|
|
|
|
Provincialising Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical
Difference by Dipesh Chakrabarty
Princeton, 320 pp, £42.95
I
went to a Protestant school in Bombay, but the creation
myth we were taught in the classroom didn't have to
do with Adam and Eve. I remember a poster on the wall
when I was in the Fifth Standard, a pictorial narrative
of evolution. On the extreme left, crouching low,
its arms hanging near its feet, was an ape; it looked
intent, like an athlete waiting for the gun to go
off. The next figure rose slightly, and the one after
it was more upright: it was like a slow-motion sequence
of a runner in the first few seconds of a race. The
pistol had been fired; the race had begun. Millisecond
after millisecond, that runner - now ape, now Neanderthal
- rose a little higher, and its back straightened.
By the time it had reached the apogee of its height
and straight-backedness, and taken a stride forward,
its appearance had improved noticeably; it had become
a Homo sapiens, and also, coincidentally, European.
The race had been won before it had properly started.
This
poster captured and compressed the gradations of Darwin's
parable of evolution, both arresting time and focusing
on the key moments of a concatenation, in a similar
way to what Walter Benjamin thought photographs did
in changing our perception of human movement: |
|
Whereas
it is a commonplace that, for example, we
have some idea what is involved in the act
of walking (if only in general terms), we
have no idea at all what happens during
the fraction of a second when a person actually
takes a step. Photography, with its devices
of slow motion and enlargement, reveals
the secret. It is through photography that
we first discover the existence of this
optical unconscious; just as we discover
the instinctual subconscious through psychoanalysis. |
|
|
|
|
|
The
poster in my classroom, too, revealed a movement
impossible for the naked eye to perceive: from lower
primate to higher, from Neanderthal to human, and
- this last transition was so compressed as to be
absent altogether - from the human to the European.
These still figures gave us an 'optical unconscious'
of a political context, the context of progress
and European science and humanism. Here, too, Benjamin
has something to say. In a late essay, 'Theses on
the Philosophy of History', he stated: 'The concept
of the historical progress of mankind cannot be
sundered from the concept of its progression through
a homogeneous, empty time.'
'Homogeneous'
and 'empty' are curious adjectives for 'time': they
are more readily associated with space and spatial
configuration. Certain landscapes glimpsed from
a motorway, or the look of a motorway itself, might
be described as dull and 'homogeneous'; streets
and rooms might be 'empty'. My mentioning motorways
isn't fortuitous. When Benjamin was formulating
his thoughts on progress and history, and writing
this essay in 1940, the year he killed himself,
Hitler, besides carrying out his elaborate plans
for the Jews in Germany, was implementing another
huge and devastating project: the Autobahn. The
project, intended both to connect one part of Germany
to another and to colonise the landscape, was begun
in the early 1930s; it's clear that Hitler's vision
of the Autobahn is based on an idea of progress
- 'progress' not only in the sense of movement between
one place and another, but in the sense of science
and civilisation. In India, in other parts of the
so-called 'developing' world, even in present-day
New York, London or Paris, it's impossible properly
to experience 'homogeneous, empty time' because
of the random, often maddeningly diverse allocation
of space, human habitation and community. It is,
however, possible to experience it on Western motorways
and highways. Hitler was a literalist of this philosophy
of space and movement: he wanted space to be 'homogeneous',
or blond and European. Benjamin knew this first-hand;
he was writing his 'Theses on the Philosophy of
History' as a Jewish witness to Nazism and one of
its potential victims. Hitler's anxiety and consternation
at Jesse Owens's victory in the 100 metres at the
Munich Olympics in 1936 came from his literalism
of space, his investment in progress and linearity.
That idea of space was at once reified and shattered
when Owens reached the finishing line before the
others.
Benjamin
had been thinking of history in terms of space for
a while; and, not too long before he wrote about
'homogeneous, empty time', he'd posited an alternative
version of modernity and space in his descriptions
of the flâneur, the Parisian arcades and 19th-century
street life. The Parisian street constitutes Benjamin's
critique of the Autobahn: just as the crowd, according
to Benjamin, is 'present everywhere' in Baudelaire's
work, and present so intrinsically that it's never
directly described, the Autobahn is implicitly present,
and refuted, in Benjamin's meditations on Paris.
The flâneur, indeed, retards and parodies
the idea of 'progress'. 'Around 1840 it was briefly
fashionable to take turtles for a walk in the arcades,'
Benjamin writes in a footnote to his 1939 essay
on Baudelaire. 'The flâneurs liked to have
the turtles set the pace for them. If they had had
their way, progress would have been obliged to accommodate
itself to this space. But this attitude did not
prevail; Taylor, who popularised the watchword "Down
with dawdling!", carried the day.' The flâneur
views history subversively; he - and it is usually
he - deliberately relocates its meanings, its hierarchies.
As far back as 1929, Benjamin had explained why
the flâneur had to be situated in
Paris:
|
|
The
flâneur is the creation of Paris.
The wonder is that it was not Rome.
But perhaps in Rome even dreaming
is forced to move along streets that
are too well-paved. And isn't the
city too full of temples, enclosed
squares and national shrines to be
able to enter undivided into the dreams
of the passer-by, along with every
shop sign, every flight of steps and
every gateway? The great reminiscences,
the historical frissons - these are
all so much junk to the flâneur,
who is happy to leave them to the
tourist. And he would be happy to
trade " all his knowledge of
artists' quarters, birthplaces and
princely palaces for the scent of
a single weathered threshold or the
touch of a single tile - that which
any old dog carries away. |
|
|
|
| |
|
There's
an implicit critique of the imperial city, and the
imperialist aesthetic, in this description of Rome,
with its 'great reminiscences' and 'historical frissons',
and in the contrast of 'national shrines' and 'temples'
with the 'touch of a single tile'. Benjamin is not
alone in using these metaphors; both Ruskin and
Lawrence (who probably took it from Ruskin) use
Rome as a metaphor for the imperial, the finished,
the perfected, as against the multifariousness of,
say, the Gothic, the 'barbaric', the non-Western.
Benjamin doesn't quite romanticise the primitive
as Lawrence at least appears to: instead, he comes
up with a particularly modern form of aleatoriness
and decay in the 'weathered threshold' of a Parisian
street. |
next
>>
|
|
|