Page 1 of 7

European Journal of Business &

Social Sciences

Available at https://ejbss.org/

ISSN: 2235-767X

Volume 07 Issue 02

February 2019

Available online: https://ejbss.org/ P a g e | 776

New Literatures of

Commonwealth and Post-Colonial Backdrops

DR AJIT SINGH

MA,M.PHIL,PH.D, JRF

ABSTRACT: This paper at first, examines the relationship between empire and English

literature, in other words, the ideological uses to which English literature was put. Next, it

examines the concept of commonwealth literature and the controversies surrounding it, and

lastly, it discusses selected aspects of the concept of postcolonial studies, the differences between

commonwealth and postcolonial literature, and the concerns or characteristics of postcolonial

literature. It begins by establishing the link between Empire and English-language literature.

Drawing on various thinkers, it discusses the ideological uses of literature and argues that the

textual forms that emerged as “resistance” to imperial domination were referred to by a

multiplicity of terms: Commonwealth Literature, New English Literature, Literature in English,

Third World Literature, World Fiction, Minority Literature, Multicultural Literature, or

Postcolonial Literature. It examines the merits and handicaps of each designation and explains

why the term “postcolonial” is the more appropriate notion and designation.

INTRODUCTION

Britain used, if it is true, military might to subdue a good part of the world especially in

the last part of the nineteenth century, military victory constituted not the winning of the war, but

of a battle and it were cultural texts to complete what military might had started. Thus, literary

texts which were produced during this period and which can be described as colonial or

colonialist texts, reflected the colonial ethos, and contributed to the complex of attitudes that

made imperialism seem part of the order of things. In other words, it was clear that to assume

control over a territory or a nation was not only to exert political or economic power, it was also

to have imaginative command. It is in the self-representations of the British and the

representations of the Other, that the ideological uses of English literature can be seen most

clearly. The best illustration is in the introduction of English literature into the Indian educational

system. After the battle of Plassy in 1755, the British East India Company began to administer

the various native Indian states as colonies. A high proportion of those who came over from

Britain to serve as administrators were Scots who found it easier to succeed without English

patronage abroad than at home. The Scots had the responsibility of training a civil service from

among the Hindu and Muslim populations and one of the principal subjects taught the newly

Europeanised natives was English literature. It was expected to convey the values and standards

of the conquerors. The British had conquered India with ships and cannon; they were, however,

to rule it with Shakespeare. And talking about the Scots, it would be a major oversight not to

note that Adam Smith -- better known as the author of The Wealth of Nations -- was actually the

founder of English as an academic discipline.

Page 2 of 7

European Journal of Business &

Social Sciences

Available at https://ejbss.org/

ISSN: 2235-767X

Volume 07 Issue 02

February 2019

Available online: https://ejbss.org/ P a g e | 777

At the time that Adam Smith introduced lectures on English literature in Scotland, this

discipline was regarded in Oxbridge as an un-academic discipline and not worthy of serious

inquiry. Rather, what held sway in lecture halls were classical studies: Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and

Sanskrit. If classical studies constituted the academic menu of the upper classes, religious studies

were the main menu of the lower classes. However, by mid-century, religious studies which were

used to control the lower classes, was fast losing its grip as a result of scientific discoveries and

social change. It was therefore imperative for another social institution to be put in its place to

replace religion and the church as disseminators of value, tradition, and authority. As Terry

Eagleton notes, George Gordon in an Oxford inaugural lecture said: “England is sick, and

English literature must save it. The churches, having failed, and social remedies being slow,

English literature has now a triple function” (23). Of particular significance, however, is the fact

that English as an academic discipline “was first institutionalised not in the universities, but in

Mechanics' Institutes, working men's colleges, and extension lecturing circuits” (Eagleton 52).

The reason for this was because it was expected that the “softening” and “humanizing” effect of

literature could be used to cement the relations between the social classes. English literature was

therefore to serve as a kind of opium whose role was to ward off what Mathew Arnold saw as the

anarchy that would engulf and disrupt social relations in England (Eagleton 65).

If English literature was institutionalised in Mechanics' Institutes and in other vocational

colleges as an instrument for the transmission of “moral” values to the lower classes, it becomes

clear that it could become an even more effective weapon in the “softening” of conquered

peoples.

It is precisely with this in mind that courses in English literature were introduced in

Indian schools as far back as the 1820s and formalised with the passing of the English Education

Act of 1835. Yet, what is now known as the subject of English literature, the British educational

system had no firm place for it until the last quarter of the nineteenth century. Thus,

Shakespeare, Addison, Bacon, Locke, and others became part of the literary curriculum of Indian

schools, curriculum functioning here as discourse. Again, it is reminded that a vital if subtle

connection exists between a discourse which those who are to be educated are represented as

morally deficient and the attribution of moral and intellectual values to the literary works they

are assigned to read. Clearly then, English literature, or better still, colonialist literature played

the role of the “surrogate Englishman.” As Eagleton so well puts it, English literature presenting

“the Englishman in his highest and most perfect state, becomes a mask for economic

exploitation, so successfully camouflaging the material activities of the colonizer.

This use of literature as a “mask of conquest” was only part of a larger scheme. In his

widely anthologised “Minute on Indian Education,” Thomas Macaulay indicated clearly the role

of education in India when he declared thus, “we must at present do our best to form a class who

may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern, a class of persons, Indian in

blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals and in intellect” (430). This

category, “Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste” is what Frantz Fanon calls “black

skin, white masks” and V.S. Naipaul calls “mimic men.” In the Native American context, this is

Page 3 of 7

European Journal of Business &

Social Sciences

Available at https://ejbss.org/

ISSN: 2235-767X

Volume 07 Issue 02

February 2019

Available online: https://ejbss.org/ P a g e | 778

what Black Elk calls being an apple, “red outside and white inside.” This leads us to the overall

issue of representation in the making of empire. Boehmer states in her Colonial and Postcolonial

Literature that “in writings as various as romances, memoirs, adventure tales or the later poetry

of Tennyson, the view of the world as directed from the colonial metropolis was consolidated

and confirmed. So, it also followed almost automatically that resistance to imperial domination --

especially on the part of those who lacked guns or money -- frequently assumed textual form”

(Boehmer 14). Some of the textual forms that emerged as “resistance” to imperial domination are

what are called variously Commonwealth literature, New English literatures, Literatures in

English, Third World Literature or Postcolonial Literature, with other cognate terms also used,

such as World Fiction, World Literature written in English, multicultural literature, minority

literature, resistance literature, etc.

For some, the idea of Commonwealth Literature is quite straightforward because it is the

literature produced by countries which are former colonies of Britain or had the status of

dominions. For others, it can be extended to cover countries which, although not former British

colonies, are now members of the Commonwealth of Nations. For yet others, matters are not that

simple. There are those who argue that the very notion of Commonwealth Literature is in itself

condescending, narrow and misleading. And for some the designation is dépassé, something of

an anachronism. In a study commissioned by the Commonwealth Secretariat entitled “Learning

from Each Other: Commonwealth Studies in the 21st Century,” the authors are not concerned

with whether Commonwealth Literature exists or not. Rather, for them, the issue is how to

broaden the concept to embrace literatures in indigenous languages. In the section entitled

“Intellectual trends in Commonwealth Studies,” the authors ask, “How can the study of

Commonwealth literature more fully embrace literatures in languages other than English, and

reflect the increasingly complex varieties of English used?” (19).The question would make sense

in terms of examining the varieties of English used, the attempt at nativization etc. It would be

inappropriate, however, to think of calling the literature in the indigenous languages

Commonwealth Literature especially as some of these literatures pre-date the historical situations

that brought about what is today known as the Commonwealth. It appears that it would be more

appropriate to call Sanskrit, Igbo, Yoruba, Hindi, Khosa, Kikuyu, Hausa, Maori, and Zulu

literatures by their names rather than by the designation of Commonwealth Literature. Perhaps if

these works are translated into English, then they could fit into this category as in the case with

Ngugi wa Thiongo's works rendered from Gikuyu into English. Nor can, say, Wolof literature be

considered francophone literature. The authors were, of course, aware of the fact that many

scholars were not comfortable with the designation. They note that this is “particularly in the

field of literature” where some scholars shy away from the term 'commonwealth' and prefer to

use such terms as postcolonial. They note that the very concept of “commonwealth” derives from

“egalitarian principles of popular sovereignty, rights and freedoms. Commonwealth studies

potentially offer democratic and all inclusive forms of social analysis, pointing to reconstructed

societies and to communities beyond colonialism. They add, rather problematically, that the term

post-colonial is far more constrained than ‘commonwealth’ even though the former may in

theory (but frequently does not in practice) encompass a wider field geographically.