthat declines the c0lt of the erely relativist and artf0l. Coetee hasa"sor"ed the lessons of odern lin#0istics2the te/t0al t0rn instr0ct0ralis and poststr0ct0ralis2yet serio0sly addresses the ethicaland political stresses of livin# in, and with, a partic0lar historical locale,that of conteporary 3o0th Africa. This "ook is an acco0nt of thatachieveent.Despite the acclai that Coetee has received, "oth in 3o0th Africa ando0tside it, his ction has "een slow to attract s0stained critical attention.[1]

This is as tr0e in 3o0th Africa as it is elsewhere: in 3o0th Africa the sheerpower of the novels and2to an ear trained in the coforta"le an#lophoneand positivist conversation of the 3o0th African li"eral tradition2thestran#eness of their idio see to have warned away anycoentators, certainly those of Coetee-s own #eneration. A chan#ecae in the early to id4195$s, when a n0"er of essays esta"lished acertain consens0s on the 6eft. Altho0#h it was "y no eans waterti#ht, it

held that Coetee was a philosophical idealist whose ction #raphicallyportrayed the "reak0p of the doinatin#, rationalist s0"7ect of colonialis"0t who o8ered2dependin# on where the ar#0ent was #ro0nded2neither an analysis of the play of historical forces nor a oral anchor inthe search for a h0ane response to colonialis and apartheid.[2]

) )n 1955 the rst f0ll4len#th st0dy appeared, Teresa Dovey-s The Novels of

J. M. Coetzee: Lacanian Allegories.[3] Dovey ade it possi"le to speak

properly of a critical de"ate; she challen#ed previo0s readin#s in astron#ly theoretical disco0rse that showed, aon# other thin#s, that thechar#es "ro0#ht a#ainst Coetee were "lind to the strate#ies eployed inthe novels, and in partic0lar that the parodic, alle#orical, anddeconstr0ctive tendencies of the ction had never "een ade(0atelyreco#nied. n her relocation of the novels in a eld desi#nated , Dovey was a"le to ake the startlin#"0t 70stia"le clai that the novels possessed a preeptive theoreticalsophistication that disared the critics in advance. After Dovey-s

intervention it is no lon#er possi"le to i#nore the novels- disc0rsivecople/ity and self4conscio0sness.

http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft5k4006q3&chunk.id=nsd0e47&toc.id=endnotes&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e55#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft5k4006q3&chunk.id=nsd0e47&toc.id=endnotes&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e58#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft5k4006q3&chunk.id=nsd0e47&toc.id=endnotes&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e58#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft5k4006q3&chunk.id=nsd0e47&toc.id=endnotes&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e65#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft5k4006q3&chunk.id=nsd0e47&toc.id=endnotes&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e58#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft5k4006q3&chunk.id=nsd0e47&toc.id=endnotes&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e65#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft5k4006q3&chunk.id=nsd0e47&toc.id=endnotes&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e55#X


2/57

ncisive as Dovey-s criti(0e was, it was also the victi of its ownstren#ths, for in ar#0in# a#ainst a naively referential view of novelisticdisco0rse, Dovey sees to have erred on the other e/tree. n her st0dyCoetee-s novels are alle#ories of 6acanian theory, ill0strations of a

0niversaliin# disco0rse on the self and its residence within lan#0a#e. f,as Coetee o"7ected in an address at a "ook fair in Cape Town in 195?,historicist criticis t0rns ction into a and, on theother, those responsive to postodernis and poststr0ct0ralis, to whoCoetee, ost nota"ly in Foe sees to have 0ch to provide.[5]

owever, as Dovey herself later pointed o0t, s0ch polariation is false, for


3/57

political disco0rses of 3o0th Africa in the 19?$s and 195$s.Altho0#h Coetee respects the clais of "oth ree/ivity and historicity, hedoes not seek a ediatin# or ne0tral role in the eld of c0lt0ral politics.Behind the narrative s0"7ects of each of the novels, "ehind 0#ene Dawn,

*aco"0s Coetee, +a#da, the +a#istrate, the +edical Ecer, 30sanBarton, and lia"eth C0rren, lies an iplied narrator who shirts stancewith and a#ainst the play of forces in 3o0th African c0lt0re. n other words,Coetee-s #0rin# of the tension "etween te/t and history is itself ahistorical act, one that 0st "e read "ack into the disco0rses of 3o0thAfrica where one can discern its ill0inatin# power. Fe i#ht call thisnarrator the self4of4writin#, or the


4/57

s0"se(0ent appointent as professor of literat0re at the 3tate Universityof @ew Hork at B08alo. Fith this "ack#ro0nd Coetee ret0rned to 3o0thAfrica in 19?1and "e#an p0"lishin# ction that not only draws on the0ropean herita#e2in partic0lar, on novelists of hi#h odernis and

early postodernis, nota"ly Iafka, Beckett, @a"okov, and Jo""e4Krillet2"0t that also contin0es to participate in soe of the a7or intellect0alc0rrents of the Fest fro the 19'$s to the present, fro the Choskyanrevol0tion in lin#0istics to Continental str0ct0ralis and, nally, topoststr0ct0ralis. t is perhaps too easily for#otten now that in the earlyto id419?$s certain Festern intellect0al disco0rses o8ered to 3o0thAfricans the possi"ility of co#ent and li"eratin# criti(0es of localconditions. Lor this reason the followin# chapter ends with a "riefdescription of this oent in 3o0th African intellect0al life and of theplace of &us'lands within it.n 3o0th Africa, however, Coetee writes not as a citien of the Lirst Forld"0t of the Third2or perhaps the Lirst within the Third2and therefore, likeother white 3o0th African writers, he faces the pro"le of c0lt0rala0thority. Bl0ntly p0t, his relationship with the 0ropean canon entails anacc0sation of coplicity in a history of doination. Coetee-s response tothis sit0ation is to interro#ate the specic for of ar#inality herepresents. Altho0#h it is tr0e that his novels are no0rished "y theirrelationship with canonical Festern literat0re, it is e(0ally tr0e thatthro0#h his coplicated postcoloniality he "rin#s that sit0ation to

) % )li#ht and nds ctional fors wherein it can "e o"7ectied, naed, and(0estioned. As Derek Attrid#e correctly p0ts it, speakin# of Foe:A ode of ction that e/poses the ideolo#ical "asis of canoniation, thatdraws attention to its own relation to the e/istin# canon, that theatiesthe role of race, class, and #ender in the processes of c0lt0ral acceptanceand e/cl0sion, and that, while speakin# fro a ar#inal location,addresses the (0estion of ar#inality2s0ch a ode of ction wo0ld have

to "e seen as en#a#ed in an attept to "reak the silence in which soany are ca0#ht, even if it does so "y literary eans that havetraditionally "een cele"rated as characteriin# canonic art. =1?>n Foe Lriday-s enforced silence represents what a onoc0lt0ral,etropolitan disco0rse cannot hear; "0t the silence also overwhels andcloses the novel itself, in an act of a0thorial deference on Coetee-s part.Lriday-s silence is therefore not only the ark of Coetee-s 0nwillin#nessto receive the canon as the nat0ral "reath of life; it is also the ark ofhistory, and the ark of 3o0th Africa, in the te/t of a novel that

scr0p0lo0sly acknowled#es its own liited a0thority. This st0dy addresses the developental feat0res of Coetee-s writin#.


5/57

&us'lands and (n the )eart of the Countr$ are paired as the early ction;Life and Ti/es of Michael 0 and Foe as the later. Waiting for the+ar,arians is treated as the pivotal te/t in the corp0s as it c0rrentlystands. Broadly speakin#, the early ction constit0tes an attack on the

rationalist, doinatin# self of colonialis and iperialis. n &us'lands the criti(0e involves a "itter parody of scientic o"7ectivity, of positivisthistorical disco0rses and narratives of e/ploration; (n the )eart of theCountr$ e/aines the ontolo#ical conse(0ences of settlercolonialis-slack of social reciprocity. Both early novels ake 0se of a teleolo#y ofdecoloniation to frae their criti(0es: "y e/tension, Waiting for the+ar,arians deals with the oent of the end, presentin# a state of froenanticipation that "oth s0"verts the seiotic s0pports of pire and0nderines the transcendental s0"7ect of istory. +ar,arians also "e#insthe process where"y the liitations of white 3o0th African a0thorship aredraatied, tho0#h this draatiation is developed f0lly only in the laterction, where Coetee deals with the sit0ation of writin# in 3o0th Africa,writin#, that is, in a crisis of a0thority. The lo#ic of this developent, frothe seiotic ephasis of Waiting for the +ar,arians is plain: whereas Lifeand Ti/es of Michael 0 e/plores the freedo of te/t0ality, or ofte/t0aliin#, Foe e/aines the

) ' )conditions #overnin# this freedo "y historiciin# the within the

disc0rsive conditions o"tainin# in 3o0th Africa2what call its state ofcolonial postcolonialis. concl0de with a "rief disc0ssion of Age of (ron which is "oth a s0ation of these trends and a depart0re fro the.Coetee sees to have won thro0#h to a position of "ein# e/plicit a"o0t3o0th Africa and its o"sessions, ore so, it sees, than at any earliersta#e of his career; $et Age of (ron is also a"o0t death, a"o0t writin#thro0#h and after death: we receive lia"eth C0rren-s narrative of 3o0thAfrica only once she herself has perished in her own, and the nation-s, a#eof iron.

The


6/57

Crusoe.

n these readin#s ake selective forays into relevant areas of literarytheory and draw, wherever appropriate, fro Coetee-s own nonctionalwritin#s in stylistics, etropolitan and 3o0th African literary criticis,

political 7o0rnalis, interviews, and essays and reviews on pop0larc0lt0re. Jeaders who have "ecoe acc0stoed to the notion thatCoetee-s ction represents a for of alle#oried theory will nd here adi8erent ephasis; altho0#h he does "orrow li"erally fro theoreticalso0rces, the in0ences on his work are as often, and soeties oredecisively, literary rather than strictly theoretical. The essays in stylisticsand criticis provide especially 0sef0l keys to 0nderstandin# thesein0ences. Dovey is correct to say that


7/57

s0"itted to the University of Te/as a stylistic analysis of the n#lishction of 3a0el Beckett. Toward the end of the dissertation he identiesin Watt two indications of Beckett-s dissatisfaction with n#lish, warnin#si#ns of his forthcoin# decision to t0rn to Lrench. They are


8/57

pro"le is coplicated f0rther "y the fact that Coetee adits to "ein# alin#0ist "efore "ein# a writer and speaks of a creative relationship"etween these f0nctions.[3] n the era of str0ct0ralis-s ascendancy in theFest, an intellect0al alle#iance s0ch as Coetee-s involves far ore than

siply "ein# self4conscio0s a"o0t the nat0re of one-s edi0; it alsoinvolves workin# into ction nothin# less than the notion that lan#0a#e isa priary, constit0tive eleent of conscio0sness and of c0lt0re at lar#e.owever, thro0#h Coetee-s writin# and its historical placeent, theseodern Festern intellect0al c0rrents ow into the t0r"0lent waters ofcolonialis and apartheid. The conse(0ence is a ctional oe0vre of0n0s0al cople/ity, an oe0vre in which narrative disco0rse and socialconict str0##le for a0thority, in which ethical (0estions fastentenacio0sly to fors of ree/ive play that elsewhere see to have ade avirt0e of relativis, and in which, nally, the Fest confronts the liits ofits own disc0rsive powers, even its powers of s0"version, historiciation,and displaceent.!e "e#ate On $ealis%

Coetee cannot "e conned to any partic0lar tradition of lin#0istics orlin#0istically infored literary theory. is "rief eoir on his e/perienceas a #rad0ate st0dent at Te/as, his p0"lished notes on writin#, and

) 11 )his lin#0istic and critical essays reveal interests that incl0de historical

lin#0istics, #enerative #raar, stylistics, Continental str0ct0ralis andseiotics, translation =fro D0tch, Keran, and Afrikaans to n#lish>, anddeconstr0ction. The lin#0istic4systeic orientation of his novels involvesthe reco#nition, rooted in all lin#0istic in(0iry, that lan#0a#e is prod0ctive,that


9/57

Whirl2ind and +on#ane 3erote-s To 5ver$ +irth (ts +lood in "oth of whichCoetee nds


10/57

sol0tions that have an iplicitly pro#ressive social herene0tic. Coetee-srespect for 6a K0a and his #rasp of realis-s episteolo#ical liitationsconc0r: in leanin# toward social realis, 6a K0a at least acknowled#es atradition, 0nlike the


11/57

e/istin# in tension with other disco0rses of the oent that are also theprod0cts of history and the "earers of c0lt0re. n ters of s0ch a position,one will therefore ask not what is the proper self4denition of a writer "0t,rather, what fors of self4denition are availa,le within the c0lt0re2

availa"le, that is, to the 2riter whose relationship to society rests on theway in which he or she transits the disco0rses of ction.&ro% $e'resentation o (arration

Coetee is ore concerned, then, with narrative and its relation to otherdisco0rses than he is with representation per se. owever, 70st asKordier cannot "e acc0sed of "ein# narrowly realist, neither canCoetee "e placed on one side of the theoretical conict "etween

) 1& )te/t0ality and historicity. Despite the disc0rsive orientation of his ction, italso esta"lishes a historical narrative, one that is provided "y the essentialconte/t of colonialis in each of Coetee-s novels. e has spoken a"o0tpreferrin#


12/57

te/t0al=Political 9nconscious %>2then (0alied fors of freedo i#ht"e discovera"le in the 2riting of it. This ar#inal freedo, which is af0nction of te/t0aliin#, is sta#ed in Michael 0 and later placed in (0estionin Foe.

n hindsi#ht one can see that Coetee-s str0##le has always "een to ndappropriate points of entry into the narrative of colonialis for the specicinterventions of which a self4conscio0sly ctional disco0rse is capa"le. That this sho0ld have "een and contin0es to "e a str0##le

) 1% )res0lts fro the #eneral insistence in 3o0th African c0lt0ral politics thatwriters provide the solace of tr0th, of political faith, not ctive irritants,one i#ht say, which leave readers with fewer defenses a#ainst thecollective tra0a they inha"it. nly recently has Coetee "e#0n to speake/plicitly =and with soe diEc0lty> of this str0##le. n his Wee'l$ Mail Book Feek address of 195? he deonstrates how sharply he feels theprevailin# episteolo#ical tensions:


13/57

>6et e clarify why Coetee sho0ld "e so clinically artic0late on this(0estion. The polar opposite of Coetee-s position in the c0lt0ral politics of the period 195%S195?, the rst two years of the 3tates of er#ency and

the years iediately precedin# the address, wo0ld "e the


14/57

priacy, clai to "e a aster4for of disco0rse, 70st as, inevita"ly, peoplelike yself will defend theselves "y sayin# that history is nothin# "0t acertain kind of story that people a#ree to tell each other2that, as Don0i/ote ar#0ed so pers0asively "0t in the end so vainly, the a0thority of

history lies siply in the consens0s it coandsQ see a"sol0tely noreason why, even in the 3o0th Africa of the 195$-s, we sho0ld a#ree toa#ree that thin#s are otherwise. =

) 1? )Coetee does not share the seein# a"andonent of deconstr0ction-s iln8$ a %as de hors te#te rather, the clai is closer to the *aesonian ideathat history is not availa"le for direct representation. The risks involved in/a'ing this clai, however, are on the s0rface: the ar#0ent-s a0thorityrests in the fact that Coetee knows e/actly what he is 0p a#ainst.[6]

t is Coetee-s ri#ht to defend his position, of co0rse, "0t there coes apoint at which one wonders a"o0t the costs of s0ch poleic, whether ito"sc0res points of contact "etween the polaried e/trees and, still oredaa#in#ly, o"sc0res the fors of historicity that do, in fact, operate inCoetee-s own ction. A#ainst the drift of Coetee-s ar#0ent, therefore, shall e/plore the relationship "etween history and ction in theoreticalters that see to "e appropriate for the kind of ction Coetee-s novelsact0ally represent. do so in the "elief that if 3o0th African conditionsprod0ce what sees to "e an ipasse at the level of c0lt0ral poleic, it is

reasona"le to look o0tside the conte/t for reso0rces where"y the conictcan "e ree/ained.)ituational *eta+ction

The pro"le now confrontin# 0s can "e dened sharply: is the t0rn towardte/t0ality in Coetee a t0rnin# away fro historyG t is priarily, in otherwords, a (0estion of reference. ayden Fhite descri"es this (0estion as


15/57

e/istence of the referent is not (0estioned; in the case of ction, referenceis present, siply, in a (0alied for: it is , scr0tinies with soe skepticis Oladiir @a"okov-s iplicit clais inPale Fire to "e a"le to preept interpretation and assert the liitlessnessof ctional irrorin# =


16/57

can "e s0"stantiated "y a "rief e/aination of the historical

) 19 )thees developed "y the Pra#0e 3chool in its e/tended in(0iry into

si#nication. Altho0#h the Pra#0e 3chool never for0lated a theory ofliterary history or literat0re in history per se, L. F. Kalan asse"les one onits "ehalf in )istoric Structures showin# it to have eer#ed iplicitly inthe co0rse of the school-s work over a twenty4year period. The sta#es inthe developent of the theory are as follows: =1> there was an attept toresolve the apparent incopati"ility "etween historical and str0ct0rallin#0istics, diachrony and synchrony, inherited fro 3a0ss0re; => havin#reconciled str0ct0ral lin#0istics with the phenoenon of lin#0istic chan#e,the ne/t step was to e/tend this approach to the (0estion of literaryevol0tion; => a concept0al and ethodolo#ical "reak developed at thispoint fro foralis to seiotics proper, after which the Pra#0e 3choollooked "eyond literary ianence to the relationships "etween literaryand other, social str0ct0res; =&> nally, attention was paid to the (0estionof reception. The sta#e that initially concerns 0s here is =>, at which point there was anattept, lar#ely "y *an +0karovsky, to reen#a#e the pro"le ofsi#nication fro the point of view of its location 2ithin the aestheticfunction. The position inherited fro *ako"son was that the si#n inliterat0re is self4referential; conse(0ently, it o"str0cts reference to reality.

This position was refor0lated to accoodate the insi#ht that in orderfor the si#n to operate as a si#n within a co0nicative conte/t, areferent 0st "e present; the pro"le was therefore to 0nderstand theparado/ "etween the a0tonoo0s and co0nicative feat0res of thework. +0karovsky resolved this parado/ "y showin# that the literary si#nhad a special way of pointin# to reality that preserves the specicity of theaesthetic f0nction: its reference was o"li(0e and etaphorical. B0t o0t ofthis o"servation coes the ore si#nicant and ill0inatin# parado/:precisely "eca0se the referents of si#ns in poetic lan#0a#e have no

e/istential val0e2since these si#ns are directed at nothin#


17/57

) $ )n its theoriation, then, of si#nication and the concretiation of eanin#in reception, the Pra#0e 3chool wo0ld see to have anticipated theco0rse of later coentaries on ree/ive narrative. B0t to coplete this

e/c0rs0s: fro s0ch threads of narrative and seiotic theory it appearsthat one co0ld le#itiately speak of a situational /eta3ction. This wo0ld"e a ode of ction that draws attention to the historicity of disco0rses,to the way s0"7ects are positioned within and "y the, and, nally, to theinterpretive process, with its acts of contestation and appropriation. fco0rse, all these thin#s have a re#ional and teporal specicity. [-]

.ost%odernis% and .ostcolonialis%

Any disc0ssion of etaction today 0st pay soe attention to what has"ecoe known internationally as the postodernis de"ate. This isessentially an ar#0ent over the political stat0s of what *ean4Lranois6yotard calls postodernis-s . The ar#0ent have cond0cted th0s far, on the relationship "etweenree/ivity and historicity, iplicitly adopts a position in this de"ate, onethat shares with 6inda 0tcheon a certain re#ard for the . +y acco0nt of Coetee-s ction, however, to0ches onthe (0estion of postodernis only in /edias res for altho0#h Coetee-soe0vre draws si#nicantly on odernis and its le#acy, its stren#th liesprecisely in his a"ility to test its a"sorption in 0ropean traditions in the

ethically and politically fra0#ht arena of 3o0th Africa. The pro"le, inother words, is to 0nderstand Coetee-s postodernis in the li#ht of hispostcoloniality.ere we r0n iediately into diEc0lties with respect to thepostodernis de"ate "eca0se the cosopolitanis of the de"ate has"ecoe an o"stacle to 0nderstandin# the 0ni(0e feat0res of postodernliterat0re in di8erent re#ional conte/ts. ow we theorie a"o0tpostodern literat0re prod0ced on the periphery of colonialis 0stinvolve an interplay "etween etropolitan and nonetropolitan so0rces,

"0t the s%eci3cit$ of re#ional fors of postodernis is v0lnera"le toisrepresentation in the international scene. =The postodernis de"ateis perhaps itself an instance of the #lo"al, hoo#eniin# spread ofpostodernity, a process e"odied, in this instance, in the acadeic"ook trade.> @eil 6aar0s, in a val0a"le essay on conte4

) 1 )porary white 3o0th African literat0re, ill0strates this v0lnera"ility. 6aar0sapplies Theodor Adorno-s acco0nt of the critical potential of odernis to

the writin# of Kordier, Coetee, Andr Brink, and Breyten Breyten"ach.n the co0rse of ar#0ent the followin# point eer#es:

http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft5k4006q3&chunk.id=nsd0e203&toc.id=endnotes&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e484#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft5k4006q3&chunk.id=nsd0e203&toc.id=endnotes&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e484#X


18/57

This literat0re 0st now "e dened not only "y its ne#ativity, "0t also "yits ar#inality and ac0te self4conscio0sness. And one is tepted to askwhether a literat0re displayin# these characteristics, and written after2and fre(0ently even in the idio of2Iafka and Beckett and, for that

atter, I0ndera, co0ld "e anythin# other than odernist; especially whenit is "orne in ind that as a disco0rse it is so ethicall$ sat0rated, sohu/anistic in its criti(0e of the esta"lished order, so concerned tore%resent reality, and so rationalistic that it wo0ld "e (0ite inappropriateto descri"e it as postodernist. =1&5> share 6aar0s-s appreciation of the ethical val0e of this writin#, "0t whatis p0lin# is his insistence that it wo0ld "e ipossi"le for postodernisin an$ for/ to achieve an ethical stance; indeed, 6aar0s drives the pointhoe in a footnote, sayin# that he wo0ld


19/57

reains 0naware of the historically The challen#e facin# these writers. D0rin# ar#0es, is to nd a lan#0a#ethat encodes new fors of historical and ethical vision 2ithout 0nwittin#lycele"ratin# colonialis-s aterial and episteic capt0re of the coloniedworld and its traditions. TiEn speaks of a


20/57

these scholars with several e/aples of their leadin# propositions>, for itneeds to "e acknowled#ed that there are fewer #ro0nds in 3o0th Africa forthe de#ree of optiis evinced "y 3leon concernin# the criticalcapacities of


21/57

their 0sef0lness to 3o0th Africans is 0ndo0"tedly tied 0p with the fact thatthey have provided any intellect0als with the eans to validatetheselves and deno0nce others in a co0ntry in which the social distance"etween intellect0al and pop0lar sectors reains e"arrassin#ly visi"le.

Altho0#h class factors are, of co0rse, in evidence within "lack intellect0alcircles as well, race is a cr0cial deterinant, perhaps the naldeterinant, of the social coposition of intellect0al life. And altho0#hdeocratic nonracialis provides a set of core val0es to which it ispossi"le to appeal, the str0ct0ral constraints "0ilt into ed0cationalinstit0tions, scholarly disciplines, and, to a lesser e/tent, literary practicesare inescapa"le. The national sit0ation, in other words, in whichintellect0als and literary artists work iposes on the a politics of a#ency.[]

n Kordier one can see the pro"le ctionalied "oth in Josa B0r#er andin illela in A S%ort of Nature where the central iss0es involve thepositions these prota#onists achieve within the eer#ent "ody politic.Kordier also deals with the iss0e e/plicitly in her 195 lect0re .dward 3aid-s concept of


22/57

rivalin# nationaliss; in this respect, he has not shared the view of orestrictly +ar/ist revisionists, for who class str0##le in the conte/t of theind0strial transforation of 3o0th Africa has "een ore si#nicant than(0estions of race and nationhood have "een. =n the early 199$s these

eleents see to "e


23/57

intellect0al than any other writers, and also less o"vio0sly aEliatedpolitically, then is he not ore at li"erty to artic0late #eneral conditionsG This is not to s0##est that he has s0perior insi#ht, necessarily, "0t ratherthat his relative detachent ena"les hi to "e ore e/plicit and ore

honest a"o0t his own social placeent than ore o"vio0sly en#a#edwhite writers can "e a"o0t theirs. The (0estion of a0dience a8ects everywriter in 3o0th Africa, "0t Coetee is 0ni(0e in achievin# a de#ree ofcritical o"7ectication and control over the pro"le. 30ch, then, isCoetee-s politics of a#ency. The novel that takes 0p this iss0e ostclearly is, of co0rse, Foe which #ets "ehind the self4of4writin# and(0estions its self4representation "y settin# it "efore the #0re of Lriday,who anticipates the silent, transforative potency of the "ody of history,the "ody of the f0t0re.Coetee and $eisionis%

Th0s far have noted the di8erences separatin# Coetee fro certainstreas of radical tho0#ht in 3o0th Africa. @ow let e e/plore thesiilarities. The iplications of a potentially revol0tionary historicalsit0ation are present fro the "e#innin# of Coetee-s oe0vre; in this sensehe participates in shapin# a literary4intellect0al oent that "ecae#enerally 0nderstood as .

n this cliate an acadeic revisionis datin# fro the late 19'$s in theeld of historio#raphy ac(0ired a partic0lar 0r#ency. The ori#ins of the

http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft5k4006q3&chunk.id=nsd0e203&toc.id=endnotes&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e639#Xhttp://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft5k4006q3&chunk.id=nsd0e203&toc.id=endnotes&toc.depth=1&brand=ucpress&anchor.id=d0e639#X


24/57

oveent, as its in0ence and p0rview increased and widened toe"race all the social sciences and h0anities, wo0ld have to "e tracedto the proinence of radical philosophies in 0rope in the 19'$s =ainlye/istentialis and str0ct0ralis and, on a lesser scale, +ar/is> and to

the antiwar and civil ri#hts oveents in the United 3tates. n the localsit0ation these powerf0l odels of the etropolitan c0lt0re seeed toopen 0p new vistas of conscio0sness and pra/is in a 3o0th Africaseein#ly deadened "y apathy, ac(0iescence, and repression. The e/eplary "ook of the period was The 5$e of the Needle =19?>, andthe e/eplary life was that of its a0thor, Jichard T0rner, who wasassassinated in 19??. T0rner-s e/pos0re to e/istentialis and +ar/iswhile a st0dent in Paris in the 19'$s translated into the conviction,e/pressed in his life and work as a la"or activist and lect0rer inphilosophy, that o"7ective conditions in 3o0th Africa were theconse(0ence of h0an choices and actions and co0ld therefore "echallen#ed. The 5$e of the Needle was written specically to pop0lariethis concept and to pro7ect ethical and political alternatives as "ein#thinka"le in a c0lt0re that "locked the. er"ert +arc0se-s ne&i/ensional Man is a hi#h

) 5 )point of the period, with its resistance to . The representative feat0re of T0rner-s life and work is this attept toco"ine a partic0lar perspective on the self with a lar#er, historical view.t is a pro"le toward which 3o0th Africa sees prone to drive its oretho0#htf0l citiens. The proinence of a0to"io#raphy since the early19'$s, in "lack writin# especially, is evidence of this trend, "0t it is

partic0larly visi"le in two a7or disc0rsive events of the early 19?$s:BlackConscio0sness itself and the 3t0dy Pro7ect on Christianity in Apartheid


25/57

3ociety =3PJ4CA3>. The Black Conscio0sness position was one of self4recovery and self4aEration in response to the ne#ations of racis. The"lack world was posited as an or#anic 0nity, a transindivid0al ode ofselfhood, and it was reinforced "y a teleolo#y of oral 70stice. The

reso0rces 0sed "y the early e/ponents of Black Conscio0sness wereclassic stateents of "lack assertion s0ch as Lrant Lanon-s The Wretchedof the 5arth and Sto'el$ Car/ichael8s +lac' Po2er.

3PJ4CA3 was initiated "y Beyers @a0de in id419'9 with the followin#o"7ectives: . The pro7ect esta"lished si/ coissions to address iss0es ineconoics, ed0cation, law, politics, society, and the ch0rch. The ethicalfraework 0nderlyin# the pro7ect was dened in ters of three principles:the , @7a"0lo

@de"ele, and, c0rio0sly eno0#h, Katsha B0thelei. These two fors ofcriti(0e, the ost proinent of the period, were ra#"a#s of criticaltho0#ht artic0lated "y people forin#, in the case of 3PJ4CA3, an0nlikely alliance on the "asis of a coon opposition to apartheid. The state took the challen#e serio0sly, however. The 3chle"0schCoission was set 0p to investi#ate the @ational Union of 3o0th African3t0dents =@U3A3>, the Christian nstit0te =closely linked to 3PJ4CA3>,and the nstit0te of Jace Jelations. ts report, p0"lished in 19?&, is acopendi0 of the in0tiae of the day4to4day a8airs of these

or#aniations and their representatives, not e/cl0din# their private lives.ts distortions of lo#ic are 0s0ally "anal, altho0#h the conse(0ences inters of "annin#s and restrictions were not. An e/aple is the chapter; this chapter tries to showthat "eca0se Black Conscio0sness incorporated a dialectical acco0nt ofthe pro#ress fro racis, to "lack assertion, to an 0ltiately nonracialf0t0re, its whole ethod and its ethnic ephasis were a ask for a6eninist dialectical aterialis =3chle"0sch Coission 91S&'>. n the

c0lt0ral or#aniation within @U3A3 called A(0ari0s, the coission(0otes reas of evidence fro st0dent leaders apparently provin# their


26/57

de facto #0ilt "y statin# that they o"7ected to the environentalconditionin# aro0nd the =&S%>. n these e/aples and others thecoission tries to pin down s0"version to partic0lar con#0rations oftho0#ht or conscio0sness: for all parties, it sees, incl0din# the state,

0nder#oin# the kind of history it representediplied a li"eral4positivist conception of racial


27/57

ideolo#ies. Lor B0tler, the n#lish were


28/57

and its copleentary faily syste. The colonier-s tr0e task, if he can"e enli#htened, is not to perpet0ate and "ask in dependence, "0t to assistin the "irth of a f0ll personality in the colonied, la0nchin# his e#o 0ponthe tro0"led ocean of the inferiority cople/. e 0st learn to end0re the

tra0a of a"andonent and sta"ilie his personality thro0#h desperateachieveents. e 0st learn, as Festern an has learned, to live o0t theyth of To Th0".n the third sta#e the initiative passes to the colonied, whose stirrin#s2Karveyis, ne#rit0de2have 0shered in the second sta#e. Thedependence theory of +annoni and other notions of


29/57

narrative and p0rs0in# it thro0#h de#rees of painf0l reco#nition and self4conscio0sness. Both in his ode of access to the c0lt0re and in histhees, in other words, Coetee is an intiate and e8ective participant inopenin# 0p the new disc0rsive possi"ilities. Het his point of contact with

these other developents is o"li(0e. t is o"li(0e "eca0se of personalhistory, for it cae a"o0t thro0#h his e/pos0re to Aerica; it is o"li(0ealso "eca0se it is ltered "y lin#0istic st0dies.ow does Coetee-s lin#0istic perspective factor into the revisionistoentG This is the (0estion to "e posed in t0rnin# to &us'lands. n thec0lt0ral estran#eent of Te/as, and linkin# di8erent threads of hispersonal history and c0rrent sit0ation, Coetee "ro0#ht aspects of his#rad0ate st0dies to "ear on the (0estion of colonialis. n a sketch of

) )the period written fteen years later for the Ne2 ;or' Ti/es +oo' 1evie2 =


30/57

literary lan#0a#e, the writer sets disco0rses in otion, p0rs0in# theirinner lo#ic, soeties settin# several disco0rses in parallel2as in&us'lands where the interest lies in the critical distance set 0p "etweendi8erent disco0rses. Coetee-s c0lt0ral displaceent sees to have

precl0ded hi fro takin# 0p 0nreservedly the political odel thatChosky also represented; however, he was in0enced, no do0"t, "yChosky-s A/erican Po2er and the Ne2 Mandarins which, in (0estionin#the role of


31/57

colonists- da0#hters, who connect the white ale with ,0nderlin#s rollin# their eye"alls, words of oderation, cal, swift arch,the hidden dele, the encapent, the #ray"eard chieftain, the c0rio0sthron#, words of #reetin#, r tones, PeaceX To"accoX ,Q the order tofollow, the inner de"ate, the cas0al spear in the vitals =Oisco0ntd-Aleida>, the eein# 0nderlin#s, pole thro0#h the f0ndaent, rit0aldise"erent in the sava#e encapent, Q the order to follow, theinner de"ate, the cowardly "low, anesia, the dark h0t, "o0nd hands,0neasy sleep, dawn, the sacricial #atherin#, the wiard, the contest of

a#ic, the celestial alanac, darkness at noon, victory, an a0sin# "0ttedio0s rei#n as tri"al dei4#od, ret0rn to civiliation, with n0ero0sento0ra#e of cattle2these forkin# paths across that tr0e wildernesswitho0t polity called the land of the Kreat @aa(0a where everythin#, was to nd, was possi"le. =?$S?1>3trands are woven to#ether here fro a ran#e of so0rces in colonialdisco0rse, fro chronicle and ethno#raphy =s0ch as the references to thedeath of d-Aleida and to ethods of ipalin# ip0ted to 3haka> toadvent0re ction =as in the wiard and the contest of a#ic, reiniscent

of Jider a##ard-s 0ing Solo/on8s Mines >. Lrain# the whole passa#e isthe Conradian ephasis on the psychic 7o0rney inward2


32/57

advent0re is a catalo#0e of fail0res to achieveconnection, se/0al and otherwise. 6ikewise, the photo#raphs of prisoners,which Dawn carries aro0nd in his "riefcase and re#0larly fetishies,involve attepts to #et "eyond the s0rface of the pict0re to act0alpresence: . The #lint in the eye of the prisoner in the photo#raph isiediately #eneralied to all the Oiet Con#, while Dawn speaks on "ehalf of his c0lt0re: . *aco"0s Coetee is 0nderined early in his enco0nter with the @aa(0as.n direct contrast to @. A. Coetee-s representation of *aco"0s Coetee-srhetorical skills in the local lan#0a#e, we nd *aco"0s hiselfacknowled#in# r0ef0lly, . The editations "e#in with *aco"0s Coetee tryin# to dene hiself in

ters of an isolated potency:


33/57

"0ried within e.Q deepened yself in a "oyhood eory of a hawkascendin# the sky in a f0nnel of hot air< =5$>. e hears two voices, . These voices correspond to what 3. *. Coetee later will call


34/57

appearance as slave, is the +anichaean ther, with c0lt0ral di8erenceinscri"ed in his therness, so that his approach involves theesta"lishent of a threshold near which the e/plorer feels a #en0inev0lnera"ility. t is this threshold that presents itself to the e/plorer as . 30spension,irresol0tion, an/iety: s0ch is the e/plorer-s e/istential lot.Fe have coe a lon# way, therefore, fro the crisply eEcient prose of thehistorian 3. *. Coetee: a "roken and historicied s0"7ectivity has intr0dedand s0"verted the record even "efore 3. *. Coetee-s version of events ispresented. The sae pattern is fo0nd in D0rin# the ret0rn 7o0rney to the Cape, *aco"0s Coetee-s priary concernis to achieve a state of a"sol0te self4s0Eciency; of co0rse, s0ch a

condition is ill0sory, and *aco"0s Coetee is perhaps at his ost specio0sin this se(0ence. After "ein# "anished for "itin# o8 the ear of a child who


35/57

ta0nted hi, he t0rns necessity into a virt0e "y treatin# the loss of hiswa#on, weapons, acco0treents, and servants as a . The death of Ilawer occ0rs at this point, an event thatis repeated in di8erent fors, ill0stratin# the coplete s0"ordination of

the


36/57

Oietna Pro7ect< is the otel se(0ence, in which Dawn a"d0cts his son+artin and sta"s hi with a fr0it knife as the police arrive. Fritin# self4conscio0sly in the


37/57


38/57

) %' )!e 8%erence o/ !e "is'laced )u#9ect

Altho0#h a##ressiveness is one of the conse(0ences of Coetee-s ctive

str0##le with colonialis, another is the eer#ence of a displaceds0"7ect, a narrator who is not one of the priary a#ents of coloniation"0t who lives in the conditions created "y s0ch a#ents, and who end0resthe s0"7ectivity this position entails. +a#da in (n the )eart of the Countr$ is s0ch a displaced s0"7ect, "0t it is possi"le to discern its eer#ence in&us'lands. ne of the e/planations *aco"0s Coetee #ives for his acts isthat he is


39/57

ited c0lt0re. Cople/ity is c0rtailed "y eans of a #est0re whoseessential f0nction is to preserve the oral iperative of the a0thor-s self4distancin# fro coplicity and the iprisonent of nat0raliedconnections. *aco"0s Coetee-s #est0re of denial or clos0re, in other

words, ao0nts to a declaration of conscience on the part of *. +.Coetee, one that says: this is the record; let 0s allow it to stand andspeak for itself. t is for this reason, "elieve, that *. +. Coetee nevera#ain allows his a0thorship to inha"it a narrator as oppressive, asfatherlike, as *aco"0s Coetee. 6ater s0ch #0res are the antagonists of the narrators: +a#da-s father(n the )eart of the Countr$ or Colonel *oll inWaiting for the +ar,arians. 30ch a narrator has to "e inha"ited for oralreasons, and appropriately at the start of the corp0s, "0t in the end *. +.Coetee 0st leave the *aco"0s Coetees to their own devices. This is the eanin#, s0##est, of the #aes of self4preservation played "y *aco"0s Coetee on his ret0rn 7o0rney: . The#ae of self4preservation is also *. +. Coetee-s #ae of s0rvivin# thenarrative, p0rs0in# its destr0ctive lo#ic to the end. After all, *aco"0sCoetee-s #aes constit0te a /ise en a,H/e a reco0ntin# of soe of these(0ences of the narrative itself: the 7o0rney, the p0nitive raid, captivityand e/p0lsion, and a nal #ae,


40/57

lar#er thin#s in the Coetee oe0vre; "y the tie he coes to writeMichael I, Coetee will have t0rned Dawn-s , the pro"le repeatedly thrown 0p "y confession isthe pro"le of clos0re. Lriday possesses the key to the clos0re of thenarrative. The econoy of confession, Coetee ar#0es in the essay, iss0ch that its self4e/aination is potentially endless; the self4directedskepticis of confession prod0ces a (0estionin# of the confessant-s ownotives, so that resol0tions to confession that rely solely on the

achieveent of


41/57

words in a disp0te we know to "e endlessG< =1%$>. There are iportant connections "etween Lriday and clos0re, nota"lyLriday-s dancin# and the (0estion of castration. n 1o#ana the da0#hterree"ers her other-s oent of tri0ph, dancin# alone for the

a0seent of #0ests in what is passed o8 as a T0rkish perforance.Jecallin# the event, the da0#hter destroys the other-s caref0llypreserved identity "eca0se it proves the daughter8s identity and there"yJo/ana-s as well; th0s, thro0#h the twist in the narrative the dance is rsta eans of sec0rin# Jo/ana-s self4representation as ther, aErin# herse/0ality and social ascendancy, and then, as it is recalled "y theda0#hter, the eans of her 0ndoin#. n Foe Lriday dances in Loe-s scarletro"e, whirlin# aro0nd so that 30san can satisfy her c0riosity a"o0twhether, in his 0tilation, he was also castrated. Fhat 30san sees,however, we do not know:n the dance nothin# was still and everythin# was still. The whirlin# ro"ewas a scarlet "ell settled 0pon Lriday-s sho0lders and enclosin# hi;Lriday was the dark pillar at its centre. Fhat had "een hidden fro ewas revealed. saw; or, sho0ld say, y eyes were open to what waspresent to the. saw and "elieved had seen, tho0#h afterwards ree"ered Thoas,who also saw, "0t co0ld not "e "ro0#ht to "elieve till he had p0t his handin the wo0nd. =119S$>Defoe #rants Jo/ana therness to constr0ct her #endered di8erence and

then takes it away in an act of 0nveilin#; Coetee does not allow 30san toass0e this a0thority. Fhatever the condition i#ht "e of Lriday-s "ody,the state of his potency, 30san is not a"le to tell 0s, for she does notdispose over this power. +ore strictly, neither 30san-s disco0rse nor thenovel-s can appropriate the ia#e:


42/57

Fhen Lriday akes his own arks on the slate, however, he prod0ces. Lriday-s writin# inscri"es his own watchf0lnessover 30san and Loe: it prod0ces tokens of his position as the


43/57

narrative, t0rnin# it into an acco0nt of the relationship with Loe. n part &an 0nnaed narrator appears whose addressee is not specied: in otherwords, we are now in the real of narration per se, and the addressee issiply the reader, the one who holds the "ook. This oent represents

the last phase of the #rad0al process of . vent0ally he nds 30san and, not Loe, "0t

the ship-s captain, . 30san-s narrative and all that develops fro it lie "0ried


44/57

here: the story of 30san, Cr0so, and Lriday has never "een written. Thenarrator contin0es searchin# and nds Lriday, the syptoatic presenceof all colonial narratives, seein#ly dead "0t in fact not dead, o0tlivin#the stories that i#ht or i#ht not incl0de hi:

t0# his woolly hair, n#er the chain a"o0t his throat.


45/57

Coetee-s ost recent novel represents "oth s0ation and depart0re. treains for e to o0tline, therefore, the lon#4ter transitions fo0nd in therst ve novels, to locate these in Age of (ron =199$>, and, nally, tos0##est how this novel e/tends and enriches Coetee-s whole novelistic

corp0s. As it is with concl0sions, y ar#0ent will "e "rief and scheatic; have no do0"t that Coetee will contin0e to prod0ce path"reakin# ctionand that f0t0re novels will necessitate (0alications and revisions that cannot anticipate. The corp0s of Coetee-s work fro &us'lands to Foe 0nder#oes threeseisic shifts. The rst shift involves the pro"le of a0thority. Lro aco"ative, a##ressive s0"version of the a0thority of colonialis and itsdisco0rses, Coetee-s ction develops toward a point of self4conscio0sdeference, ar#inality, even a"ne#ation. Lriday-s silence is thec0lination of this developent, for here Coetee takes his reader as faras it is lo#ically possi"le to #o into a reco#nition and draatiation of thehistorical constraints that in0ence his ction writin#. avin# challen#edthe a0thority of the colonial le#acy and the fors of ideolo#y thato"sc0red its destr0ctiveness, Coetee "e#ins interro#atin# the disc0rsivea0thority in whose nae the s0"version is enacted. Collectively, thenovels ill0strate Coetee-s contention, in the concl0sion to his essay onthe far novel and %laasro/an that altho0#h


46/57

syptoatic dia#nosis of its


47/57

warfare cond0cted "y the sec0rity forces a#ainst the ins0rrectionaryyo0th, who were inspired in t0rn "y a notion of .


48/57

f lia"eth has any a0thority, it is provided "y her very irrelevance; it isthe a0thority of the dispara#ed, of a retired lect0rer in classics whosecanon eans little to anyone "0t herself, 0nder#oin# a private death.n te/t0ality, lia"eth says,


49/57

the fact that ethical conscio0sness in 3o0th Africa is constrained "eca0se 70d#ent is invaria"ly selective or interested. The +a#istrate-s atteptsin Waiting for the +ar,arians to appeal to siple standards of decencywere crippled "y their coplicity. Coplicity is the res0lt of havin# a

constit0ency, of speakin# =wittin#ly or not> on "ehalf of a #ro0p ofdoinant actors in the conict. Fithin s0ch conditions, speakin# 2ithout a0thoriation, or with an a0thority few are willin# to take serio0sly in asociety in which the


50/57

n a novel which is so 0ch a"o0t dyin#, it is ironic that one of lia"eth-sresponses to her da0#hter2whose own for of


51/57

for they ret0rn 0s to the site of history and present it, rearka"ly inCoetee, as a place of privile#e. Between the p0"lication of the novel andthis #loss, of co0rse, lies a cr0cial oent in 3o0th Africa-s history,naely Le"r0ary 199$, which saw the 0n"annin# of e/iled or#aniations,

the release of n0"ers of political prisoners, and tentative ne#otiationstoward a transition to deocracy. This shift partly e/plains Coetee-srelative optiis. A year later, ne#otiations proper had not yet "e#0n andthe co0ntry was still riven with violence; at that point, Coetee i#ht have"een less san#0ine. B0t the stateent is less a

) 1% )reection of the c0rrent state of a8airs in 3o0th Africa than a reinder ofthe e/tent to which historicity has infored Coetee-s oe0vre fro thevery "e#innin#. n hindsi#ht we can see that Coetee-s ret0rn to 3o0thAfrica at the start of the 19?$s had the e8ect of ens0rin# that his ctionwo0ld escape the conse(0ences of the , the University of Cape Town Book Award, and the Prin#le

Prie for Criticis =twice>. nternationally, he has won the Keo8rey La"erand *aes Tait Black +eorial pries, the Booker4+cConnell Prie, the Pri/


52/57

Leina Ztran#er, the *er0sale Prie, and the Sunda$ 5#%ress Book of the Hear Award. e is an honorary e"er of the +odern 6an#0a#esAssociation and a Lellow of the Joyal 3ociety of 6iterat0re; he also holdshonorary de#rees fro the University of 3trathclyde and the 3tate

University of @ew Hork at B08alo. MBACI N. The ost pertinent essays are +ichael Oa0#han,


53/57

acadeic profession. think there is evidence of an interest in pro"les of lan#0a#e thro0#ho0t y novels. don-t see any disr0ption "etween yprofessional interest in lan#0a#e and y activities as a writer< =Coetee,. MBACI N

&. This de"ate has received new ipet0s "oth fro @de"ele-s on#oin#theoretical clarication of what he calls


54/57

9. n this disc0ssion of a#ency a inde"ted to Tony +orphet,


55/57

%. . n his 7o0rnal of 15$9 Colonel Collins reportseetin# with one coando leader who co0ld acco0nt for ,$$ dead,

and another for ,?$$ =+oodie, part % M15$5419N, p. ?>. Coetee-s version,it 0st "e said, ref0ses the palliative of third4person o"7ectication o8ered"y statistics s0ch as these; instead, he provides 0s with the iplicateds0"7ect =see note >. MBACI N11. +a#da-s condition wo0ld also e/eplify what *aeson =followin#6acan> calls


56/57

Countr$. MBACI N1. The schoolistress, a


57/57

stock of its historical location, he does not represent a . arelyin# on Catherine Klenn46a0#a-s disc0ssion of Foe in relation to theLrench tradition, which Coetee sees to know =*. Kira0do0/ precedesCoetee in havin# a feale prota#onist, called 30anne, enter the story>.Klenn46a0#a-s analysis encopasses Kira0do0/, Suzanne et la Paci34ue 3aint4*ohn Perse, (/ages K Cruso +ichel To0rnier, endredi ou les li/,esdu %aci34ue Oalry,

jm coetzee atwell

Documents