Mimetic Shame: Fictions of the Self in Postcolonial Literature by Gillian Bright A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of English University of Toronto © Copyright by Gillian Bright, 2018 Mimetic Shame: Fictions of the Self in Postcolonial Literature Gillian Bright Doctor of Philosophy Department of English University of Toronto 2018 Abstract This study considers how shame is rendered within postcolonial literature. Moving away from trauma-centered approaches that typically read shame as “unrepresentable,” the central idea driving my analysis is that shame’s multiple significance in the “real world” can be traced through parallel literary iterations. The synthesis reached by the multiple correspondences between social, psychological, physiological, and textual domains suggests a mode of representation that I call “mimetic shame.” I argue that literature about shame achieves mimesis on three registers, each connecting lived experiences of shame with a specific textual counterpart. The first of these registers indexes shame’s corporeal symptoms—how shame announces itself through uncomfortable physical responses. Novels frequently signify embodied symptoms via single literary devices, such as metaphors or prosodies. The second register encapsulates the historical events that prompt shame, whereas mimetic shame’s third register correlates to the social dynamics of shame, conveying the inflections of ashamed intra- and inter-subjective relationships via overarching textual elements such as narration, focalization, intertextuality, and genre. Together, these three registers archive what lies between representation and “original” experience. After developing my theory and laying out a “typology” for my approach, I examine mimetic shame in three novels: V.S. Naipaul’s The Mimic Men, Zakes Mda’s Ways of Dying, ii and Rawi Hage’s Cockroach. These works portray certain bleak characterizations of colonial and postcolonial subjectivity—the mimic, the zealot, and the scourge—but the techniques structuring these figurations also expose shame as a repressive apparatus within the colonial project. Thus, because of the dialogic nature of novelistic writing, mimesis both captures real experiences of shame and disperses new meanings about shame, inviting readers to imaginatively reframe the affective futures of postcolonial subjectivity. Despite the urgency underscoring Frantz Fanon’s desperate appeal to all subjects to cast off the shame formed by the alienating histories of colonization, shame as a topic of serious consideration continues to evade analysis within postcolonial studies. My dissertation attempts to remedy this oversight, turning especially to Jacques Lacan’s theory of split subjectivity and Kalpana Seshadri-Crooks’s argument about a vision-centered system of identification to argue about the productive interfaces between social worlds, intersubjectivity, and textuality. iii Acknowledgments For the years it took to write this dissertation, I thought a lot about shame—rarely a happy obsession. Though not without exhilarating beauty, the novels I read were often bleak, reflecting trauma, oppression, and marginalization. Added to this intellectual gloom, my years as a graduate student were not always easy: I had small children, faced difficult losses, and struggled to stay ahead of poverty. Yet, looking back, I am filled with gratitude—awe, even—that I was held through these years so carefully by so many people. I have been lucky beyond measure, and I resurface from this enterprise with many people to thank. First and foremost, my thanks go to Professor Marlene Goldman. I could not have asked for a more admirable mentor; her feedback was thoughtful and generous, even as she never let me off the hook for a lazy argument or an awkward phrase. Marlene also showed limitless compassion through those moments when private life meddled with productivity. From sending chocolate boxes at the births of babies to insisting that she sleep on the tiny trundle bed in our hotel room at a conference, Marlene’s benevolence provided a measure of instruction on how to be a wonderful human that could only be matched by her guidance with my scholarship. I was equally fortunate in my committee members, Professors Uzoma Esonwanne and Ato Quayson. Their feedback on each chapter demonstrated a degree of attention to my ideas that I had not anticipated. Thank you so much, Uzo and Ato. To my delight, the additional members of my Final Oral Exam ensured that the magnitude of the event was divested of dread. Thanks to Professor Cannon Schmitt for feedback on my abstract, and wonderful questions during the exam; to Professor Neil ten Kortenaar for such astonishing engagement with my ideas, and providing me with the satisfaction of pinning down a solution that had long evaded me; to Dr. Laura Moss for travelling from UBC, writing me a generous and challenging report, and conversing with my arguments with the full weight of her expertise; and to Professor Jeff Reynolds for chairing the exam so expertly, and offering such warm congratulations at the final hour. This dissertation was supported with the assistance of two Ontario Graduate Scholarships, a SSHRC-CGS, and a University of Toronto Fellowship. I also benefitted from receiving two Department of English Travel Conference Grants. During my time at the Department of English, I received wonderful guidance from Sangeeta Panjwani, Tanuja Persaud, Gillian Northgrave, and Professors Will Robbins, Melba Cuddy-Keane, Paul Stevens, John O’Connor, Alexandra Peat, Nick Mount, Victor Li, Daniel Heath-Justice, and Alice Maurice. Thank you, as well, to Marguerite Perry for conducting me so cheerfully through the last months, and for the shrewd advice to take a banana with me to my defense. Thanks to my colleagues at Kwantlen Polytechnic University for their support and wise- cracking advice over the last stages of dissertating, and particularly to Drs. Heather Cyr and Kelly Doyle for their sneaky gifts. At various stages of writing, I was ridiculously lucky to find friends and colleagues willing to edit drafts. For their comments and encouragement, thanks to Laurel Ryan, Esther de Bruijn, Joanne Leow, Jay Rajiva, Talia Regan Palmer, Jennifer McDermott, Julia Grandison, Aparna Halpe, Alex Peat, Kailin Wright, and Lara Okihiro. To my relatives who smiled and applauded each time they talked to me about my project, no matter the roadblocks I met: I, Dr. Gilly-Willy, am immensely grateful. iv To my in-laws, Anna, Michele, Sandra, Felix, and Diego: thank you for your patience, love, and encouragement, and for never making me feel sorry for taking on such an enormous burden despite its heavy costs. To my siblings, Bronwyn and Owen, and their dear families: your love and ridiculous laughter helped me continue to wade through the muddy waters. To my incredible parents, Mary Liz and Howard Bright: thank you for brewing and stirring my passion for literature and ideas, and for supporting me through every moment— dreary and dazzling. To their parents, as well: Nana and Grampa Frank, Granny (who gave multiple modes of support), and Grampy: I love you, ha-ha. To the friends I don’t deserve, but who deeply enrich my life—Katrina and Jay Forsyth, Jonathan Service, Amy Stewart and Jay Thorburn, Nicole Stocker, Hanako Masutani, Filippo Campo and Maria Barrios, and my beloved Jiminy Cricket (Catherine Egan)—thinking of each of you, I crumple beneath the gratitude. Thanks for your shoulders (to catch my tears), laughter, wine, gift baskets, cheer-squads, advice, solidarity, and love. To my children, Lucia and Phineas, for surviving me. And so much more: for understanding, even at your age, why I had to keep doing this work, for making me want to do this work, and for growing the way you grow: wise, hilarious, and determined. From the tip of the top to the bop of the bop, I love you bigger than the biggest thing. Finally, to my Tony. This project is possible, in the end, because of how we love each other. Thank you for the place we arrived at once we got through it all. v Table of Contents Abstract ii Acknowledgements iv Table of Contents vi Introduction: A Phenomenology of Postcolonial Literary Shame 1 Shame and Postcolonial Literature 1 The Subject of Shame 11 Mimetic Shame: The Aesthetics of Shame in Postcolonial Literature 24 Chapter 1: A Typology of Mimetic Shame 36 Mimetic Shame: Theoretical Origins 37 Conventions of Reading Shame in Literature 48 A. Shame as a Therapeutic Vehicle 53 B. Shame as an Ethical Guide 56 C. Shame as a Social Critique 57 The Dimensions of Mimetic Shame 59 Models of Reading Mimetic Shame 66 A. Salman Rushdie’s Shame (1983) 68 B. Nadine Gordimer’s Burger’s Daughter (1979) 72 C. J.M. Coetzee’s Boyhood (1998) 77 Chapter 2: “The Face Behind the Pillar”: Shame and Narcissism in V.S. Naipaul’s The Mimic Men 88 From Shameful Origins to Narcissistic Fictions: The Mimic Men’s Contextual Register 92 Excessive Imagery and Abjection: The Mimic Men’s Symptomatic Register 105 The Ironies of Autobiographical Form: The Mimic Men’s Structural Register 117 Chapter 3: “The Screams and the Shouts and the Laughter”: Shame and Shamelessness in Zakes Mda’s Ways of Dying 124 Against Transcendence: Comedy, Shame, and Mourning 136 A Parade of Shame: Tragedy, Shamelessness, and Melancholia 154 Chapter 4: On Being the “Same Type”: Albert Camus and the Paradox of Immigrant Shame in Rawi Hage’s Cockroach 175 The Three Registers of Mimetic Shame in Cockroach 175 Shame and Migration in Canada 178 Aesthetic Relations: Albert Camus 183 Shame in the Works of Albert Camus 192 Rawi Hage’s Cockroach 195 The Politics of Absurdity 208 Conclusion: Writing Out Shame 211 Works Consulted 222 vi Introduction: A Phenomenology of Postcolonial Literary Shame “Shame. Shame and self-contempt. Nausea. When people like me, they tell me it is in spite of my color. When they dislike me, they point out that it is not because of my color.