- In the first chapter of his book, Fanon writes: “Every colonized people—in other words, every people in whose soul an inferiority complex has been created by the death and burial of its local culturally originality—finds itself face to face with the language of the civilizing language… (Pp.8 of the original text)?” What does he mean by this?
- In this chapter, Fanon seems to be arguing that for the colonized purposeful assimilation is concomitantly emasculating and infantilizing. Do you agree with this line of argumentation?
- Also on page 18 of the original text, Fanon argues that the Negro…will become proportionately whiter—that is he will come closer to being a real human being—in direct ratio to his mastery of the French language.” Do you feel this this argument is applicable to our educational system here in the United States?
In this quote on page 8 Fanon means that colonized people who have experienced being treated as inferior by others (generally the dominant culture) cannot escape being exposed in some way to the language of the culture that is trying to "civilize" them. A major part of the process of being civilized is learning the language of the dominant culture, and so people who have been prejudiced against as inferior ultimately find themselves learning the language of those who looked down on them as lesser beings. In the book Fanon goes on to say, "The colonized is elevated above his jungle status in proportion to his adoption of the mother country’s cultural standards," explaining the idea that the colonized gain higher status in proportion to the degree to which they learn and adapt to the dominant culture and language.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Fanon's argumentation that purposeful assimilation is "emasculating and infantilizing." Fanon gives many examples of the effect of people speaking pidgin to blacks. Through his examples of various situations in which this has happened he shows how this "talking down" to blacks, rather than putting them at ease in any way, as might be intended by those who do it, only shows that they are seen as inferior by others.
When the colonized speak the dominant language fluently, as a result of assimilation (or during the process of it),they lose a part of their connection to their heritage and the older generations in their families that do not know the dominant language - Fanon refers to this as a "rupture."
"The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house" -Audre Lorde
ReplyDeleteFanon states that, as such, colonized people are expected to and must learn the language of the colonizer. To learn the language, however, means to assimilate to the white man’s ways. In other words, language becomes a way to mask. By speaking French, for example, the black man is not conditioning his tongue (and literally) to the white man’s ways but also (his) self.
“To speak a language is to take on a world, and culture.”
Fanon seems to be concerned with the loss that happens as a man tries to immitate or as he states it become whiter. But at the same he offers the possibility of trangression since once the black man speaks not as a child/ talks back, there is a sense of empowerment and breaking of tradidition. I happen to agree and disagree with this stement on “assimilation as emasculating and infantilizing.” While I do believe (and speaking from personal experience) that there is a loss in learning the language of the colonizer, there is also empowerment in being able to speak back and, even, at the same level (eye-to-eye) with the white man. Growing up bilingual and an interpreter for my parents, this loss and gain was very clear to me. Being able to help my mom at the doctor but also seeing the expression of white people when they hear me say that I’m a student at UC Berkeley. In this sense, I believe that Fanon’s argument that the Negro…will become proportionately whiter (more “human-like”) in direct ratio to his mastery of the French language, is pretty much applicable to our educational system here in the United States. The presence of people of color in institutions of higher education, for instance, will always come as a surprise to white folks, even in the midst of conversations surrounding “inclusion” and diversity.
In his quote, Fanon is saying that people who have an oppressive experience in regards to their culture and language always end up having to confront the language of the “civilized.” I think it is saying that those who believe themselves to be more “civilized” end up pushing their language onto all others who are different, and through this experience, those who don’t know the civilizing language are made to feel inferior. In attempt to lift themselves out from this inferiority complex, the colonized people are forced to learn the other language, which in effect instills in them the idea that their own language is not as good as this new one.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Nancy’s sentiments above about Fanon’s argument, which is that the colonized purposeful assimilation is concomitantly emasculating and infantilizing; I both agree and disagree with it. On the one hand, forcing assimilation onto another culture is oppressive because it pushes the “civilized” language onto another people and creates hostility between cultures, ranking one above the other. However, because of the differences, we need to assimilate to one particular language in order to communicate. By seeing each culture and language as intrinsically valuable, it is merely a tossup as to which language we all learn as a medium of communication. However, this is not to shut down other people’s languages, but out of realistic practice, we must all learn at least one language.
In general, I agree with Stephanie’s assessment of what fanon is trying to say, but I think she’s missing an important aspect as well. Fanon is indeed talking about how the civilized impose their language on oppressed people. It’s definitely a real phenomenon, and it’s something that happens whenever we have an instance of colonization. But the underlying reason for the harmfulness of such imposition of the conquerer’s language on the conquered has to do with the nature of language itself. If language were inert, simply a tool that humans used to communicate and nothing more, then forcing your language on another wouldn’t mean a whole lot; it would essentially just be substituting one kind of hammer for another. But language is more than just a tool, and that is Fanon’s deeper point. Language is not just cultural, but in many ways, language IS culture. Language represents, in a very deep way, a person’s cultural heritage and background.
ReplyDeleteGiven this, then, the conquerer, in imposing his language on the conquered, is doing more than saying that their language is better; they basically send the message that their culture is better. Language is a symbol. In the case of colonized people, the level to which a “savage” became “civilized” was basically directly proportional to how much they accepted and assimilated the tongue of their invaders. Language became a way to become white. It wasn’t just so that they could communicate—it was so they could assimilate.
Q3.
ReplyDeleteI think that the text “Negro…will become proportionately whiter – that is he will come closer to being a real human being – in direct ratio to his mastery of the French language” meant that African American becomes more like White people as they speak the language that white people speaks rather than using their own language. I feel that this argument is applicable to educational system in the United States. At the school in the United States, all the students have to use English no matter what their languages are. The level of language is the way to measure your social level in the United States. The SAT test, which mostly used to measure one’s educational levels in the academic field, has two parts of English and one part of math, which also contains word problem made in English. Unlike those Spanish people and African Americans, White people use English at homes and have more chance to master their language, but the others do not have chances since they use other languages at home. As African American students and Spanish students master the English, they could achieve to college and so called “real human being.” It is hard to say one can become a real human being by achieving the mastery level in the dominant languages, but one can have the power of knowledge to become an important person, and it is applicable to educational system here in the United States.
Q3.
ReplyDeleteI believe the text "Negro…will become proportionately whiter – that is he will come closer to being a real human being – in direct ratio to his mastery of the French language" meant that the more African Americans start to learn how to speak the language that White people speak, they become more "human." Looking at this in context, in the past, people used to look at African Americans as inferior to Whites, as if they were not human beings. This statement is saying that for African Americans to move to a more equal grounding, they need to learn the white language.
I believe this statement is somewhat applicable to the American system today because ESL students suffer because of their inability to speak English. However, this system is much more fair as we offer ESL classes for students to learn English and get them to an equal level as those who are born here. It is difficult to change your primary language, especially because you must learn the dominate language of where you are located.