Colonial Hybridity

The student’s blog post titled “Sati to Subvert Colonial Authority” brings up many important and interesting points about the final scene of revolt as well as the relationship between Hilarion and Luxima in Owenson’s The Missionary. I agree with their main theme of Hilarion representing the West as “dominating and empowering with a cause”, whereas Luxima represents the East as “submissive but with a fiery spirt and purpose, devout to social rules, a deep love for nature, and attracted to new and different things.” A lot of the traits used to describe Europe and India at the time are being used as traits for both characters. They are direct representations of both countries. And I do agree with how the author says that just like Hilarion becomes more open to receiving and learning about Luxima, so does Europe react the same way about India.

However, I do not agree with the author’s opinion on the way India “accepted” Europe. As readers we have to think about the fact that India was colonized by the Western world. The country and its people didn’t just “accept” the traditions and things the Europe brought for them; they were forced to assimilate to a society that was complete foreign to them in order to survive. Sure, there were some Indians who did choose to accept Europe and its traditions and beliefs. But a majority of the population was forced to change their religion, their clothing, their morals and beliefs in order to stay alive. This is what colonization does to these countries and I don’t think it’s right to say that the hybrid culture that did come out of this mixture was completely accepted by both parties. Because the reality is that, a lot of the time, hybrid cultures are created as a way for the culture that is oppressed to somehow survive and keep its older traditions while still having to accept the culture of the oppressors. It’s a sacrifice they must make in order to keep what is most important to them.

However, I do agree with the fact that both Hilarion and Luxima represent the hybrid culture, Luxima sacrificing herself for Hilarion and then he doesn’t allow her to complete the sacrifice in the sati scene furthermore emphasizing the fact that both cultures have to let go of a part of them in order for both to successfully thrive.

-Laura Mateo-Gallegos

Mahomet’s True Identity

I agree that Sake Dean Mahomet’s imitation of European literary and artistic conventions reproduces racial-ethnic stereotypes that were used to justify British colonial violence. To support this stance, the first thing to remember is this book was initially written to recruit Irish men to the East India Company. Within the book it is very evident that Mahomet does use sly civility to get a few points across to the Europeans, but he is a business man so any sense of imperialism is seen as revenue to him. 

His use of sly civility is only to a certain extent because he makes it clear that his roots of India and being Muslim are not that important to him due to his admiration described for Captain Baker (the European). In Letter IV it states “my mother unhappy at the idea of parting with me, and resigning her child to the care of a European”. A keyword to look at is resigning. To resign something is to voluntarily leave or give something up. I believe this was the start of Mahomet’s conformity to imperialism and British colonialism because he says his mother resigned him, but she ultimately did not have a choice, Mahomet was the one to make that decision for her and had the agreement of the Europeans. And British colonial violence is exactly that, the act of taking advantage of ‘the other’ and destroying who they are, but yet make it seem as if it is the fault of ‘the other’. At the time of leaving his mother he probably did not see it as her ‘resigning her child’ but at the point of writing this book, he would already have a mindset of imperialism and already experienced what it means to be part of the Europeans.

Although Mahomet does use imitation of European literary and artistic conventions and there are many gray areas in the book as to what he is trying to get across, I think it is no question of whether Mahomet agreed with the Europeans. He clearly did. From the admiration he had for Captain Baker, to leaving his identity in India, to marrying a European women, and to top it off, his wife’s family are the ones that endorsed the book. So to be that involved with the Europeans is to prove that Mahomet was in agreement with the British colonial violence. 

-Alyssa Rodriguez

Letters to Hamilton and Her Privilege

“So far all is right. We behold women moving in their own proper sphere, learning no other art, save that of adorning their persons; and inspired by no other view, but that rendering themselves objects of pleasure for the eyes of men. But how shall I astonish you, when I unfold the extreme inconsistencies of the foolish Europeans, and inform you, that these uninstructed women are frequently suffered to become their own mistresses; sometimes entrusted with the management of large estates and left at liberty to act for themselves!………No, in that country, as well as in this, all men allow that there is nothing more amiable in a woman as the helplessness of mental imbecility: and even the women themselves are so well convinced of this, that they would consider this an insult to be treated as rational creatures.” (Hamilton, 129)

Elizabeth Hamilton has produced a work of literature that is so rich in a satire that it isn’t uncommon to find it difficult to pinpoint who and why she is defending in her novel at different points. While she herself is a white woman of Irish descent, there are many times in the novel where she critiques the moral livelihood of Europeans just like herself. However, because she is a woman who is part to the consumption of the British India company she is also exposed to the orientalism that exists, even if it is just through the eyes of her own Europeanism which in turn does make her biased to her own point of view given that she doesn’t experience orientalism through the eyes of native Indians.

While the passage provided above is less focused on the hegemonic ways of Europeans and mostly focused on satire, it still provides insight into how both sides treat women. The hegemonic ideology of Europeans gets subtle included in the text because there is a predisposition of how Europeans view the moral integrity of Indian natives through the call out that Hamilton does towards them. For example when she mentions how she can astonish the reader, “when I unfold the extreme inconsistencies of the foolish Europeans, and inform you, that these uninstructed women are frequently suffering to become their own mistresses…” This suggests that Europeans have a skewed biased view towards how Indian men treat their women, however, they themselves prefer their women to be live life aloof and in turn, creates an environment in which women do not believe that they deserve and any semblance of rights. Hamilton outwardly judges them, however, she does so in a backhanded way because in exposing these parochial ways of living of Europeans she does so at the expense of India and uses them as an example that is meant to encourage Europeans to change. It’s almost like the modern posts for drugs that show children how the effects of heroin can harm you while someone is being harmed by that substance. In approaching it this way Hamilton chooses to ignore her own privilege in society. It is as if she mocks the lives of Indians and uses their ways of living to show Europeans “look at this, you do not want to be this way! We are better than this!” Therefore does her exposure to such things really make her an ally? Or is her blinding privilege as a white woman and her lack of social awareness just make her arguments towards Europeans not as effective. After all change at the expense of others isn’t much change at all.

 

–Katherine Hernandez

Counter-Hegemony: Christian Ideals

The play created by Elizabeth Inchbald, The Mogul Tale, tells a fascinating story with a veiled significance. Although orientalism revolves around the notion of exerting dominance and superiority of European ideals onto others like India, this play resists orientalism by illuminating the stereotypical perceptions it carries. This play also carries with it a counter-hegemonic thought about religion within British society and how it is interwoven into Elizabeth’s play.

The final speech carried out by the Mogul emperor is truly symbolic because it exposes the counter-hegemonic expressions lingering within Europe. In Dennis Porter’s critique of Edward Said, it is stated that “there already exist within Orientalism itself alternative and only partially silent counter-hegemonic voices that have expressed themselves differently at different historical moments.” The counter-hegemony present in The Mogul Tale attempts to tease the religious tension Europeans had between Catholicism and Christianity during that historical time period. Although Inchbald was a Catholic, she goes about the play from the perspective of Christian rule and ridicules it. When Johnny pretends to be a Pope, he states that “Popes have never any conversation with women except in private” as though it was intended to expose popes for sexual crimes. The Mogul even mockingly states that he could have learned compassion and forgiveness from Christians although it was Christians who were judging him in the first place. This play has divulged religion from a society in which affiliation with a certain religion could determine your social standing and access to social goods.

The Mogul Tale also depicts the stereotypes Europeans had about India during that time period. The doctor, Johnny, and Fanny believed the stereotypes of Muslim rulers from the beginning to only learn that the Mogul emperor was not like they originally imagined. Instead of being punished for their lies and deceit, the Mogul let the Europeans free. The play allows the viewers to see themselves as foreigners to further learn how ridiculous they seem when they attach stereotypes to people who are different from themselves. During this time period, discrimination of Catholics by Christians was common but this story uncovered how Christians themselves discriminate, judge, and lay stereotypical ideas about others. It puts into perspective that the world is not simply black or white, Christian or non-Christian, and even European or non-European.

– Jose Lopez

The Humanization of The Orient

The word orientalism, as far as history goes, both in terms of the world and within the confinements of our own classroom, is regarded as a word that stands for the injustices people of the Orient faced due to the colonization from the British. Orientalism is the power to dominate, stereotype, and control the narrative of India in order to drain it of its resources and gentrify it. In the play, The Mogul Tale by Elizabeth Inchbald we get to experience the duality of Orientalism

While Inchbald gives into the stereotypes of Indians in her play, she does not give the British the power that is typically believed to be in their possession. What do I mean by this? Typically, Orientalism in the eyes of the British is seen as a good thing. This is best seen in the critic of Dennis Porters,  Orientalism and Its Problems, in which he exams the approach of Europeans towards the Orient. He explains how Europeans, their form of Orientalism believes that Indians are meant to be “educated; they are meant to be introduced into society as a better citizen because they are “savages” and have to follow a way of living in order to be successful in their own country. However, in explaining this, Porter recognizes how unjust and wrong this idea is. Europeans give themselves an all-mighty savior complex which is meant to depict them in a good light. as if their whiteness is meant to save an Indian people. So, how does that fit into Inchbald’s play?

Inchbald creates a plane of existence in her play in which by allowing her characters to play out these stereotypes placed on them, she counter-intuitively criticizes the ways of the Christian European through her resolution of the play. The Europeans believe that their religion and ways of living will “educate” the “savages,” however none of that affected the pardon the emperor gave to them. The mogul’s emperor let them free based on the goodness that exists inside them. Inchbald takes these stereotypes and tums them on her head with her resolution. Thus allowing the orient to have power over the Europeans based on their own terms. The stereotyping of her characters is meant to depict how unjust such stereotyping is. She exposes how cruel these ways of looking at the Orient can be and how the gentrification and colonization of its people are just plain cruel, to put it in simpler terms because they are capable of being all the things that Europeans claim them not to be. Inchbald, in other words humanizes the people of Orient once more.

 

By: Katherine Hernandez

 

Buffoonomania

Orientalism is about power, control, and intersexuality of different elements in regards to the European perspective of the ‘lesser other.’ In ‘The Mogul Tale,’ Inchbald represents a different orientalist perspective where the debate lies on who the real ‘other’. Is it the Indian mogul with cruel laws and savage nature, or the balloon loving sexually-driven and confused Europeans? The audience is to decide.

By the end of the satirical farce, the mogul freely departs the Euros, not before taking the chance to condemn Christian rule in India. While it’s known that Europe invaded India religiously, amongst other ways, his speech sounds like an exaggerated thankfulness for the religion’s provided ‘improvement.’ Ironic considering Inchbald is Catholic in a time where the religion is criticized and generally shamed. But it’s the exaggeration that makes it greater.

It can be said that Elizabeth Inchbald’s, a Catholic woman actor, intention with this play was to use humor to indirectly take a jab at/expose the political and social climate of England at the time. It’s her discrete way to criticize and mock the upper class, the Christian, the men of England. With the addition of balloonomania, sexuality, wealth, religion, and such scattered across, she’s pointing out the ridiculousness of their power-obsessed minds, with just enough elements of what they believe and enjoy to hide her truth for them to see it as a harmless comedy.

The Mogul Emperor’s speech can be seen to reinforce orientalism for those who took part or believe it, but seen deeply, it resists or complicates it in that it’s done sarcastically, mockingly. To say how Christianity just magically changed his tyrannical ways to let those fools be free, and have them believe it! The Mogul is humoring them, Inchbald is humoring the audience. It takes away the weird white man’s power, it lets them believe they have the power to say their religion improved the orientals; in reality, the Indians were just messing with them and had no intention to hurt them, to begin with. The high and mighty British folk with money and ideas of superiority had no true power, they just want to force it.

-Priscilla Delgado

The Art of Expressing Orientalism

The poems Hymnand Kubla Khanby Jones and Coleridge, respectively, unveil a peculiar similarity in regards to descriptive romantic poetries. Both poems express different forms of art and religion. However, orientalism becomes evident throughout each passage. The culture of religion and art from the European and Western world is thus compared to those of Eastern Asia.

Jones attempts to describe the creation of the universe by instilling religious ideologies throughout his piece of work. By conveying the divine creation of the universe to the audience, Jones tries to express the importance of religion through the use of imagination. Stating things such as “things unexisting to existence sprung” or “from which this gorgeous Universe he fram’d” draws the reader’s attention to unconsciously trust and believe in this religious belief. Through poems about religion, the author is able to inhabit other people’s minds, beliefs, and ideals by forcing his religion onto others. As such, orientalism comes to play as western culture is embellished to overshadow other Eastern Asian cultures.

Coleridge, on the other hand, focuses on art through his poetic work but still approaches the audience using the same method as Jones. Coleridge essentially captivates the audience through the use of romantic poems. Passages such as “gardens bright with sinuous rills ”, “sunny spots of greenery”, or “dancing rocks” captivates the reader. Yet again, orientalism becomes evident by making the western place seem as though it is “paradise” compared to Eastern Asian. In essence, both poems share a similar approach to showing how Western or European art and religion outshines Eastern Asian culture.

– Jose Lopez

Intersection of War Ideology and Western Literature

The inclusion of Sake Dean Mahomet’s reproductions of European literary and artistic conventions serves as way in which to implicate the British in the process of systematic, colonial violence. By including Classical tropes, such as the implicit reference to the Roman story of Lucretia on page 89, Mahomet exemplifies how colonial violence is not justified by an ideology concerned with racial-ethnic stereotypes. Rather colonial violence is symptomatic of the pervasive, endemic warfare that has plagued European history. Mahomet draws parallels between the Romans, one of the most influential peoples in Western history, through the ancient legend and the subjugation and violence carried out by the British in India. Mahomet uses Lucretia as a literary manifestation of one of Mulnahoffis’ daughters. Following Mulnahoffis’ defeat by the British, Sujah-doulah “forced [Mulnahoffis’ daughter] to yield to his licentious desire. The violated female, with a soul, the shrine of purity, like that of the divine Lucretia, disdained life after the loss of honor” (89). The daughter consequently kills herself and injures Sujah-doulah. The intersection of Roman mythology and colonial violence is examined here using a Western lens in order to emphasize the way in which the British overwhelm preexisting political and social order in India. Sujah-doulah, and by extension the British, defile the daughter’s chastity in a manner mirroring the way in which Britain corrupts and exploits India. Colonial violence has more to do with an ingrained ideology of violence in Europe than with the colonized people themselves. Furthermore, instances of colonial violence are not particular to England as we see similar behavior with the French in Vietnam and the Spanish in Latin America.