Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide

Content Warning: This section of the guide includes discussion of racism.

According to Tyson, postcolonial criticism analyzes “cultural difference” and is useful for understanding the similarities of the critical theories “that deal with human oppression” (363), like queer theory, African American theory, etc. Postcolonial theory holds that any population that has experienced oppression can be considered “formerly colonialized” and can be widely applied, although different populations incorporate it differently depending on their specific cultural historical experiences.

Tyson gives a brief history of colonialism beginning with the “Age of Discovery” in the 15th century through the height of British colonialism in the early 20th century. Following World War II, Britain and other colonial powers lost many of their colonial territories. Postcolonial criticism studies works about and/or by colonized or once-colonized peoples from the 15th century to the present. 

Tyson asserts that the most relevant postcolonial criticism for English majors is analysis of works that deal with British colonialism and its legacy. Postcolonial theory typically analyzes both how colonial ideologies have been internalized by dominated populations and anticolonial efforts to resist colonialism. It can be applied to texts created both under and after colonial rule. In this way, postcolonial theory is one method of Literary Analysis as a Form of Social Justice.

Colonialist Ideology and Postcolonial Identity

British colonialism became embedded within colonized populations in ways that left traces visible to this day, most notably in the use of English in the former colonies. This persistent and lingering cultural colonization created postcolonial identities in the formerly colonized populations that both reflected colonial negative stereotypes and featured an “alienation” from local cultures that had been suppressed under English colonialism.

Colonialist identity or colonialist discourse was predicated on the assumed superiority of the colonizers and the notion that the colonized were “savages.” This judgment of the perceived inferiority of local populations and cultures is known as “othering” and serves as a form of dehumanization. Colonialist identity is Eurocentric and compares all other cultures against European standards. One example of “Eurocentric othering” is orientalism, a term used by Edward Said to describe how Western cultures stereotype Eastern cultures as “other” to create a positive self-image in contrast. Nordicism is the “logical extreme” of Eurocentric othering and is an ideology that views Nordic people as inherently superior (e.g., master-race theory).

Colonialist ideology was promoted throughout colonized populations through education and other methods. As a result, colonized “subjects” engaged in mimicry to more closely resemble their colonizers and thereby align themselves more closely with the “superior” group. This is a form of “colonization of consciousness.” An awareness of the injustice of colonial rule creates the “double consciousness” or “double vision” of being caught between colonial culture and a local culture. This feeling of the “trauma of the cultural displacement” is termed “unhomeliness,” or the feeling of not being “at home in yourself” (369). For instance, postcolonial writers must choose whether to write in English, the colonizer’s language, or a local language, which may not be accessible to a wider audience.

It is difficult, if not impossible, to “reclaim a precolonial past” because much of it has been destroyed, suppressed, or lost (369). Therefore, many postcolonial theorists assess the hybridity or syncretism of culture, or the mix of colonial and precolonial cultural elements. Others, particularly nationalist movements, seek to reclaim as much as possible of precolonial past cultures.

Postcolonial women experience “double colonization,” as they are oppressed both by the patriarchy and by colonial ideology.

Foundational Postcolonial Debates

There are three debates that shape the formation of postcolonial theory as a field: “Which peoples—and, therefore, which literary works—should be considered postcolonial? Is postcolonial theory in danger of marginalizing the real concerns of postcolonial peoples? Finally, is postcolonial criticism in danger of marginalizing the work of postcolonial writers?” (372).

One key element of the “who is postcolonial debate” is the argument over whether postcolonial literature includes works from “[w]hite settler colonies” like the US, Canada, Australia, etc. or whether it should only address those from “invader colonies,” like India, Nigeria, etc. (372). Those against the inclusion of white settler colonial literature note that white colonists share a race, language, and culture with the colonizer. Those who feel that these works should be included note that anticolonial movements in white settler colonies provide an example of how anticolonial resistance can occur despite cultural connections between the colonizer and the colonized.

Some postcolonial theorists argue that postcolonial theory is the product of an intellectual elite and does not truly reflect the concern of the “subaltern,” a term for “poor, exploited postcolonial peoples” (373). Others criticize the use of the concept of hybridity in the field as a product of deconstructive theory, which is itself Eurocentric. Some postcolonial theorists warn that the application of postcolonial analysis to the Western canon will lead to the neglect of postcolonial writers.

Globalization and the “End” of Postcolonial Theory

Some critique the field of postcolonial theory as being outdated because today the world is shaped by globalization, or the transformation of global culture through its domination by multinational corporations, rather than colonialism and its legacy. They argue that the relevant framework is not postcolonialism, but cultural imperialism or neocolonialism. 

Cultural imperialism is “the ‘takeover’” of a culture via economic dominance. Neocolonialism is the exploitation of labor in developing countries or subaltern populations by multinational corporations. Tyson analyzes the examples of resource exploitation of the Niger Delta by Royal Dutch Shell, an Anglo-Dutch oil company; labor exploitation by clothing manufacturers in Bangladesh; and destruction of local dairy industries in Colombia, Sri Lanka, and the Philippines by Nestlé. These examples show how multinational corporations, rather than colonizing nations, are the contemporary engines of oppression.

Postcolonial Theory and Global Tourism

Global tourism is one aspect of globalization that contributes to the exploitation of developing countries through its commercialization of local heritage sites and cultural practices for a wealthy, foreign audience in a way that limits their access by members of the local communities. Postcolonial theorists see this process as largely analogous to colonial exploitation. For example, in the Philippines, local residents of Hacienda Looc were forced off their land to make way for a tourist resort. These kinds of projects are undertaken to “economically develop” poor nations. Tyson argues that this “development” language is analogous to the colonial discourse of “civilizing” “savages.”

Postcolonial Theory and Global Conservation

An area of concern for postcolonial theorists is environmental destruction that endangers local populations and is often driven by multinational corporations. However, conservationism and postcolonial theory have often been at odds because postcolonial theory focuses on human impacts, whereas conservationism is a domain that arises from a belief in preserving Eurocentric notions of a “pristine nature” free of humans that is often at odds with Indigenous land management practices. 

For instance, the creation of Yosemite National Park resulted in the marginalization of the Miwok people who had historically lived there. Often, when the Indigenous locals are forced to leave, the land falls into disrepair and poachers and other bad actors take advantage of the isolation to exploit its resources. 

Ramachandra Guha argues that the focus on wilderness preservation has resulted in a systemic oversight of the way that global consumerism spurs environmental damage. Indigenous movements have advocated for the incorporation of Indigenous peoples, their rights, and their land management practices into ecological conservation efforts since the 1960s.

Postcolonial Criticism and Literature

Postcolonial literary analysis focuses on themes that address the interaction of “individual identity and cultural beliefs” (387). Tyson lists the major themes of postcolonial literary analysis as the following (387):

• The “initial encounter” with colonizers

• The journey of a European colonizer through “an unfamiliar wilderness with a local guide” 

• Othering

• Mimicry

• Exile

• The excitement and hopes around independence and subsequent disappointment

• Cultural difference

• Identity struggles

• Double colonization

• The natural environment and its loss

• Connection to the “precolonial past”

• Whether a text is colonialist or anti-colonialist

Assessing the colonial or anticolonial aspects of a text is complex because some texts, like Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad, reproduce colonial ideologies while criticizing colonial practice.

Tyson describes the approaches of some postcolonial theorists. Homi Bhabha argues that postcolonial literary analysis should focus on “what world literature tells us about the personal experience of people whom history has ignored” (389), like the similarities between Black people living under racism in South Africa and the United States as shown in the work of Nadine Gordimer and Toni Morrison. Helen Tiffin argues that postcolonial literature should rewrite colonial myths to show their inherent colonial aspects. One example is Jean Rhys’s prologue to Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre, Wide Sargasso Sea (1966), which tells the story of Rochester’s Jamaican wife, Bertha Mason, and presents her as “a sane woman driven to violent behavior by Rochester’s imperialist oppression” (390). Edward Said argued that postcolonial analysis of the canon should move what is at the “margin” to the center of analysis, as he does in his analysis of the mention of Sir Thomas Bertram’s management of his enslaved persons in Antigua in Mansfield Park by Jane Austen.

The ways colonialist ideology is often implicit, naturalized, and transmitted in canonical literary works can be revealed through these modes of analysis.

Some Questions Postcolonial Critics Ask About Literary Texts

Tyson provides a series of questions that summarize postcolonial approaches to literature, highlighting how interpretations of cultural differences drive the narrative and language (391-92):

1. How does the work portray colonialist oppression?

2. To what extent does the work explore the notion of postcolonial identity?

3. How does the work portray anticolonial resistance?

4. How does postcolonial theory reveal new understandings about works in the Western canon?

5. How does the work portray relationships between people and nature?

6. How do works in the Western canon “reinforce or undermine” colonial ideology?

The Colony Within: A Postcolonial Reading of The Great Gatsby

Tyson’s postcolonial analysis of The Great Gatsby incorporates elements of psychological, Marxist, and African American literary analysis.

Tyson argues that The Great Gatsby is “the quintessential text about othering, a psychological operation on which colonialist ideology depends and that is its unmistakable hallmark” (393). Tyson begins with a description of colonialist psychology and its emphasis on the difference between the “dominant” and “inferior” groups. She argues that this psychology characterizes Nick Carraway. She justifies this argument with a description of Nick’s background and his method, as narrator, of othering those he sees as lesser, like the Jewish Wolfsheim, through a variety of methods, including emphasizing their ethnic differences. The novel itself largely erases Black people from Manhattan except as stereotypes, which is in keeping with the colonial view that its subjects have no relevance and/or are not entirely human.

Further, Tyson argues that Jay Gatsby is analogous to a colonized subject who aspires to, but can never become part of, the “dominant” group. She uses textual evidence to argue that Gatsby uses mimicry to attempt to gain entry to the “old money” crowd that Daisy is a part of. Finally, she states that Tom Buchanan illustrates how the colonial psychology is harmful even to those who benefit from it. Tom is the most privileged character and has a vested interest in Nordicism. However, despite (or because of) his privilege, he has “a tormented inner life” (401). He is aggressive toward his “lessers,” which Tyson suggests is symptomatic of a fundamental insecurity.

Tyson concludes that The Great Gatsby is not a colonialist allegory but asserts that it reveals how the colonial psychology inherent to the American national project operates.

Questions for Further Practice: Postcolonial Approaches to Other Literary Works

Tyson provides model questions to guide postcolonial literary analysis. These questions explore how postcolonial concepts, such as unhomeliness, mimicry, and othering, can deepen a reader’s understanding of texts. Topics include the following (404-05):

1. The effects of colonialism on the colonized and colonizers as depicted in The Autobiography of My Mother by Jamaica Kincaid, with a focus on the psychological dynamics at work

2. Unhomeliness and mimicry in The Mimic Men by V. S. Naipaul

3. How Chinua Achebe’s depiction of Ibo people in Things Fall Apart “corrects” the portrayal of African people in Heart of Darkness

4. The relationship between a people and their land as depicted in The Heart of Redness by Zakes Mda

5. Othering in Frankenstein, with an emphasis on the characterization of the monster and secondary characters like the Turkish merchant in the work