Transcending the Other: A postcolonial perspective of Avatar

In the box office breaking and award winning movie, Avatar, director James Cameron tells a science fiction story of colonization in the future. As stated by Lois Tyson (2006), “post-colonial criticism analyzes literature produced by cultures that developed in response to colonial domination.” Through the eyes of human protagonist, Jake Sully, the journey takes place on the planet of Pandora, which is colonized and exploited by human forces for economic interest. The planet is considered hostile, strange, and inhabited by a strange other; the Na’vi people.

As Jake begins the movie by obeying military order to find intel on the natives, he eventually transcends into their way of life. Jake ventures to Pandora, after his twin brother’s passing, to continue his work with the avatar program. Jake eventually earns the trust of the Na’vi people, through his avatar body, and turns against his own kind to defeat colonialization. Jake’s leadership allows the oppressed Na’vi people to fight against their colonizers, indicating an anti-colonial message. While Cameron conveys a message against colonial intentions, he ironically uses racist representations and stereotypes of the other to emulate the oppression of the other.

It is evident throughout the movie that the Na’vi people are characterized as the other. The Na’vi people have blue alien skin and differ from humans. The colonizer, the human forces, dehumanize the Na’va people by referring to them as animals and depicting them as savages. By emphasizing the physical features of the natives, the director creates a focus the racist representation of the natives, which place the Na’vi into the other category.

In order to demonstrate anti-colonial rule, Cameron transcends Jake’s character into the leader and force to attack the human military. Jake’s whiteness, or ability to be superior and normal, does not follow the typical main white characters. However, this transcendence is allowed due to his whiteness.

            Jake begins Avatar as a demoralized, crippled white man in a wheelchair. As a veteran, Jake upholds the obedience to following the white man in charge, but ultimately transforms into a native.

Jake initially follows the Na’vi to gather intel on their land and resources, but soon finds a liking to the life on Pandora. In order to bring balance and end the Na’vis colonization, a white character must transcend into the native to thrive. Cameron presents many conflicting aspects in Avatar, but this transcendence is key. While Cameron focuses the movie on Jake’s moral, physical, and emotional transformation to end the colonizing of Pandora, he still emphasizes the racial implications among the natives. To Cameron, it is only through the rise of the inferior white character, that the native people were able to fight against their colonizers.

To viewers this indicates that in order for there to be real order or justice, a white person must transcend into the native for trust and utilizing their knowledge to conquer the journey. Cameron makes great strides to present a colonized world and it’s later decolonization, however the racist representations and transcendence of a white man into leading the natives complicates that post-colonial perspective.

Sources
Cameron, James, director. Avatar.
Tyson, L. (2006). Critical Theory Today: A User-friendly Guide. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

Thor Ragnarok: Revealing the Double Consciousness of the Chaos G-d

Let’s talk about Thor Ragnarok, objectively the best movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s Thor trilogy and probably the closest we are ever going to get to a Planet Hulk movie.

Quick recap for anyone who hasn’t seen it:

We meet back up with Thor, who after escaping hell (literally) finds his brother masquerading as Odin, drinking and putting on plays to validate his own supposed heroics. He calls Loki out immediately ruining his fun and drags him away to find the real Odin. They return to Earth finding their father with a little help from Dr. Strange, only for Odin to tell that he’s dying and that when he does his evil daughter, that he never told the two of them about, will come to reclaim Asgard. He dies like a minute later, then Hela appears breaks Mjolnir and reveals Asgard’s imperialist past, before banishing her brothers. They end up on the Grandmaster’s planet and Thor gets captured for the gladiatorial rings there, while Loki consorts with the Grandmaster. Thor is forced to face off against Hulk, who has apparently been the jolly green giant for three years now. Long story short Thor, Loki, Hulk/Bruce, the other gladiators, and this really cool Valkyrie chick escape the Grandmaster's planet and then proceed to a boss battle with Hela in which they blow up Asgard (after getting all plot relevant characters off world) to prevent Hela from establishing a tyrannical govt.

What makes it worth discussing:

While the movie merits praise based on its comedic aspects alone, what really elevates the film is the subversive postcolonial critique it makes within the overall context of the Thor trilogy. Prior to the big reveal of Asgard's Imperialist past as shown by the shattered murals, the Asgardian peoples are indisputably the heroes of the narrative, justified in war by their superior moral status. They are quite literally depicted as the saviors of humanity in the first film, when they defeat the Jotun preventing an ice age on Midgard (aka Earth). The halo-esc discs drawn behind the head of Odin in the remade murals certainly attest to this idea.

History Rewritten in Art; the mural before misconceptions are quite literally shattered.

So when Hela reveals the reality of Asgardian rule and subjugation, the attempts of the Jotun to create a new Jontunheim on Midgard using the Casket of Ancient Winters (think Arc of the Covenant religious significance levels), takes on the aspect of a peoples searching for a way to ensure their own cultural identity continues on even if it means abandoning their ancestral home (an action mirrored by the Asgardians in the newest film). King Laufrey (King of the Jotun) isn't a monster in this context, but a revolutionary put down by a tyrannical ruler. 

A Totalitarian Reality of War and Enslavement

His struggle is silenced by the rewritten history of an empire and the very objective of his last ditch effort towards freedom is spat on as his son last of the royal bloodline is raised by the enemy who subjugated his people. 

Reading Loki as a Colonized Subject:

Colonialist ideology was instilled in Loki early, even as a baby he attempted to mimic the culture in which he was being raised, shifting his appearance magically to appear Asgardian. 

Baby Loki shape-shifting to match his oppressors

For all he knew he was Asgardian, his adopted family had allowed him to live under this misconception and had raised him as if he was such. Maybe he didn't fit all the respected personality traits associated with his culture, but this was his family. He was Asgardian, until of course he wasn't.  

Loki's True Parentage is Revealed

In the above scene from the first Thor movie, he accuses Odin of seeing him as just "another stolen relic", tears in his eyes as the entirety of his worldview is shattered just as thoroughly as the murals will later be. It is in this moment that Loki begins to embody the ideal of Double Consciousness. He is inextricably caught between two cultures, the one he grew up in and the one he was born into, yet he belongs to neither: too much the Asgardian to ever hold standing among the Jotun and too Jotun to ever sit on the throne of Asgard.

Unable to reconcile with this reality, Loki becomes 'unhomed'. He leaves Asgard and denounces his relationship to Odin and Frigga, finalizing his separation in the physical not just psychological realm.

His ensuing character arc follows the story of him rebelling and returning as he attempts to come to terms with the aspects of himself he never before had the luxury to explore and how they fit into the framework of who he once was. The way he goes about this isn't always for the best (referring of course to the disaster in New York), but it is the psychological alienation from the self which ultimately drives his at times incredibly violent and self indulgent actions. 

Conclusion:

Thor Ragnarok in revealing the Imperialist past of Asgard, allows one a unique glimpse into the characterization of Loki as not a villain, but a man inextricably caught between two cultures, whose at time erratic behavior can perhaps be attributed to an unstable sense of self. His title of Chaos G-d a referencing not only to the unrest he acts upon the world, but the unrest within.

Biopolitics and Post-Colonialism and Purple Hibiscus, oh my!

Biopolitics and Post-colonialism: Purple Hibiscus

The colonial period has formed the development of many contemporary countries and territories. The superpowers determined the way of self-esteem and self-evaluation of many peoples. Their world perception was formed by the influence of those countries which were considered to be their owners. The postcolonial period started from the point when former colonies had to continue their development alone. However, they had not start from the very beginning because they had already had the heritage which was brought by the colonizers. The majority of peculiarities are described in the postcolonial literature and criticism. Here, I would like to look through this issue on the example of Black nations and their literature which arose during the postcolonial period.

Postcolonial criticism corresponds to the certain historical period. As stated by Lois Tyson (2006), “postcolonial criticism analyzes literature produced by cultures that developed in response to colonial domination,” from the very beginning to the present times. The main heritage of the colonizers is the English language which became the background for the creation of postcolonial literature. Thus, the writer Adichie, about who I will speak further, argued that  "what we represent is largely the result of colonialism, for example, the fact that I think in English" (Garner, 2004). For many, English was the first language in which they learned to write. The Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe once said concerning this issue: “For me, there is no other choice. I have been given the language, and I intend to use it” (Tyson, 2006). However, lots of pre-colonial cultural heritage have been lost through many generations of colonial domination. Significant attention is paid to the postcolonial feminist critics which are often the central issue of many literature works, such as Purple Hibiscus (2003) by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie.

The development of the Nigerian literature started from the 1970s. In the 70-80s, the Nigerian novel has a critically realistic tendency connected with unfulfilled hopes for a better life and a comprehension of new negative tendencies in public life (duCille, 1996). The feeling of frustration among writers, an accusatory beginning in their work is a reaction of literature to new phenomena of social life. The novel Purple Hibiscus (2003) is a family novel in which the educational and didactic trend is traced. Most of them are related to the problem of the status of women in modern African society. The author defends the idea of the woman's inner freedom, her right to choose her place in the surrounding reality. The novel is the story of the life of the heroine, her family, where the father traditionally rules, demanding from his wife and children obedience and serving him as a master. These traces were mentioned by Tyson (2006). The novel tells the story of a Nigerian family against the backdrop of events unfolding in the country during the Abacha military regime in the mid-1990s. The inner development of the protagonists demonstrates the historical development of the postcolonial countries.

In such a way, the postcolonialism is brightly reflected in the belles-lettres. The thoughts, expectations, and actions are shown in the texts. The readers see the transformation of heroes which is the allusion to the transformations of the whole peoples. Thus, Kambili and Jaja go through the path from the silent oppressed by their tyrant father of teenagers to the spiritually strengthened young people who are ready to take responsibility for their family and intercede for their unhappy mother. In such a way, Adichie traces the origins of the newest social reality through the destinies of her heroes.

References

Adichie, C. N. (2004). Purple Hibiscus a novel. London: Fourth Estate.

DuCille, A. (1996). Skin Trade. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Garner, C. (2004). Profile of Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie. London.

Tyson, L. (2006). Critical Theory Today: A User-friendly Guide. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

A Powdered Pocahontas: Pocahontas II and Postcolonialism

Pocahontas II: Journey to a New World is an untimely straight to DVD sequel of Disney’s Pocahontas. And, in all honesty it’s a wreck. It stays true to what actually happened to Pocahontas in real life (kind of) by sending her to London with John Rolf after news of John Smith’s death. However, in real life she did not willingly go and willingly give in to being “civilized” like the Disney movie portrays. In real life, she died three years after arriving in England. But, anyhow, this movie did terrible in the box office, and is riddled with opportunities for Postcolonial Criticism.

For example, she is shown off to the King, but only after a huge makeover in which a character named Mrs. Jenkins sings a song entitled “Wait ‘till he sees you!” During this makeover, Mrs. Jenkins actually puts white powder on her face (changing her skin color to a lighter shade) and sings “He’ll [John Rolf] be so pleased you came down from the trees!” Implying that Pocahontas is a savage, as she and the people of England see her and is finally coming down from “the trees” to be civilized. Before her makeover, she is portrayed as incompetent and uncultured, as she attempts to wear a girdle as a hat etc. There’s a lot wrong with that song, but this part is pretty straightforward.

Yes, that is Pocahontas!

In the cartoon, Pocahontas comes to the England, and is promptly informed that she will be attending a ball during which she will be shown off to the King of England to show hi
m that the people of the New World “can be civilized.” She’s lied to and she thinks she is doing everything for peace between her people and John Rolf’s, but she is only being colonized and forced into a culture she really does not want. She

 After her makeover, both Mrs. Jenkins and John Rolf treat Pocahontas as a different person. She appears to be more “European” and hence, she is better, more civilized. This is a prime example of Eurocentrism, because it is clear that whoever wrote this movie, wanted England’s cultural practices to seem like the ultimate “culture standard to which other cultures are negatively contrasted” (Tyson 401). The King would not even see her until she was powdered up and strapped into a fancy ballgown, hence the Eurocentric way seems to win out.

All the English characters show blunt colonizer ideology too, as they all seem to think that their way is better, especially since they are “civilizing” this “savage Indian.” They just assume their way is better, especially John Rolf and Mrs. Jenkins who give her the makeover in the first place, and always treat her as if she were an ignorant child. Not to mention the way her body guard is portrayed, a Native American Character who does nothing but grunt, and follow Pocahontas around while wearing buffalo hide clothing. Obviously, he is meant to be seen as less than civilized. However, Pocahontas even gives in to these ideas of the colonizers by exhibiting mimicry in her willingness to be changed to a lighter skinned, strangely dressed Native American source of amusement (for much of the movie, she does eventually stand up. Not for herself though but for a bear who has been held captive.) She allows this to happen, and for the first part of the ball, (before saving the bear) she acts and talks just like John Rolf; truly becoming a colonial subject in England and making Mrs. Jenkins shed tears of joy. Furthermore, when John Rolff meets sees her for the first time in her new clothes, she explains to him that what is on her face is “called powder” and he exclaims how beautiful she is. For the first time in the movie, Pocahontas is told she looks beautiful by a man she loves, and in order for that to happen, her face has to be powdered lighter. Again, the colonizers and their ways are obviously portrayed as superior here.

Overall, the film is riddled with colonizer ideology, mimicry on Pocahontas’ part, and Eurocentrism through the way Pocahontas is portrayed and treated, and how she reacts

New Historicism in “The Lottery”: Cold War Anxieties

“The Lottery” is a rather well known short story written by Shirley Jackson. The story revolves around a village performing their annual “lottery” that essentially decides who is going to be sacrificed so that the town will have a good harvest. The story was written in 1948 which locates it a few years after the end of World War II and in the beginning stages of the Cold War. This is a time when anxieties about the conflict are skyrocketing in both countries.

Simply locating the story within a timeframe is not enough for new Historicism though, as its goal is more complex. Tyson describes one of the ways new Historicism is distinguished from the traditional “New historicism is concerned not with historical events as events, but with the ways in which events are interpreted, with historical discourses, with ways of seeing the world and modes of meaning”(Tyson 278). “The Lottery” focuses on the anxieties and events surrounding the Cold War and Jackson uses them to show the  conflict and discourse between the U.S. government, and the average U.S. citizen of the time.

Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery"

The way that the lottery functions is that one of many strips of paper is marked with a black dot, and then they are all put into a specific black box which has been used for years, and then the next day the box is drawn from to select a family, and then a family member. The “winner” of the lottery is then stoned to death by every man, woman, and child of the village together. This system is the closest thing there is to an authority or system of government in the story. It is mentioned that there are other villages and that these villages also partake in the lottery, so it is not just a random phenomena. The lottery may reflect a general anxiety and distrust in fellow citizens felt among all at that time, but I believe it more specifically is referring to the government’s distrust among its population and those in power, and the beginning of Mccarthyism. The government was seeking to maintain an idealised version of the United States and the “American Lifestyle™” and through their attempts at protecting their conceptualization of the world, harmful laws and legal events occured. The villagers, on the other hand, are simply “victims of the machine” and only want to survive, and have enough crop to survive. Among the villagers there are even those who distrust the lottery and wish to end it “‘They do say,’ Mr. Adams said to Old Man Warner, who stood next to him, ‘that over in the north village they're talking of giving up the lottery’” (Jackson). Old Man Warner promptly replies that “There’s always been a lottery”(Jackson) and dismisses him. The villagers only partake in the lottery because they feel trapped, they have never known a life without it and believe that if they do not participate they will have insufficient crops to feed themselves. The villagers take part in the lottery for survival. Jackson interprets the U.S. population’s fear at the time of the potential conflict and contrasts it against the government’s idealized values and willfulness to strike against its own people through the conflict between the villagers and the tradition of the lottery. “‘It isn't fair, it isn't right,’ Mrs. Hutchinson screamed, and then they were upon her” (Jackson).

Communist Pigs: New Historicism in Animal Farm.

Tyson interprets New Historicism as what happens when we read a historical account and ask ourselves: “what does thus account tell us about the political and ideological conflicts of the culture that produced and read the account?” (Tyson 268). When New Historicism is applied to literary texts Tyson states that these texts are often viewed as “cultural artifacts that can tell us something about the interplay of discourses, the web of social meanings, operating in the time and place in which the text was written” (Tyson 277). When pondering both of these topics, the first example that came to my mind was George Orwell’s famous novel: Animal Farm. At first glance, Orwell’s novel seems to be about a bunch of animals who overthrow their farmer, fight for control, and ultimately just end up in a situation worse than what they came from. In a nutshell, that’s it; but if you do a deeper reading of the novel and apply New Historicist thought to it, traces of communism come out from the framework.

When we read the novel while keeping in mind “the political and ideological conflicts of the culture that produced” it and asking what the “interplay of discourses” within it might be we see the plucky pig leaders, Napoleon and Snowball in a different light. Written in 1945, a time when communism was striking fear in the hearts of many people throughout the world, Animal farm perfectly fits into the social discourse of post WWII/Cold war era Russia. The overthrow that the animals partake in against the humans is often seen as parallel to the communist revolution, and the pig that starts the revolution, Old Major, is often compared to Vladimir Lenin, the leader of the revolution in Russia. We also see reflections of other communist Russian leaders such as Joseph Stalin (Napoleon) and Leon Trovsky (Snowball) in the pig leaders who take over after Old Major’s death. We slowly start to see the discourse of communist Russia and the communist revolution play out through the characters of the animals, something that was heavy on many people’s hearts at the time of Animal Farm’s publication.

Thus, when reading Animal Farm with a new historicist point of view, we view it as a reflection of the political conflicts of communism in Russia in the 1940s. We see the “web of social meanings” in the way the pigs lead the animals in revolt, the way Napoleon overthrows his partner snowball, and in the way he changes the “Principles of Animalism” from their original purposes to a more sinister interpretation. By the end of the book, one pig has taken over the whole farm, (kind of like Stalin took over, but let’s not name names….) and the animals can’t see any difference in their post revolution farm from the pre-revolution version. This strikes a lot of similarities with communism at the time, because it certainly was nothing like anyone expected it to be. Just like communism spread and overtook several countries through one leader, the corruption of the pig Napoleon spread throughout the farm and he banished anyone who tired to stop him. Talk about a thirst for power. Overall, Animal Farm can be read in a new historicist light by the way in which it reflects the communist discourse of the time in which it was written (and takes the term "communist pigs" to a whole different level).

A Queer Theory Reading of Disney’s Mulan

            The animated film Mulan, released in 1998 by Disney, centers around a young Chinese girl who saves her father from being drafted into the army by taking the guise of a young man. The children’s film is based on the Chinese legend of Hua Mulan, a girl who also takes her father’s place in the army and goes to war for her country. A striking difference between the legend and the film, however, is that iterations of the folktale illustrate that Hua Mulan never claimed to be man; she went to war as a woman because she got bored of weaving, was victorious, and then returned home to continue weaving. Alternatively, Disney’s film focuses on a young girl who doesn’t fit in with her environment and is uncomfortable with the activities prescribed to her gender by her culture. Viewers follow Mulan and witness her question the masculine and female binary as she consistently performs somewhere in between the spectrum. A queer theory reading of Mulan shows how the film is capable of challenging the cultural notions of masculine and feminine and implicates the limitations of gender roles.

            The very beginning of the film introduces the customs and pageantry surrounded with becoming the ideal bride which establishes a role for women in society to the viewer. During the song “Honor To Us All,” Mulan is bathed, clothed, and painted with white makeup, rouge, and lip colour to show the elaborate process women must go through to be considered in good taste and desirable. Throughout the song, Mulan looks uncomfortable and lost as her elders continue to groom her making her appear more feminine and passive. When Mulan sees her reflection in the hand mirror presented to her, she is visibly shaken because she does not recognize the woman she sees in the mirror as being her. The makeup and clothes she is dressed in act as a metaphor for the mask she wears to hide her true identity. This instance contributes to our knowledge of queer work because it is akin to the roles people must perform when they do not fall into the category of gender roles or sexual identity. External expectations complicate the ability for individuals to self-actualize as is clear with Mulan. Ultimately, Mulan is acting to “keep [her] father standing tall” and bring honour to her family.

After being rejected by the matchmaker and disappointing her family, Mulan sings the song “Reflection” in which she laments her inability to be who she truly is. The sentiments she expresses are those longing to “show the world what’s inside [her] heart” and to escape “a world where [she has] to hide [her] heart and what [she] believe[s] in.” The imagery used in “Reflection” shows half of Mulan’s face without makeup (masculinity) and the other half painted (femininity) to show the binary opposition existing on the spectrum; queer theory works to break down these opposites. The lyrics of the song coupled with the image of Mulan’s face offer a look into the struggle of those who identify as genderqueer often endure because it shows conflict in coming to terms with one’s own identity. This process is made more complex when one identifies contrary to the expectations of society. More often than not, these individuals are met with judgement and vehement opposition. This is especially true in Mulan’s case where the punishment for a woman impersonating a man in the army is death.

                                           

The film explores other areas of queer theory such as homosocial behavior. When Mulan assumes the role of Ping, she develops an intimate but non-sexual relationship with General Li Shang whom she saves from death at the film’s climax. The initial relationship between both Shang and Ping at the training camp is one of tension. In many cases the tension is homoerotic, especially when a shirtless Shang stares at Ping. A queer theory reading likely would attribute this tension to the problematics of sexuality or sexual identity. Sheng’s song “I’ll Make A Man Out Of You” indicate he subscribes to heteronormative culture. His attraction to Ping conflicts with his heterosexual/hyper-masculine self-schema. As the film progresses, Shang grows closer to Ping. After Ping is revealed to be Mulan, a woman, Sheng is disgusted with himself and with the deception, realizing his sexuality may not be as clear-cut as he had once thought. At the end of the film, Sheng and Mulan are suggested to be romantically involved after she returns to life as a woman. This example illustrates that Sheng was appealed to by the masculine qualities of Ping/Mulan and continued to pursue Mulan in spite of this. This situation presented by the movie may serve as an effective example of a deconstruction of rigid binaries that society has constructed for women/men and homosexuals/heterosexuals that are a focus of queer theory.

                           

Other instances in the film such as the communal male bath, the “effeminate” male advisor to the emperor, and male warriors in drag promote themes that question what gender roles and human sexuality serve as a whole. Offered here is a taste of how these themes are initially explored in Disney’s Mulan. Upon closer examination of these other situations, a more complex look into queer theory can be obtained. Furthermore, this film can offer the opportunity to discuss the issue of “gender is performance” and transgendered identity. It is under these lenses one can learn how a person can have multiple identities rather than be limited to categorization. As a children’s film under this light, Mulan has the potential to facilitate an appropriate discussion and education about acceptance and diversity at a young age.

 Song Lyrics: Mulan, www.fpx.de/fp/Disney/Lyrics/Mulan.html.