Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna
Diplomarbeit
zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades
eines Magisters der Philosophie
an der Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz
vorgelegt von
Johannes HÄUSLER
am Institut für AMERIKANISTIK
Begutachter Prof. Dr. Walter Hölbling
Graz, 2012
I gratefully dedicate this work to my parents.
Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 2
2. THE THEORIES 4
2.1. MICHEL FOUCAULT: LIFE AND MAJOR WORKS 4
2.2. SAID’S ORIENTALISM 14
2.3. HOMI K. BHABHA & POSTCOLONIALSM 14
3. LITERARY AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE POISONWOOD BIBLE AND THE LACUNA 20
3.1. HISTORICAL BACKGROUNDS 20
3.2. LITERARY CONTEXT 21
4. THE ANALYSIS 24
4.1. POWER AND DISCOURSE IN THE POISONWOOD BIBLE 24
4.2. POWER AND DISCOURSE IN THE LACUNA 44
5. HYBRIDITY IN KINGSOLVER’S TPB AND TL 64
5.1. HYBRIDITY IN THE POISONWOOD BIBLE 64
5.2. HYBRIDITY IN THE LACUNA 70
6. CONCLUSION 77
7. BIBLIOGRAPHY 79
Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
1. INTRODUCTION
'Tis written: "In the Beginning was the Word." Here am I balked: who, now can help afford? The Word?—impossible so high to rate it; And otherwise must I translate it. If by the Spirit I am truly taught. Then thus: "In the Beginning was the Thought" This first line let me weigh completely, Lest my impatient pen proceed too fleetly. Is it the Thought which works, creates, indeed? "In the Beginning was the Power," I read. (Goethe, Faust)
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (The King James Bible, The Gospel According to Saint John, 1:1) is probably the most well-known and widely read first sentence of all books in human history. In the quote above, it is Goethe’s Faust who meditates on the famous beginning of the Bible which for this paper so significantly opens the field of my analysis and its central questions: how is the “word” connected to establishment and reinforcement of power? In which ways does “Power” correlate “Knowledge” and vice versa? And finally: what is the space in which new “Knowledges” emerge which empower individuals to define their identity (in a post-colonial discourse)?
In the multi-lateral, globalized world of today the idea of who speaks to whom and for whom is, both, a political and spiritual issue, with the authority of the “Truth” claimed by its proclaiming leaders. As I will show in this paper, “Truth” is nothing but a mere product of a certain corpus of knowledge, hence, discourse which – based on the power of the word – is valid only within the paradigm, or episteme; it rests on and is dependent on the individual perspectives and experiences of its members.
INTRODUCTION 2 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
To lay the theoretical ground of my work, I will start off with an introduction to the life and work of Michel Foucault, who in the second half of the twentieth century changed the conception of the constellation power/knowledge/discourse. An easy summary of his main ideas can be found in Fillingham, Lydia (1993), Foucault for Beginners. Also Sara Mills’ Michel Foucault (1993) offers an accessible elaboration of Foucault’s sometimes elusive writings.
The second part of this thesis deals with Homi Bhabha’s theories on post- colonial studies which very much employ and elaborate Foucault’s work. Bhabha’s main point in The Location of Culture is that culture is nothing pure in itself, but a ‘third space’ in which new knowledge and identities emerge. Writing from a post-colonial perspective himself, his ideas are very fertile for the analysis of Kingsolver’s novels that are both set in such a discourse. As Homi Bhabha is probably one of the most demanding authors, I suggest reading David Huddart’s Homi K. Bhabha for a better understanding of his ideas. Concerning post-colonialism, Bill Ashcroft et al. The Post-Colonial Studies Reader, offers a wide range of primary (and often abbreviated) texts by the leading scholars in this field.
Having laid out the theories of this paper, I will apply them to two of Barbara Kingsolver’s novels: The Poisonwood Bible (TPB) and The Lacuna (TL). Based on a seminar paper written by my colleague Daniel Hermes and myself, this paper can be seen as elaboration of my previous work (i.e. Foucault and TPB), which is then followed by an analysis of the same dimensions in The Lacuna.
As an addition, in the second part of this thesis, I continue to apply Bhabha’s concepts to both novels, which will provide insights into the power constellations as portrayed by Kingsolver in the characters and countries of the post-colonial settings of Mexico and the former Congo.
INTRODUCTION 3 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
2. The Theories
2.1. Michel Foucault: Life and major works
Michel Foucault’s work still resides among the most important in critical theory. Covering a wide field, it draws from philosophy, the social sciences, psychology and their histories respectively. Often associated with (post-) structuralist and post-modernist thought, the influences of his work can be found in a much wider range of academic disciplines such as English studies, sociology, post-colonial, post-Marxist and feminist theory. (cf. Gutting; Miller:1)
Michel Foucault was born in 1926 into a provincial family of renowned doctors. Both, his father and his grand father were surgeons, with Michel supposed to follow that line. Already in his early life as a young boy Michel performed extremely well in school, entered the Jesuit Collège Saint Stanislaus and eventually reached a first major achievement when he made fourth place at the entry test for the École Normale Supérieure. (cf. Fillingham, 19 ff)
His years as a student are termed intellectually brilliant, though psychologically tormenting. Because of growing depressions, Michel’s father sent him to see a psychiatrist to whom Michel revealed his sexual attraction to men. Both father and psychiatrist then regarded homosexuality as an illness with a need for treatment, as was usual in these days. By the age of 17, Michel knew that he did not want to become a surgeon, which caused wild arguments with his father. Michel successively distanced himself from his father and later even removed “Paul” from his name (cf. Fillingham, 19, 22 ff).
The academic environment in which Foucault’s career started also played a crucial role in how he came to view the world. Entering the École Normale Supérieure in 1946, and because of his experiences, Michel became fascinated with psychology, which became his major subject, along with philosophy. Existential phenomenology was then at its heyday in France and Foucault
The Theories 4 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler attended the lectures of Merleau-Ponty, a famous phenomenologist. Also Heidegger, Marx and Hegel were on the syllabus and left their marks in Foucault’s early work (cf. Gutting).
Another three great philosophers need to be mentioned when speaking about influences on Michel Foucault. Firstly, Jean-Paul Sátre, the great existentialist, who still holds a prominent role in the culture and life of France. Sátre was a politically active scholar as well as an author of plays, novels, and newspaper articles.
“[He] defined the parameters within which a politically motivated academic could act and influence public opinion. The philosophical position developed by Sátre, existentialism, is concerned with stressing personal experience and responsibility in a seemingly meaningless universe.” (Mills, 21)
Even if Foucault was very much concerned with distancing himself from and reacting against Sátre’s philosophy, they share, on the one hand, a common aversion of bourgeois culture and society, and on the other hand an empathy for marginalized groups of the bourgeoisie. Foucault also became very active politically later in his life (cf. Gutting). The major difference, as Mills (22) points out, is that “Sátre was concerned with the analysis of meaning while he [Foucault] was concerned with the analysis of systems.”
The second important philosopher to Michel Foucault’s work is Immanuel Kant, who provided at his times a very modern criticism of knowledge.
The Theories 5 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Kant's great epistemological innovation was to maintain that the same critique that revealed the limits of our knowing powers could also reveal necessary conditions for their exercise. What might have seemed just contingent features of human cognition (for example, the spatial and temporal character of its objects) turn out to be necessary truths. Foucault, however, suggests the need to invert this Kantian move. Rather than asking what, in the apparently contingent, is actually necessary, he suggests asking what, in the apparently necessary, might be contingent. (Gutting)
Hence, what Foucault focused on was a critique of historical reason and the human sciences as such, providing us with universal truths that turn out to be the political and ethical products of a certain society (cf. Gutting).
Friedrich Nietzsche, then, is the third and - as Foucault would most probably agree – the most important influence on his ideas on the relation between power and knowledge.
My relation to Nietzsche, or what I owe to Nietzsche, derives mostly from the texts of around 1880, where the question of truth, the history of truth and the will to truth were central to his work. Did you know that Satre’s first text – written when he was a young student – was Nietschean? “The History of Truth,” […] He began with the same problem. And it is very odd that his approach should have shifted from the history of truth to phenomenology, while for the next generation – ours – the reverse was true.” (Michel Foucault, in Kritzman, 32)
As stated above, Michel Foucault’s work covers a wide academic field and so do the sources he drew from. Along with so far briefly discussed scholars, others such as Marx, Hegel, Heidegger, Adorno, and Habermas have influenced the work of Foucault but will remain mentioned here only, as a detailed discussion would go far beyond the scope of this paper.
What is important to remember is that Foucault inverted the classical conception of reason as a presupposed means of describing reality (through words). By focusing on mechanisms of power, truth, and discursive formations he shows that what is accepted as “normal” at a certain point in time only derives from a power/knowledge constellation. This will become clearer by taking a closer look into his works (discussed chronologically).
The Theories 6 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
2.1.1. Madness and Civilization
Foucault’s first major book was published under the original title Histoire de la folie à l’age classique and emerged from his doctoral thesis in 1961. Madness and Civilization traces the history of institutionalized treatment and confinement of the sick from the physically ill with leprosy towards people considered as mentally mad. (cf. Fillingham, 29ff)
Being a rather unconventional subject for a philosopher, Foucault explains his interest in that matter as follows:
[…] studying philosophy, then psychopathology, then training at a psychiatric hospital and being lucky enough to be there neither as a patient nor as a doctor, that is to say, to be able to look at things in a fairly open-minded, fairly neutral way, outside the usual codes […] led me to become aware of this extremely strange reality that we call confinement. What struck me was that this practice of confinement was accepted as absolutely self-evident … However, I came to realize that it was far from being self-evident and was the culmination of a very long history […]. (Kritzmann, 96-97)
After leprosy had disappeared in the middle ages, the hospitals built for lepers were of no use any more. In the 15th century then, the so-called Ship of Fools would float down a river, picking up any person dispelled from society, no matter if mentally, physically, or socially deviant. Whilst there are certain acknowledgements of the mystic insights of the madmen to be found in Shakespeare or Erasmus in the late 16th century, with the advent of reason the deserted leprosy hospitals where readily filled with the outcasts of society. (cf. Fillingham, 33ff)
In the 19th century, then, the medical treatment of the obverse of reason (i.e. the madmen) came to be seen as the enlightened liberation from the barbarous middle ages, which eventually, as Foucault argues, did not make an improvement for the ‘patients’ at all. (cf. Haeusler and Hermes, 232)
The Theories 7 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
What Foucault could show in Madness and Civilization was that the process of determining what is normal or sick is not rooted in the condition of ‘the sick’ itself. On the contrary,
[…] the alleged scientific neutrality of modern medical treatments of insanity are in fact covers for controlling challenges to a conventional bourgeois morality. In short, Foucault argued that what was presented as an objective, incontrovertible scientific discovery (that madness is mental illness) was in fact the product of eminently questionable social and ethical commitments. (Gutting)
2.1.2. Discipline & Punish
Foucault’s second major book to be discussed here was published in 1975, examining penal systems and their changes in the 18th century respectively. Looking at both “repressive” as well as “positive effects”, punishment is regarded as a “complex social function”. Hence, methods of punishment are analyzed “not simply as consequences of legislation or as indicators of social structures, but as techniques possessing their own specificity in the more general field of other ways of exercising power” (Rabinow, 170).
Before the mid 18th century, punishment usually meant publically displaying the criminal by torture or execution. Foucault argues that in the old ‘monarchical law, punishment is a ceremonial of sovereignty; it uses ritual marks of the vengeance that it applies to the body of the condemned man;’ (Foucault, Discipline and Punish, 130). In the late 18th century, the jurists who reformed the system of punishment regarded punishment as a “procedure for requalifying individuals as subjects [using] not marks, but signs, coded sets of representation […]”. Hence, punishing became a means of coercing individuals, forcing (i.e. training) them to adopt new behaviors and habits with a presupposed power for executing the penalty (ibid. 131).
Another reason for such a change in the penal system was that publicly punishing a criminal who “was popular or represented what was perceived as
The Theories 8 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler merited opposition to the sovereign” might carry a danger to the sovereign him/ herself (Prado, 60; cf. Häusler and Hermes).
The conclusion made by Foucault is that human beings were generally regarded as “abstract beings” by conventional history, without looking much at the importance of the body. The focus lies in controlling most aspects of life, be it in the emerging prisons or in society as a whole, i.e. the exertion of power by state and institutions to regulate life (cf. Fillingham, 115ff). As the mode of punishment changed in the late 18th century from violent public display towards imprisonment, the question of the body remains central in Foucault’s view:
[…] the body is also directly involved in a political field; power relations have an immediate hold upon it; they invest it, mark it, train it, torture it, force it to carry out tasks, to perform ceremonies, to emit signs. (Foucault, 25)
This enforcement of discipline upon the body and its methods of influencing and changing the individual came to reach far beyond the system of punishment into hospitals, factories, and schools (Fillingham, 120).
Foucault then identifies five mechanisms which are applied in such institutions to regulate behavior: hierarchical observation, normalizing judgment, examination, panopticism, and surveillance. The institutions here play a central role for the question of power and knowledge as they constitute a place where people are brought and kept together for a certain amount of time, with a dedicated and to all known seat of authority (i.e. the principals office) (cf. Prado, 60). The panopticism as a device of control will provide an useful example.
2.1.3. Panopticism
At the end of the 18th century, Jeremy Bentham – an English philosopher – had the vision of an ideal prison. Minimal effort and maximum effectiveness were supposed to be the result of a refined design.
The Theories 9 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Morals reformed - health preserved - industry invigorated instruction diffused - public burthens lightened - Economy seated, as it were, upon a rock - the gordian knot of the Poor-Laws are not cut, but untied - all by a simple idea in Architecture! (Bentham)
Even if no prison was actually fully realized after his original plans, his ideas had a strong impact. The panopticon has the shape of an upright cylinder with a tower in its center and the prisoners’ cells in the outer segment of the building. Apart from the inside walls, which face the ‘inspector’s lodge’ (as Bentham called the watch tower), the other cell walls were opaque in order to isolate the prisoners from each other, but leaving them exposed to the guards’ view in the tower behind its darkened windows. Hence, the convicts could not know whether or not they were being observed, but had to presume they were at any time. This made it possible to guard a maximum number of prisoners while at the same time minimizing the number of inspectors. (cf. Bentham)
I FLATTER myself there can now be little doubt of the plan's possessing the fundamental advantages I have been attributing to it: I mean, the apparent omnipresence of the inspector […] combined with the extreme facility of his real presence. (Bentham)
But it’s not the efficiency on which Foucault actually focuses, but rather the methods of surveillance, subjugation and normalization for maintaining control by “compiling of detailed reports and dossiers that track patterns of behavior and incorporate expert assessments, thereby providing bases for prediction of behavior and preemptive action”. By internalizing norms of the society, “the subject can be made complicitous in the surveillance through adoption of certain additional beliefs” (Prado, 61).
The Theories 10 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
The examination combines the techniques of an observing hierarchy and those of a normalizing judgment. It is a normalizing gaze, a surveillance that makes it possible to qualify, to classify and to punish. […] The superimposition of the power relations and knowledge relations assumes in the examination all its visible brilliance. (Foucault, 184-185)
In both books, The Poisonwood Bible as well as in The Lacuna, these techniques play an important role for creating and maintaining power, hence for the establishment of systems of truth.
The idea behind normalizing is to make people functional parts of the society by disciplinary means that inculcate chosen norms. Hence, not only prisons or asylums are designed to enforce discipline, but so are most institutions (i.e. schools, hospitals, companies, etc.) in our social system. (cf. Häusler and Hermes, 234)
2.1.4. Archeology and Genealogy
The concept of the connection of truth, knowledge, and power Foucault further develops by applying the methods of ‘archeology’ and ‘genealogy’. ‘Archeology’ investigates how the human sciences establish systems of truth on the basis of how they produced knowledge. (Prado, 25; cf. Häusler and Hermes, 234)
The question here is not whether the claims of the sciences were true or false, but to show that something which is seen as objectively true is only a product which emerged at a certain point in history.
[…] the intent is to unearth the contexts in which truth and knowledge are produced, the activities and practices that manufacture and develop the methods we dub scientific and that fabricate the bodies of judgments and beliefs we dub sciences - and which we take as providing expert intelligence on whatever interests us“ (Prado, 28; quoted in Häusler and Hermes, 235)
The method of “genealogy” then examines the questions of descent and power relations which lead to the development of such systems of knowledge.
The Theories 11 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
The essence of this idea is that history contains no ontological explanation for its state in itself.
2.1.5. Power – Knowledge – Discourse
A major part of Michel Foucault’s writings deal with the connection of knowledge to power. Knowledge is nothing which exists independently but is created in discourse. Here Foucault adapts the original meaning of ‘discourse’ from semiotics and focuses more on how it developed historically. Hence, he shifts his focus to the ‘subjectifying social sciences’ as the disciplines of knowledge which “ […] like religion in earlier times, could give us truth about knowledge” (Hall, 43; cf. Häusler and Hermes, 235).
Foucault examines the practices and rules with which, in certain historic epochs, the sciences gained their influence by defining the framework of what was meaningful and true.
[Discourse is a] group of statements which provided a language for talking about – a way of representing the knowledge about - a particular topic at a particular historical moment. [...] Discourse is about the production of knowledge through language. But [...] since all social practices entail meaning, [...] all practices have a discursive aspect.” (Hall, 44; quoted in Häusler and Hermes, 235)
Traditionally, practice and language were seen as being distinct. But Foucault changes the meaning of the term from semiotics and aligns language and practice to the same phenomenon (cf. Hall ,44; Häusler and Hermes, 235).
2.1.6. Discourse and Epistemes
As discussed before, Michel Foucault was never interested in truth itself, but in the ways how truths emerged in particular discourses, and “the circumstances in which power is exerted in order to apply a certain kind of knowledge” (Häusler and Hermes, 236). Hence, there is nothing like an ultimate truth as such, but only an inseparable combination of power, truth, and knowledge that constitutes a discourse. Hence, knowledge “not only
The Theories 12 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler assumes the authority of 'the truth' but has the power to make itself true” (Hall, 49; cf. Häusler and Hermes, 236).
As shown when discussing panopticism and 'Discipline and Punish', power and knowledge are used by the so-called “regimes of truth” to, firstly, determine what is ‘abnormal’, and then to control the people’s behavior.
Foucault refers to these systems of knowledge (i.e. the scientific discourses) as ‘epistemes’, which are:
[…] holistic frameworks that define problematics and their potential resolutions and constitute views of the world comprising the most fundamental of identificatory and explanatory notions, such as the nature of causality in a given range of phenomena”. (Prado, 26; cf. Häusler and Hermes, 236)
The idea of epistemes is reminiscent of Thomas Kuhn’s ‘paradigms’:
A mature science […] experiences alternating phases of normal science and revolutions. In normal science the key theories, instruments, values and metaphysical assumptions that comprise the disciplinary matrix are kept fixed, permitting the cumulative generation of puzzle-solutions, whereas in a scientific revolution the disciplinary matrix undergoes revision, in order to permit the solution of the more serious anomalous puzzles that disturbed the preceding period of normal science. (Bird)
One major example for a paradigm shift would be the Copernican Turn, with the episteme of the geocentric world-view being replaced by the heliocentric. (cf. Häusler and Hermes, 236)
The next important aspect to be mentioned takes us into semiology. The question is, how humans make sense of their world, that is, how they represent as well as perceive it through language. Since the age of reason, language was seen as a natural reflection of the world. The logical relation between signifier and signified was presupposed and unquestioned. Any logically correct thought must have also been so epistemologically, taking reason a priori as the base of cognition. (cf. Häusler and Hermes, 236)
The problem, of course, for Foucault and the more recent scholars was that in such ways anything could be defined as being true, as the system of
The Theories 13 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler representation was not part of the reflection. But with a shift to a more conventional relationship between signifier and signified, then, truth turned out to be the product of certain discursive formations.
2.2. SAID’s Orientalism
Another important theory to be mentioned talking about colonialism is Edward Said’s Orientalism, which also had significant influence on Homi Bhabha’s work. Said’s concept of the Orient as “the Other” analyses the Western discourses “which set up an allegedly superior Western self in relation to an allegedly inferior non-Western other” (Huddart, 4). Starting from the point of view that West and East are substantially different, the created discourse is used to reinforce the image of the inferior. Hence, orientalism is in fact telling us more about the West than the Orient and shows how these discourses were applied to ratify domination, colonial expansion, along with an economic as well as political manipulation (ibid).
[Orientalism] is, rather than expresses, a certain will or intention to understand, in some cases to control, manipulate, even to incorporate, what is manifestly different (or alternative and novel) world; it is, above all, a discourse that is by no means in direct, corresponding relationship with political power in the raw, but rather is produced and exists in an uneven exchange with various kinds of power, shaped to a degree by the exchange with power political (as with a colonial or imperial establishment), power intellectual (as with reigning sciences like comparative linguistics or anatomy […]) power cultural […], power moral (as with ideas about what ‘we’ do and what ‘they’ cannot do or understand as ‘we’ do). (Said, in: Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin, 26f)
2.3. Homi K. Bhabha & Postcolonialsm
The second theory to be discussed in this thesis was developed by the Indian- born scholar Homi K. Bhabha. Today his work belongs to the most important in the field of post-colonial criticism and critical theory. It deals with concepts
The Theories 14 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler of difference, mimicry, ambivalence, and hybridity (Huddart, 1); the latter being the central one for the analysis of The Lacuna and The Poisonwood Bible.
Homi K. Bhabha was born in Mumbai, India, in 1949, where he also went to school and eventually graduated at the University of Mumbai. After attaining his B.A., he continued his academic career at Oxford University, getting his Ph.D. in English Literature. For the following ten years he lectured at the University of Sussex; after receiving a senior fellowship at Princeton University, Bhabha crossed the Atlantic to lecture at the University of Pennsylvania and at University of Chicago. In 2001 he returned to London to become a Distinguished Visiting Professor at University College. Presently Homi K. Bhabha is the “Anne F. Rothenberg Professor of English and American Literature and Language, and the Director of the Humanities Center at Harvard University.” (Homi K. Bhabha, Wikipedia).
Bhabha’s concepts and methods of postcolonial criticism derive from the writings of the French post-structuralism philosophers such as Jacques Lacan, Gilles Deleuze, Jacques Derrida (cf. Singh), as well as Michel Foucault and elaborate questions of difference between cultures, hence discourses.
Renowned critic Frantz Fanon fathered postcolonial studies in 1952 with the publication of Black Skin, White Masks, as well as with The Wretched of the Earth (1961). Fanon – whose works reflect his own experiences “as a black intellectual in a whitened world” – argues that
racism generates harmful psychological constructs that both blind the black man to his subjection to a universalized white norm and alienate his consciousness. A racist culture prohibits psychological health in the black man. (Poulos, online).
It would take until 1978, though, for Postcolonialism to find other prominent voices in Edward Said’s Orientalism, and The Empire Writes Back: Theory and Practice in Post-Colonial Literatures (1989) by Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffiths, and Helen Tiffin. Focusing on literature of the colonial experience, they argue that postcolonialism “is a continuing process of resistance and
The Theories 15 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler reconstruction” (Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin, 2). The dominance which the imperial powers exerted on the colonized
took various forms in different times and places and proceeded both through conscious planning and contingent occurrences. As a result of this complex development something occurred for which the plan of imperial expansion had not bargained: the immensely prestigious and powerful imperial culture found itself appropriated in projects of counter-colonial resistance which drew upon the many different indigenous local and hybrid processes of self-determination to defy, erode and sometimes supplant the prodigious power of imperial cultural knowledge. (Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin, 1)
Another important voice in the field of postcolonial studies belongs to the Indian scholar Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. While being influenced, among others, by Said’s Orientalism, Foucault’s, and Deleuze’s writings, it is especially Marxist concepts which she applies for her literary theory in her pioneering essay “Can the Subaltern Speak” (1985). In this widely recognized essay, Spivak focuses on the literary representation of the lowest social strata, the oppressed and underprivileged, in reference to their ability to speak (i.e. for their rights, or against power exerted on them).
The ‘subaltern’, hence, are those in society being pushed to the margins the most. In Spivak’s critique, which includes cultural, historical as well as social criteria, it is especially women who suffer most from a patriarchal power system (cf. Arnold and Bicman, 266f). One essential concept she develops is that postcolonial studies (as is literary criticism) are themselves part of a male, first world, institutionalized, academic discourse. To ‘unlearn’ all that knowledge coming with such a discourse becomes essential for the researcher in this field.
The Theories 16 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
With no possibility of nostalgia for that lost origin, the historian must suspend (as far as possible) the clamor of his or her own consciousness (or consciousness-effect, as operated by disciplinary training), so that the elaboration of the insurgency, packaged with an insurgent- consciousness, does not freeze into an 'object of investigation', or, worse yet, a model for imitation. […] The postcolonial intellectuals learn that their privilege is their loss. (Spivak)
Spivak eventually concludes, though, that the dominant Eurocentric, male hegemonic discourse does not allow a pari passu interaction between the speaking subaltern and the colonial listener.
[T]he assumption and construction of a consciousness or subject sustains such work and will, in the long run, cohere with the work of imperialist subject-constitution, mingling epistemic violence with the advancement of learning and civilization. And the subaltern woman will be as mute as ever. (Spivak)
The question of who is speaking for whom, to whom and in which ways is a very central feature especially in TPB. But in TL that issue is also raised through the portrayal of the ancient Mexican cultures as well as with the press representing others, and will be further elaborated in the analysis.
More important to the second part of my thesis, though, is Homi Bhabha’s concepts of ‘hybridity’. As mentioned above, the encounter of the colonizer and the colonized opens the question of social identity in the context of mingling cultures.
Bhabha develops his position by investigating the effects of colonialism “in ways in which colonized peoples have resisted the power of the colonizer, a power that is never as secure as it seems” (Huddart, 1 ff).
As Ashcroft et al. (138) argue, it is not the weakness of the postcolonial process that postcolonial studies focus on, but its strengths.
The Theories 17 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Such writing focuses on the fact that the transaction of the post-colonial world is not a one-way process in which oppression obliterates the oppressed or the colonizer silences the colonized in absolute terms. In practice it rather stresses the mutability of the process. (Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin, 138).
Taking a look at the colonial past with its mechanism of domination and its power struggles, hence, allows us to better understand the
[…] colonial present. […] Bhabha’s close textual analysis finds the hidden gaps and anxieties present in the colonial situation. These points of textual anxiety mark moments in which the colonizer was less powerful than was apparent, moments when the colonized were able to resist the dominance exercised over them. (Huddart, 2)
For Bhabha, the most central concept is that the ‘in-between space’ of cultures provides the hybrid location for the “emergence of the interstices” (Bhabha, 2). It is this border-line space, “the boundary [that] becomes the place from which something begins its presencing” (Bhabha, 5).
The function of language, then, becomes a central inspiration for Bhabha’s concept of the creation of meaning and identity which cannot simply be prescribed or controlled by the West. Thus, in a process of “negotiation” between the colonized and colonizer (with both depending on each other), the “colonizer’s cultural meanings are open to transformation by the colonized population” (Huddart, 3).
The “translational” aspect of the intercultural encounter which Bhabha addresses, hence, refers not to a literal translation from texts or language from one language to the other, but to the emerging result of a transformation of two discourses (i.e. the “in-between space”).
[T]he transformational value of change lies in the rearticulation, or translation, of elements that are neither the One […] nor the Other but something else besides, which contests the terms and territories of both. (Bhabha, 28)
Bhabha further points out that such transformation (i.e. Diaspora, migration, relocation, displacement) “makes the process of cultural translation a complex form of signification” (Bhabha, 172) due to questions of what is
The Theories 18 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
signified by cultures in which ways. “The great, though, unsettling advantage of this position is that is makes you aware of the construction of culture and the invention of tradition” (ibid).
Especially in TL the “construction of culture” plays a central role in the aftermath of World War II with the re-creation of the American identity as opposed to communist Russia.
The last important concept by Bhabha to be mentioned within the frame of “hybridity” is the “Third Space of Enunciation”. Bhabha argues that cultures are never pure entities but, in fact, “all cultural statements and systems are constructed in this contradictory and ambivalent space of enunciation” (Bhabha, 37).
But for me the importance of hybridity is not to be able to trace two original moments from which the third emerges. Rather, hybridity to me is the 'third space' which enables other positions to emerge. This third space displaces the histories that constitute it, and sets up new structures of authority, new political, initiatives, which are inadequately understood through received wisdom. (Bhabha, in Rutherford, 211)
The Theories 19 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
3. Literary and historical Context of The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna
3.1. Historical Backgrounds
TPB is mostly set in the Belgian Congo in 1959, just before it gained its independence. In this time of political transition and instability, the Price family, lead by their missionary father, arrives in Africa to spread the Word of God. In the course of the novel, the members of family not only learn about, but also experience the local traditions, customs, and the history of the country: the exploitation of its natural resources as well as its people by the colonizers (as started by King Leopold in 1885), the rise of the revolutionary Patrice Lumumba, along with his effort of establishing a democracy, the role of the CIA in destroying the plans by assassinating Lumumba, and their installment of puppet leader, Desire Mobutu, and his regime.
The historical background also plays a central role in TL for the development of the major character, Harrison William Shepherd (HWS). Entering the story in 1929, the protagonist grows up in a time of radical political and social transition both in the USA as well as in Mexico: experiencing the effects of the Depression, being part of the Bonus Marchers in Washington, DC., living with the artists Diego Rivera and his wife Frida Kahlo in Mexico, being the secretary of socialist (and exiled) revolutionary Lev Trotsky until his murder in 1940, history is more than just a background to HWS’ life.
Leaving Mexico in the second half of the novel, the scene is changed to Asheville, North Carolina; with the USA about to enter Word War II, various references to the ending Roosevelt epoch, wartime life, and the beginning of the Red Scare under McCarthy, along with the beginning of the consumerism in the early 1950s. What might sound like a pure historical novel, nevertheless, is the story of man in search for his identity and for peace.
Literary and historical Context of The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna 20 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
A history book can educate you, but oddly, a novel is much more likely to move you to tears, because it creates empathy. That’s the amazing power of fiction. (Kingsolver, About The Lacuna)
3.2. Literary Context
As Barbara Kingsolver declares in the forewords of both novels, The Poisonwood Bible (1994) as well as The Lacuna (2009) are works of fiction. Their settings, though, are strongly historical, with their main characters being engrossed in the events of the countries and times they live in. But the ways the characters experience their worlds are central and foregrounded, which aligns the novels in the post-modernist tradition. What Hölbling and Tally argue for TPB (discussing Georg Lukács’ concept of the historical novel) also applies for TL:
They do no longer offer a definite (dialectical or otherwise) explanation for the course of historical events; but rather acknowledge the contingencies of history. (Hölbling and Tally, 311)
In the case of TPB, the historical realism which Kingsolver employs is added to a magic realism to be found in the witch doctor of Kilanga and more prominently, in sections of Ruth May’s dreams, her death, and eventually her epilogue.
Magic realist novels and stories have, typically, a strong narrative drive, in which the recognizably realistic merges with the unexpected and the inexplicable and in which elements of dreams, fairy story, or mythology combine with the everyday, often in a mosaic or kaleidoscopic pattern of refraction and recurrence. (Drabble, 614)
In search for a theory that incorporates the multiple perspectives and experiences of individuals (i.e. of the characters in the novel) with reference to the portrayal of and search for truths, TPB could also be called a postpositivist novel.
Post-positivists reject the idea that any individual can see the world perfectly as it really is. We are all biased and all of our observations are affected (theory-laden). Our best hope for achieving objectivity is to
Literary and historical Context of The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna 21 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
triangulate across multiple fallible perspectives! Thus, objectivity is not the characteristic of an individual, it is inherently a social phenomenon. It is what multiple individuals are trying to achieve when they criticize each other's work. We never achieve objectivity perfectly, but we can approach it. (Trochim)
The question of objectivity raised by the postpositivists cannot, though, be clearly answered by the insights into the characters’ worlds as it remains open which experiences are significant in the end. As Robert Young argues:
For postpositivists, these questions and answers are situated within immanent logic of the subject's experiences, his location, and his insights. Consequently, postpositivist [theory cuts off] the possibility of external critique, and thus from the postpositivist position, it would be very difficult to question a person's position, if that person finds his explantion rational. Thus postpositivists call for an objective realist framework but slip into a relativism. (Young)
But it seems to be exactly this relativism which makes the power of Kingsolver narrations in both, TPB and TL. It is the characters point of view which allows the reader to learn about the protagonists’ locations and traditions.
Another recent literary theory which should be mentioned and could be applied to TPB and TL is called metamodernism. Setting itself against the contradictions of the multiple postmodern mindsets, metamodernism is a new approach defined
as a continuous oscillation, a constant repositioning between positions and mindsets that are evocative of the modern and of the postmodern but are ultimately suggestive of another sensibility that is neither of them: one that negotiates between a yearning for universal truths on the one hand and an (a)political relativism on the other, between hope and doubt, sincerity and irony, knowingness and naivety, construction and deconstruction. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamodernism)
Once more, the quest for a truth remains dynamic as a process that can never be fully achieved, which applies for both, TPB and TL. “Metamodernism moves for the sake of moving, attempts in spite of its inevitable failure; it seeks forever for a truth that it never expects to find” (Vermeulen and Akker).
Literary and historical Context of The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna 22 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Hence, as multifaceted as both novels are, so are the literary techniques and styles employed in them. It seems impossible to clearly define TPB or TL as being purely the one or the other, but rather a fine blend of perspectives which themselves can be seen as a metaphor for the process of searching and creating truth.
Literary and historical Context of The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna 23 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
4. The Analysis
4.1. Power and Discourse in The Poisonwood Bible
One important point which Foucault makes in his later work is that power constantly circulates. This new idea concerning the mechanisms of power works not only singularly, as Hall (49ff) argues “from top to bottom – and coming from a specific source – the sovereign, the state, the ruling class and so on”, but in Foucault’s view as a “productive network which runs through the whole social body” (ibid, cf. Häusler and Hermes, 237).
Power spreads through all of society and life, without being totally monopolized by one side. Moreover, there are also positive (i.e. not only negative) aspects of power, as they provide the basis for the production of new discourses and knowledge. Foucault, hence, shifts his attention from institutional power to its ‘micro-physics’ and ‘meticulous rituals’ which are the ‘the grand, overall strategies of power [and the] localized circuits, tactics, mechanisms and effects through which power circulates’ (Hall, 50).
In the case of The Poisonwood Bible, the central questions of analysis concern the ways in which the characters perceive the world and how they justify their behavior. Each character experiences Africa differently to a certain extent, based on their capability to adapt to a new discourse. Moving along a spectrum from basically totally failing to incorporate new knowledge (as for Nathan) towards Leah (who changes the most), each family member lives in his/her own ‘micro-episteme’.
These 'micro-epistemes' are at the beginning of the narration very much alike, yet with the unfolding of the events in the Congo and the acquisition of new knowledges, they start to clash in the broader frame of the 'macro-epistemes' of the Western world versus the African. (Häusler and Hermes, 237)
Being constantly confronted with new quests, the Prices’ experiences allow them to expand their knowledge that results in a correction of their judgment of the Congo. Taking a closer look will reveal, though, that for the provider of
The Analysis 24 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler the word and power, Nathan, this is hardly the case; likewise, it does not really apply to Rachel, whose personality is influenced only little by Africa. Orleanna, Adah, and Leah, on the other hand, “not only acquire a better understanding of their environment but also of themselves and hence gradually gain the power to free themselves from Nathan” (ibid., 237).
Remembering Michel Foucault’s concept of the inseparable connection between knowledge (‘savoir’) and power (‘pouvoir’), the Congo becomes the stage for the Prices to contest their ‘regimes of truth’. Always fluctuating, the power-formations (i.e. their epistemes or systems of thought) are at no point static but in constant competition throughout the unfolding of events, (ibid., 237).
In short, it is not the activity of the subject of knowledge that produces a corpus of knowledge, useful or resistant to power, but power- knowledge, the processes and struggles that traverse it and of which it is made up, that determines the forms and possible domains of knowledge. (Foucault, 28)
4.1.1. From one Discourse to Another
Right from the beginning of the story, the interaction of knowledge and power becomes apparent, when the Prices set out for the Congo. After Orleanna’s mystical introduction in hindsight, Leah is the first one to give an account of the Prices’ journey to Africa.
Preparing for their departure, we meet the Price family collecting the things they consider necessary and useful in the Congo. It soon becomes obvious, that their knowledge of travelling as well as that their destination is very limited.
We struck out for Africa carrying all our excess baggage on our bodies, under our clothes. Also, we had clothes under our clothes. My sisters and I left home wearing six pairs of under-drawers, two half-slips and camisoles; several dresses one on top of the other, with pedal pushers underneath; and outside of everything an all-weather coat. (The encyclopedia advised us to count on rain.) The other goods, tools, cake-
The Analysis 25 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
mix boxes and so forth were tucked out of sight in our pockets and under our waistbands, surrounding us in a clanking armor. (TPB, 17)
Eventually, the Prices arrive in Africa and learn quickly enough that what they have brought with them does not provide them with any power in the Congo: their (best) clothes are too hot, the official language is French, the baking powder turned to stone due their sweating and so forth.
At the beginning only Nathan seems untouched by the travel excitements of his family. His mission is clear in bringing the word of God to the pagan people of Kilanga “which fortunately weighs nothing at all” (TPB, 22). His idea is to become “a powerful instrument of Thy perfect will here in Belgian Congo” (TPB, 21).
In the opening scenes of TPB Barbara Kingsolver manages to beautifully portrait how the characters encounter the discourse of the Congo by showing in which ways the Western ideas of civilization fail in such a totally different environment. Knowledge and power can be found inseparably connected in TPB right from the beginning, and the discourses they represent will continue to be in contest throughout the novel.
4.1.2. Light is Knowledge
Nathan’s superior perception of his Western world (i.e. an white Anglo – Christian supremacy) can be beautifully observed in his first prayer at the welcoming feast the people of Kilanga give for the Prices’ arrival. As mentioned above, the Price girls vary in their degree of adaption and comprehension of the African civilization, with Leah showing the highest, down to Rachel having the least. Rachel, whose first experiences in Kilanga show how much she is also part of the white supremacy discourse, tells the episode of the welcoming party:
After a good long hootenanny of so-called hymns shouted back and forth, the burnt offering was out of the fire and into the frying pan so to speak, all mixed up into a gray-looking, smoldering stew. […] Most of
The Analysis 26 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
them were still waiting to get served, like birds in the wilderness. They held up their empty metal bowls or hubcaps or whatnot and cheerfully beat them like drums. It sounded like an entire junkyard orchestra […]. (TPB, 29-30)
Rachel is through her conditioning not able to understand the meaning of such a different discourse, and from the start she is portrayed as being the most powerless character, apart from Ruth May, who is simply too young.
As the feast is about to begin then, Nathan is asked to say the prayer. He does not express any gratitude for the food, but prefers to cite a part of the Bible that connects his views of light, knowledge, and rightfulness.
'The Lord rideth in the person of His angels of mercy. His emissaries of holiness into the cities on the plain, where Lot dwelled amongst the sinners.’ […] 'The emissaries of the Lord smote the sinners, who had come heedless to the sight of God, heedless in their nakedness.’ “Up! Get ye out from this place of darkness! Arise and come forward into a brighter land!" 'Lord, grant that the worthy among us here shall rise above wickedness and come out of the darkness into the wondrous light of our Holy Father. Amen.' (TPB, 31-33)
It comes out very clearly in that section that Nathan aligns ‘nakedness’, ‘darkness’ and ‘sinners’ to the African people whilst he represents the bringer of light, hence, knowledge. Even if we already know that the clothes they brought are useless in the Congo, he condemns nakedness as a sin. Choosing the double image of ‘darkness’ as the absence of light (i.e. of knowledge) as well as the color of the people’s skin, Nathan demonstrates his felt superiority as the knower of the “real truth”. As one of the ‘angels of mercy’, he descended (as he did in the airplane) from heaven in order to ‘smote the sinners’.
The authority Nathan builds his judgments and power on is the Holy Bible, which he takes literally as an unquestionable axiom. Being the knower of the words which came directly from God puts him above the heathen Africans, who need him not only for the salvation of their soul but also their bodies (i.e. to feed them).
The Analysis 27 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Moreover, remembering Foucault’s concept of the importance of the body, the control over the body (be it physical punishment or just inspection) provides means for controlling psychological dimensions as well. The connection of observing, judging and threatening with punishment in order to gain and reinforce power are here in the novel almost identical to the ways Foucault found to be working in Western societies.
4.1.3. A Garden of Evil
In one of the most comical sections of the story, Nathan attempts to provide the hungry people of Kilanga with food which he wants to grow from the vegetable seeds brought from Georgia. In order to cultivate his “demonstration garden” (TPB, 41), Nathan has to “beat down a square of tall grass and wild pink flowers, […]. Then he bent over and began to rip out long handfuls of grass with quick, energetic jerks as though tearing out the hair of the world” (TPB, 42).
Considering his ways and knowledge superior to Mama Tataba’s, he ignores her warnings:
'That one, brother, he bite’ she said, pointing her knuckly hand at a small tree he was wresting from his garden plot. White sap oozed from the torn bark. […]'Poisonwood’ she added flatly. […] She pointed again at the red dirt. 'You got to be make hills.' (TPB, 46; cf. Häusler and Hermes, 238)
While Leah at least shows some concern about Mama Tataba’s remarks, Nathan remains untouched by her advices and carries forward his project. But only to find the next day that Mama Tataba rearranged their garden they way she had suggested into “eight neat burial mounds”. Moreover, Nathan’s face and hands were swollen and aching from the biting plant. “Ow! Great God almighty, Orleanna. How did this curse come to me, when it's God's own will to cultivate the soil!” (TPB, 47).
The Analysis 28 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Still he has not learned his lesson and once again deems his knowledge expert in cultivating the soil. Together with Leah, the “eight burial mounds” are “leveled […] out again as flat as the Great Plains” (TPB, 48).
Therefore, as the rainy season starts, the defenseless young sprouts are flushed away by the flood, and Nathan has to accept his first big defeat. He “had been influenced by Africa. He was out there pushing his garden up into rectangular, flood-proof embankments, exactly the length and width of burial mounds.” (TPB, 73; cf. Häusler and Hermes, 238)
Looking at this episode from Michel Foucault’s point of view reveals a challenge of the knowledge of the native worlds. In Nathan Price’s understanding of the natural world, everything which grows in America must also do so in Africa. Even though the people of the Congo have been planting their soil for ages uncounted, Nathan believes his Western knowledge superior.
As the flushed away seedlings and the plant that bites show him his limitations, he (for the only time in the book) alters his behavior and eventually shapes the beds the way his was told by Mama Tataba. Hence, only in the natural world – as it can be directly observed - is Nathan slightly able to adapt, but he fails to in any other field. (cf. Häusler and Hermes, 239)
Nevertheless, as the reader learns later, his efforts (i.e. his vegetables) do not carry any fruits due to the fact that African insects have themselves no knowledge of American plants and leave them without pollination. Nathan’s incapability along with his ignorance of the other’s natural world becomes a first demonstration as well as a foreboding of his gradual downfall in the Congo. The African soil is no suitable ground for Nathan’s knowledge, and with the “demonstration garden” the connection of power, knowledge, and truth can be beautifully observed. All three are here for the first time in the novel contested and also represent the onset of their decline for Nathan. (ibid.)
The Analysis 29 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
4.1.4. “Terrify me” in the River
As the events continue in the Congo, Nathan has to realize that his church remains empty on Sundays. The problem to start with was, as Rachel describes,
[…] days and months do not matter one way or another to people in this village. They don't even know Sunday from Tuesday or Friday or the twelfth of Never! They just count to five, have their market day, and start over. One of the men in the congregation confided to Father that having church just every old now and then, as it seems to them, instead of on market day, has always bamfuzzled everybody about the Christians. (TPB, 52)
So to get his “church geared up” (ibid.), he decides to create his own calendar with Easter Sunday being on the 4th of July. Commencing the festivities with a pageant, Nathan planned a mass baptism in the Kwilu River in order to save the souls of the people, foremost the ones of the children of Kilanga.
What Nathan has not realized, though, is that the river is only approached with highest alertness due to abundance of crocodiles living in it. Not to speak of letting their children have a bath in the waters.
But the men said no, that was not to be. The women were so opposed to getting dunked in the river, even on hearsay, they all kept their children extra far from the church that day. So the dramatic points of Father's pageant were lost on most of Kilanga. (TPB, 54; also cf. Häusler and Hermes, 240)
Hence, Nathan’s Easter liturgy failed, and not a soul was saved in the river baptism. The only successful part of the pageantry was the picnic Orleanna had prepared and the fried chicken she made was well accepted by the people of Kilanga.
Looking at this scene from Foucault’s point of view shows, that Nathan’s knowledge of the local language fails to distinguish certain sounds and words. Being unable to produce the correct pronunciation of “batiza”, as well as constant repetition of “Jesus is bangala”, Nathan’s positive intention is turned into a negative one. Instead of to ‘baptize’ he is talking about ‘terrifying’, and
The Analysis 30 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler the ‘son of God’ becomes ‘poisonwood‘ the way he pronounces it, which is explained only two hundred pages later in the novel.
“Then there is batiza. Our father’s fixed passion. Batiza pronounced with the tongue curled just so means ‘baptism’. Otherwise it means ‘to terrify’ […] No one has yet explained it to the Reverend. He is not of a mind to receive certain news. (TPB, 243; quoted in Häusler and Hermes, 240)
One question appearing here now is whether Nathan is unwilling or only unable to listen to and pronounce Kikongo correctly. He does not understand that words can have diverting meanings based on their acoustic production. It seems not to be a problem of his memory, as his knowledge of the Bible is profound, but more likely that Nathan considers his language (i.e. English) superior a priori to Kikongo. (cf. Häusler and Hermes, 240)
What Nathan eventually achieves is the opposite of what he intended: instead of gaining power and trust by holding a spiritual ceremony, he repels the people of Kilanga. The metaphors from the Bible of saving their souls are turned into an imagery of terror, destruction, and death. (ibid. 240)
Such imagery becomes even more pertinent with Richard Dyer’s (1993, 45) remarks: in fact, the first white Europeans in Africa were seen by the Africans as ghosts or living dead who bring death and destruction. As history showed, this imagery became the sad truth. (cf. Häusler and Hermes, 240)
Hence, when Nathan uses the power of speech, he unwillingly makes Jesus the harmful poisonwood tree or proposes to sacrifice Kilanga’s people to the crocodiles in the river. The result is that his own power is further diminished and his goal to become the savior of the village is never attained. The contest of the spiritual and linguistic worlds here marks the second major event in the clash of discourses and of Nathan’s gradual downfall. (cf. Häusler and Hermes 240.)
The Analysis 31 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
4.1.5. 'The Verse’
The dreaded Verse is our household punishment. Other lucky children might merely be thrashed for their sins, but we Price girls are castigated with the Holy Bible. The Reverend will level his gaze and declare, 'You have The Verse’. Then slowly, as we squirm on his hook, he writes on a piece of paper, for example: Jeremiah 48:18. (TPB, 68)
This short quote gives another insight in how Nathan makes use of the words of the Bible in order to exert influence on his family. Having not only to copy one verse, but also the following 99, the last one eventually reveals the reason for the punishment.
The words of the Bible, hence, represent for Nathan the truth that contains all the answers to the mundane life. Deviating from the ways of the Bible means not only to fail in this world , but spiritually to fall into sin which needs correction. Punishing, then, means a process in which an individual has to reconsider his or her actions in order to realize what the deviation was in order to adjust his/her behavior.
So, in order to maintain his power, the necessary normalizing process is supposed to be achieved by making the Price girls copy/incorporate the words which contain the code, i.e., the knowledge which constitutes the possible domains of behavior deemed agreeable within Nathan’s discourse.
Reconsidering the idea of the panopticon, the ‘prison’ which Nathan builds for his family members does not consist of physical walls but of the norms within which they are allowed to move about. The effectiveness of such a prison is provided by a supposedly omnipotent observer who is God himself, watching anytime and anyplace for somebody deviating from his path. Nathan, then, represents his executing instrument who has to guard and guide his flock.
One could argue here now that the prison could, in fact, be seen as a physical one, as Africa or the Congo itself to which Nathan as the patriarch selfishly takes his family. Being deprived of their normal environment, the Price family is put into a situation which is not only created by the discourse of the Congo
The Analysis 32 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler but very much by the spatial displacement which they eventually have to overcome in order to regain their personal power over their lives.
‘The verse’, hence, is the most prominent tool in TPB for Nathan to punish his daughters for their offences. It is introduced with Methuselah, the parrot left to them by the former missionary of Kilanga, Brother Fowles. Methuselah could not only repeat and understand words but also imitate the speaker’s voice, which eventually causes both fun and discomfort to the Price girls.
[…] he raised his head and screeched through the roar of the storm his best two phrases in our language: first, in Mama Tataba's side-slant voice, 'Wake up, Brothah Fowels! Wake up, Brothah Fowels!' Then in a low-pitched growl, 'Piss off, Methuselah!' (TPB, 68)
Here the parrot beautifully functions as a living mirror of the clashing discourses on at least two levels: on the linguistic for having the capability of reproducing the human’s language with its underlying intelligence hard to grasp; and symbolically representing an Africa which cannot ultimately be subdued to the will of a colonizer, i.e., Nathan.
[…] Methuselah could not be made to copy the Bible. Curiously exempt from the Reverend's rules was Methuselah, in the same way Our Father was finding the Congolese people beyond his power [my emphasis]. Methuselah was a sly little representative of Africa itself […] (TPB, 69)
This section is told by Adah, who recognizes very soon that their father has no power over the people of the Congo.
4.1.6. NOMMO !
The power of the word is also directly addressed in the TPB, with word and spirit being inseparably connected in the Congolese.
[…] the principles of ntu are asleep, until they are touched by nommo. Nommo is the force that makes things live as what they are: man or tree or animal. Nommo means word. The rabbit has the life it has - not a rat
The Analysis 33 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
life or mongoose life - because it is named rabbit, mvundla. A child is not alive, […] until it is named. (TPB, 238)
In the novel it is Adah who is most interested in the Congolese (and in general in) language. Reading books front to back and back to front, she has a special access to language, and through her enthusiasm for words she gains the biggest understanding of the Congo. A, in the story, very central part of the mystical construction of the African discourse is revealed.
Nommo comes from the mouth, like water vapor, he said: a song, a poem, a scream, a prayer, a name, all these are nommo. Water itself is nommo, of the most important kind, it turns out. Water is the word of the ancestors given to us or withheld, depending on how well we treat them. The word of the ancestors is pulled into trees and men […] and this allows them to stand and live as muntu. (TPB, 239)
Again, the importance of the spoken word (i.e. the tradition of passing on knowledge by speaking) as a contrast to the written tradition of the Western discourse is pointed out. As a tree pulls up the water to live, the word is understood to carry the power to turn things into living objects.
For Nathan, though, his world is based on language put down on paper. The incapability or unwillingness to adapt to a new linguistic discourse, be it phonetically or semantically, reduces his power in the Congo, though back home in Georgia it was unquestioned.
Our Father has a bone to pick with this world, and oh, he picks it like a sore. Picks it with the Word. His punishment is the Word, and his deficiencies are failures of words - as when he grows impatient with translation and strikes out precariously on his own, telling parables in his wildly half-baked Kikongo. It is a dangerous thing, I now understand, to make mistakes with nommo in the Congo. (TPB, 242-243)
As Nathan will have to experience soon, the power of the word will turn against him. But there are also characters in TPB that do not fail in the contestation of the discourses. Being in the same position as Nathan actually, it is the Fowells who contrast the helplessness of Prices.
The Analysis 34 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
4.1.7. Tata Santa Claus
In this episode of the TPB, the Prices meet their precursors of the ministry of Kilanga: Brother Fowells and his family. They arrived in the village on their boat, which they travel and live on, in to visit some friends and meet the Prices.
While Nathan is out in the fields, the women of the house have the chance to speak to Tata Fowells without supervision. All they knew so far was that their precursor was banned from the ministry for the ways he used to handle things. In the conversation he has with the family, Barbara Kingsolver crafted a chapter in which the connection between power, word, and knowledge are beautifully displayed.
The contest of discourses again derives from the capability of understanding another language, hence, culture, and the ability to accept as well as adopt. Brother Fowells tells the Prices that the ‘pagan’ people in the Congo are actually very spiritual and perform most of their actions “with one eye to the spirit” (TPB, 278). This spirit is represented by and living in the beauty of the nature surrounding them, which the Congolese then worship in their gospels.
What makes Brother Fowells such an interesting character is that his knowledge of both world and scriptures is hybrid. One the one hand, he is a scholar of nature, classifying flora and fauna, and on the other hand, he knows various versions of the Bible by heart. Yet he does not take these words literally, but evaluates knowledge. Hence, he allows the epistemes to be in contest with each other in order to get the best out of both.
The Analysis 35 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
‘Many parts of the Bible make good sense here, if only you change a few words.’ He laughed. 'And a lot of whole chapters, sure, you just have to throw away.’ 'Well, it's every bit God's word, isn't it?' Leah said. 'God's word, brought to you by a crew of romantic idealists in a harsh desert culture eons ago, followed by a chain of translators two thousand years long.' (TPB, 278-279)
This shows how much freer Fowells is and provides an explanation why his existence in the Congo is not marked by decay as Nathan’s, but on the contrary: his character becomes a metaphor for a successful life, having many children and being friends with all the people they are in contact with.
In terms of power loss (or gain), this scene is also the beginning of Leah’s emancipation from her father. Being ‘Daddy’s girl’ so to speak, she had not really questioned Nathan’s authority and knowledge very much so far. But in the conversation with Fowells she realizes the truth of his words and recognizes that there might be a second point of view outside of Nathan’s discourse: “Leah sat narrow-eyed in her chair, for once stumped for the correct answer” (TPB, 279).
As Nathan comes home from the fields then, he soon falls into a battle of Bible verses with the visitor. The argument is about on how to interpret the scriptures, and Nathan eventually meets someone equal in knowledge of the Bible. Hence, as Nathan still clings to a rigid exegesis of the Words of God, Tata Fowells points out that this knowledge was written long ago, translated, and certain parts thereby misinterpreted. (TPB, 279ff.)
Looking at this section from Foucault’s perspective, what we find is a contest of the biblical discourse which shows that written down knowledge has its deficiencies when taken too rigidly. Moreover, allowing ‘knowledges’ to be in contest, as in the character of Brother Fowells, is portrayed as being closer to the truth.
The importance of the spoken word, as a contrast to the written one is even more significantly brought to light in the following episode.
The Analysis 36 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
4.1.8. The democratic Church of Kilanga
As the events continue in the Congo, the Price family is not only exposed to discursive contestations but also to physical threats. Having to face a terrible drought as well as an invasion of dreadful ants, Nathan’s authority as the head of the congregation and the power of his god is challenged. Leah tells this episode.
Looking back over the months that led to this day, it seems the collapse of things started in October, with the vote in church. We should have been good sports and lit out of the Congo right then. How could Father not have seen his mistake? The congregation of his very own church interrupted the sermon to hold an election on whether or not to accept Jesus Christ as the personal Saviour of Kilanga. (TPB, 373; cf. Häusler and Hermes, 241)
Tata Ndu is the actual chief of the people Kilanga. He is the oldest and the authority when it comes to decisions concerning his folk. After all the disasters, he marches into Nathan’s church and turns the Western understanding of democracy against him, as for Tata Ndu the source of all distress is Nathan’s religion.
'You believe we are mwana, your children, who knew nothing until you came here. Tata Price, I am an old man who learned from other old men. I could tell you the name of the great chief who instructed my father, and all the ones before him, but you would have to know how to sit down and listen. (TPB, 379)
This utterance becomes very significant remembering the discussion of ‘nommo’ as above. The two discourses contesting each other derive from the written vs. the spoken tradition of passing on knowledge, and Nathan has to experience that Africa (as symbolized by Tata Ndu) is much smarter than he might have expected.
The Analysis 37 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
'White men tell us: Vote, bantu! They tell us: You do not all have to agree, ce n'est pas necessaire! If two men vote yes and one says no, the matter is finished. A bu, even a child can see how that will end. It takes three stones in the fire to hold up the pot. Take one away, leave the other two, and what? The pot will spill into the fire.' (TPB, 380; quoted in Häusler and Hermes, 241)
What the chief of the people of Kilanga then explains is that their system of gaining consent is based on communication, not on imposing rules. The most prominent difference is that each party has to agree eventually without feeling discriminated. This is achieved by the chiefs of the parties, who keep talking to each other until a fair consent is reached and justice for all the families is guaranteed. (cf. Häusler and Hermes, 242 ff)
Compared to the Western idea of democracy, in which a small majority is eventually enough for exerting power on the overruled ones, the African system is portrayed as superior in terms of fairness. Knowledge and the resulting power, hence, as Kingsolver might suggest in TPB, is not used to control someone else, but to gain an understanding of the other’s problems and the true cause of an issue. (cf. ibid) “Jesus is a white man, so he will understand the law of la majorite, Tata Price. Wenda mbote.' Jesus Christ lost, eleven to fifty-six” (TPB, 380).
Breaking his spiritual power, chief Ndu takes away Nathan’s function as the provider of the truth by depriving him of his ability to speak in the name of a greater power, hence, for the god(s). Nathan’s worldly and political power in the public field is finally contested and eventually reduced to his family, who will also soon rise against him.
4.1.9. Leah the huntress
As mentioned above, Nathan’s gradual loss of power pervades the book from the beginning until his decay. Not only does he never attain his goal of saving the souls of Kilanga through his means, but ultimately also looses the respect of his family and, eventually, his life.
The Analysis 38 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
In the episode of the great village hunt, it is Leah who rises up against her father’s will.
“Leah would rare up and talk back to Father straight to his face [...] Leah always had the uppermost respect for Father, but after the hullabaloo in church where they voted Father out, she just plumb stopped being polite.” (TPB, 381; quoted in Häusler and Hermes, 242)
In these decisive scenes, Nathan’s authority as the head of the family is broken and the Price women eventually begin to escape his control. Leah always used to be the most fond to Nathan and her rise against his will represents the biggest loss within the family. Adah, as a contrast, was never as devoted to her father and often makes remarks on his pride and unawareness. (cf, Häusler and Hermes, 242)
The contestation to be found here is not only within the family, but also a challenge of the social order and the place of women within it. In the Congolese discourse women are simply not allowed to take part in hunts and, hence, Leah has not only to stand up against her father’s will but also against the elders’ of the village. The young men of Kilanga, though, are on Leah’s side and support her wish for the hunt, which represents a third power struggle within the native community. (cf. ibid.)
Being torn between two very disparate cultures, the space for Leah as a woman is very restricted. But she is already empowered with the local knowledge she acquired in the conversations with Anatole. So Leah is eventually able to rewrite her story and change the discourse, hence, the truth she lives in. Supported by her friends from Kilanga, it is again a democratic vote that decides. (ibid.)
[…] when it came time to walk up and cast their votes, fifty-one stones went in the bowl with Leah's bow-and-arrow by it. Forty-five for the one with the cookpot. (TPB, 385)
Nevertheless, Nathan still tries to maintain his control and wants things to happen his ways:
The Analysis 39 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
'What occurred this evening may be of some consequence to the village, but it's of no consequence to you. God has ordained that you honor thy father and submit thyself to the rules of his house.' [...] Leah slung her bow over her shoulder. 'I'm going with the men and that's final.' (TPB, 386; as quoted in Häusler and Hermes, 242)
Eventually, after his and the authority of the words of the Bible failed on Leah, she takes part in the hunt, and it is her arrow that kills an antelope.
What can be observed in this episode from TPB is in Foucault’s terms how power circulates, how it is constantly being contested, strengthened or weakened. Nathan has to experience that power cannot be maintained when its premises (i.e. the knowledge it is based on) fails in a different environment, hence, discourse. Neither do the people of Kilanga really attain his sermons, nor is he able to remain the respected head of his family. With Leah lost to his power, only very few people in his life remain under his control. But as the events in the Congo continue, Nathan will be further pushed down the power spiral leading to his end. (cf. ibid)
4.1.10. Ruth May’s Death
In a final demonstration of his ignorance, Nathan neglects the warnings of the people of Kilanga, still considering their knowledge as a mere expression of their pagan superstition. The argument is about letting the local boy Nelson sleep inside their house.
“Father quoted a Bible verse about the only thing we had to fear was fear itself. He told Mother if she let Nelson sleep in our house that night she'd be playing directly into the hands of the idol worshippers, and if she wanted to count herself as one of them she could take her children and go seek shelter among them. Then he turned to us and declared it was high time for us to go to bed and put the light out on laughable Congolese superstitions.” (TPB, 383; quoted in Häusler and Hermes, 243)
But the warnings turn out to be a real threat and eventually Ruth May, the youngest Price girl, dies after getting bitten by a green Mamba. This most tragic event becomes the turning point in Orleanna’s life which gives her the strength to free herself from Nathans dominion. The ultimate sacrifice
The Analysis 40 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler eventually breaks the paralysis Nathan’s absolute power had on her, which before had seemed impossible to her, being shackled in the discourse of marriage.
I encountered my own spirit less and less. By the time Ruth May was born, [...] Nathan was in full possession of the country once known as Orleanna Wharton. [...] I was lodged in the heart of darkness, so thoroughly bent to the shape of marriage I could hardly see any other way to stand. (TPB, 228; cf. Häusler and Hermes, 243)
The “shape of marriage” can in Foucault’s terms again be seen as the prison which Nathan, as the guard, is in control of. Using the words of the Bible as its walls, the Price women became subject to the discourse of patriarchal power, supervised by God and his agent Nathan, marked by subordination and obedience to his words.
Only in a few scenes in TPB we can see Orleanna opposing Nathan’s will, but in fact with very limited success, if at all. Ruth May’s death allows her to see ‘the truth’, and the tragic event eventually empowers Orleanna to escape from Nathan with her three remaining daughters.
To mark this liberation from her role as mother and housewife, she also gives away all the household tools to the women of Kilanga, throwing off her shackles symbolically. As mentioned above, practice and language are connected according to Foucault, and it is in this scene in which Orleanna becomes the agent, whereas Nathan turns passive, his words failing.
For once he had no words to instruct our minds and improve our souls, no parable that would turn Ruth May's death by snakebite into a lesson on the Glory of God. My Father, whose strong hands always seized whatever came along and molded it to his will, seemed unable to grasp what had happened. 'She wasn't baptized yet,' he said. (TPB, 419; as quoted in Häusler and Hermes, 244)
Nathan, then, being deprived of his last dominion, has finally reached the bottom of the power spiral. Being so absorbed in the salvation of the people of the Congo, he even failed to care spiritually for his closest.
The Analysis 41 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
It is his knowledge in general of how to handle the situation which fails, and his power eventually falls apart. It is also important to remember here that Nathan’s point of view is never told by himself at any point in the novel. His knowledge is derived from the written words of the Bible, which he applies to maintain his power. As in the end not even the Bible can offer the knowledge to deal with the situation, there is nothing left he might verbalize. Being without words, having no truth to offer means being without power. (cf. ibid)
4.1.11. The burning Tower
Following the Prices’ life in the Congo, the spiral of power only circulates downwards for Nathan. Coming to Africa as the master of the family, in full belief of his power over the members of his household, the importance as well as the righteousness of his mission, his power level is at the highest.
But soon it shows that Nathan is not willing to see that different discourses demand an adaption of knowledge in order to maintain one’s power, and his failure to accept and learn from the native’s lore leads Tata bängala eventually to his demise. Losing every single contestation of the ‘truths’ which he carried to the Congo, his status as the head of the congregation as well as of his family is eventually destroyed. “The things we do not know, independently and in unison as a family, would fill two separate baskets, each with a large hole in the bottom” (TPB, 238).
It is this absence of knowledge and the failure to accept the Congo’s discourse as an independent system of thought, which lead to Nathan’s power gradually vanishing. Stubbornly he believes that there can be only one truth, which is passed on to him from the Bible; everything deviating from its words belongs to the pagan world leading to hell. Though exactly the opposite becomes the case for Nathan.
Then Adah got a very strange look and said, 'He got The Verse'[...]" The King of Kings aroused the anger of Antiochus against the rascal. And when Lysias informed him this man was to blame for all the trouble, he ordered them to put him to death in the way that is customary there. For
The Analysis 42 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
there is a tower there seventy-five feet high, filled with ashes, and there they push a man guilty of sacrilege or notorious for other crimes to destruction. By such a fate it came to pass that the transgressor died, not even getting burial in the ground. (TPB, 552f; quoted in Häusler and Hermes, 245)
In the ultimate challenge of his power, Nathan dies jumping off a wooden tower which the natives set afire when hunting for him. Nathan was simply not able to leave his self constructed ivory tower that in the end turned out to be made only of wood, which can turn into ashes.
Taking the King James Bible literally word for word, Nathan choses the rigidness of the written word which does not allow enough space to incorporate the knowledge necessary for surviving in a discourse which is so different as the African. Hence, as power is never static but always contested, it is the rigidness of Nathan’s episteme which makes his world collapse.
The Analysis 43 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
4.2. Power and Discourse in The Lacuna
The second novel of my analysis was published in 2009 and tells the story of the life of Harrison William Shepherd. Born in the USA, his parents break up early and his Mexican mother, Salome, takes the young boy to live with her in Mexico.
We get to know Harry in 1929 when he is living on a plantation on the remote Isla Pixol. No school exists on this island, so after primary school in the US. Harry’s education derives from the books he finds in Enrique’s library, the plantation owner Salome ran away with. His interest in reading, combined with his curiosity to observe the world and putting his experiences on paper, eventually become the tools which provide for Harry’s career. From a plaster mixer of famous muralist Diego Rivera, to the secretary of the Bolshevik revolutionary Lev Trotsky and, finally, a successful author in the USA, almost all stages in Harry’s life are connected to his power over words.
Analyzing The Lacuna from Michel Foucault’s point of view, I try to show that the equation ‘truth=power plus discourse’ holds true for the life of Harrison William Shepherd. From early on, it is his knowledge that gives momentum to his rise from a powerless child to a successful artist who by his connection to certain historic characters has to cope with the effects of the change of discourses in his later life. Nevertheless, it is not only the power of his words, but also the power of authorities (i.e. the press and intelligence services) to create truths which eventually causes his career to end in the anti-communist witch hunt of the 1950s.
The Analysis 44 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
4.2.1. Young Harrison William Shepherd – Knowledge equals Power
As readers we are introduced to the life of young Harry at the age of thirteen. Having had to run off with his mother to live on the remote Isla Pixol, it is 1929 where he obtains a little notebook, a present which will become the tool for shaping his powers.
Right from the beginning the importance of that book is hinted at, being lost and found only decades later to make a start for the story of a character that shall make his living by putting thoughts, hence words, onto paper.
He [HWS] came to his powers early, that is well known and many have remarked on it, but not so young as thirteen. He did acquire a notebook that year for making a journal, a habit kept on through life. (TL, 37)
Even if a major part of the story is put into shape by his later assistant Victory Brown [VB], it is Harry’s first person perspective which allows the reader to learn the true story of the events that make up his life. The idea of what is true in contrast to what is not becomes important later, with the media portraying events according to their and other’s (i.e. the superstructure’s) motivation.
Knowledge, hence, is a central feature which empowers Harry in the story, on the one hand, to make his way, and for the reader, on the other hand, to distinguish between truth and invention.
A very early incident of the connection of power, knowledge, and truth can already be found on the first pages of TL. Harry and Salome came to live with Enrique on his hacienda, and each morning they woke up terrified by a howling coming from the tree tops. Believing “it was saucer-eyed devils screaming in those trees, fighting over the territorial right to consume human flesh” (TL, 3), they spent their first year in ignorance of the truth behind the howling until Enrique eventually shed light on matter:
The Analysis 45 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
He [Enrique] had been raised to understand the usefulness of fear. So it was nearly a year before he told them the truth: the howling is only monkeys. […] “Every ignorant Indian in the village knows what they are. You would too, if you went out in the morning instead of hiding in bed like a pair of sloths.” (TL, 4)
Hence, knowledge in this scene works for Enrique to maintain a superior power position, letting his spouse and her son live in fear.
Considering knowledge as a key factor to Harry’s empowerment process, one character plays a central role in The Lacuna: it is Enrique’s cook, Leandro, who provides young Harry with two important tools. First of all, Leandro gives Harry diving goggles which not only allow him to discover the world of fishes but also a lacuna, a hidden underwater entrance to a cave. The symbolism of the unknown becomes (as the title of the book suggests) one central image of the story and in the end provides the gate which gives HWS the chance to ultimately disappear physically.
Secondly, it is Leandro who teaches Harry how to make the dough which Enrique likes so much:
“Now you know the secret for making the boss happy,” Leandro said. “Cooking in this house is like war. […] If he throws out your mother you might still have a job, if you can make pan dulce and blandas.” (TL, 28)
A few years later, this knowledge will help Harry to become the plaster mixer of the famous Mexican muralist Diego Rivera and open the doors to his household, in which Harry at first finds employment as a cook and later on as a secretary.
After Salome has run away from Enrique for not marrying her, she moves with Harry to Mexico City to live as the mistress of “Mr. Produce the cash” (TL, 63ff) in a small apartment above a bakery. The question of Harry’s schooling reappears, but no suitable, or rather affordable, school seems adequate for the teenager. As mentioned before, Harry had only visited primary school in the States before coming to Mexico, and being allowed to take only two books with him, it is Enrique’s library on Isla Pixol which has to
The Analysis 46 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler satisfy the young boy’s thirst for books at first. My key theory that power is inseparably connected with knowledge is represented at this point quite significantly in the story:
[…] all the book cabinets had iron grilles covering their fronts like prisoners’ windows, locked over shelves packed with books. […] Every Sunday Enrique brought out the skeleton key, unlocked the case, and took out four books exactly, which he left in a pile on the table without discussion. Invariably historical, stinking of mold, these were to be a boy’s education. (TL, 21)
Enrique, thus, is able to maintain his superior power over the boy by controlling the resources Harry longs most for (apart from food and shelter, which Enrique provides). Additionally, it is Enrique (and not his mother Salome) who decides what is to be read, that is, the knowledge he deems suitable for a boy. The historical books in reference to discourse can be seen as a part of a self-reinforcing white supremacy (cf. Gómez), to which Enrique considers himself belonging to: “Don Enrique is proud of no indios mixed up in his blood, Pure Spanish only […]” (TL, 42).
Whilst Harry is forced to mostly learn about the conquest of America, he actually wants to read adventure novels such as “The Count of Monte Cristo, Around the World in Eighty Days, Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea […]” (TL, 22).
Nevertheless, after having left Enrique and being both without a library and financial means, and with education still on the agenda, a bookshop owner agrees to lend some books to Harry for a small fee.
Mother sighed for the slim chances of gaining entrance to the no-cost Preparatoria. She told the shopkeeper she needed something to put her boy on the Right Track, and he showed her the section of very old, worn- out ones. Then took pity on Mother and said if we brought them back later, he would return most of the price. (TL, 68)
With Salome now being in charge of Harry’s education, again it is history which she choses for her boy. But Harry is happier now with the story of
The Analysis 47 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Cortés, the conquistadores, and Monteczuma. Living and wandering about in Mexico City, Harry has the very chance to combine knowledge with experience, visiting the historic sites mentioned in his books.
As the story continues, though, Salome and her beau decide that Harry has to attend some school. Failing the entry exam to the higher quality Preparatoria due to his lack of knowledge in mathematics and Latin, he gets enrolled in “School of Cretins, Deaf-Mutes, and Boys of Bad Character on Avenida Puig” (TL, 81). Being too old, and also too smart for such an institution, there is not much for Harry to learn there.
But what can be found in that part of the story is a contestation of power right on Harry’s first day on Avenida Puig, when he corrects his teacher Señora Bartolome:
She teaches one subject only: “Extricta Moralidad!” The tropical climate inclines young persons of Mexican heritage to moral laxity, she says. Señora Bartolome, perdon: We are at an elevation of 2,300 meters above sea level here, so it isn’t tropical, strictly speaking. […] Punished for insolence. Bad Character accomplished [...] (TL, 81)
Remembering Foucault’s ‘Discipline & Punish’ (1975), the punishment in this scene clearly signifies modes of power execution with, on the one hand, the teacher defending her superior authority, and aiming at, on the other hand, forcing a new behavior upon Harry. It does not matter that Harry’s knowledge represents the truth; but it is the contestation of power / authority which is being punished.
There are actually very few contestations of power to be found in the first stages of Harry’s life. Though it can be argued that using his wit and cleverness, as in the scene before, he becomes more and more capable of emancipating himself from the people in charge of him.
Right from the beginning of the story, being only thirteen years of age, Harry’s intellectual powers seem to be ahead of his mother’s, who basically remains a flat character until her death, longing only for men and booze.
The Analysis 48 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Back on Isla Pixol, young Harry already contests at certain points Salome’s power, which on her part is portrayed being dependent on Enrique:
[Salome] “You should go to bed,” she announced. [Harry] “I’m not a child. You should go to bed.” [Salome] “No bunk, mister. If he gets any more cross, we’ll both be hoofing it out of here.” (TL, 35)
But with no Enrique to throw them out in Mexico City Harry strikes at both, Salome’s illiteracy and authority:
[Salome] “A person could go blind from reading so much.” [Harry] “Your eyes must be good, then.” [Salome] “You slaughter me, cheeky Charlie. (TL, 75)
As a matter of fact, though, Harry remains under the power of the people providing for him. Still it is Harry’s mostly self-gained knowledge and intelligence which allow him to move along easily in life. So whilst he is attending class during weekdays, he is free to explore the streets of the city on weekends.
One of these days will then become a turning point in Harry’s life. Being sent to buy cigarettes for his mother, a girl buying parrots catches his attention. An ‘old market woman’ (TL, 85) whom Harry had met before, reveals that this girl is the servant of ‘much-discussed painter’ (TL, 86) Diego Rivera and his wife Frida Kahlo. It is also at this point that the power of the media is introduced:
The Analysis 49 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Who discusses him so much? Cienfuegos said: “The newspapers.” La Perla said: “Everyone, guapo, because he is a Communist. Also the ugliest man you ever saw.” […] They say he eats the flesh of young girls, wrapped in a tortilla. “He’s a cannibal.” (TL, 86)
The creation of truth by the newspapers and their power to spread the word becomes an ever more important aspect in the story from that point on, but it will take some time until Harry has to experience its effects.
Being too smart for the ‘school of cretins’, he is eventually allowed to attend classes on ‘Avenida Puig’ according to his own will. It is in the following scene in which the headmaster of the school recognizes the boy’s intelligence and his talent as an author.
“You should write stories, boy. You have the disposition for a romantic novelist.” […] “I’ve spoken of it to Señora Bartolome. She says your competence at learning the Latin lessons has surpassed her competence to teach them. It isn’t fair to the others, for her to teach so much. (TL, 96)
This allows Harry to work for Diego Rivera, where he uses his knowledge of cooking to mix the plaster for the famous murals. But as the painter also works outside of Mexico, the young plaster mixer is not always needed and without a job, the only other option remains school.
So Salome and ‘Mr. produce the cash’ decide that the best for Harry would be to send him to Washington DC where his father lives and to attend the Potomac Academy for boys.
4.2.2. Naming the boy
As the key-theory of my thesis is ‘truth = power & discourse’, the power of the word and language plays the central role in my analysis. As shown so far, it is to be found in both TPB as well as in TL: the power to speak correlates with knowledge and hence creates the reality (i.e. discourse) within which the characters move about, and vice versa.
The Analysis 50 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
In the case of The Lacuna, the power of naming is to be found especially in the first stages of Shepherd’s life: in various scenes in the story, HWS is addressed differently.
Central to this conception of naming is the understanding that naming, in its most simple representation, involves individuals in a concurrent process of sorting and gathering, comparing and contrasting within one ‘s evolving view of reality […]. (Armstrong and Fountaine, 7)
As for his mother: “She preferred to call him by his middle name, William or just Will, conditioned as that is on future events: You will” (TL, 9).
Later on in Mexico City, HWS is given the name ‘Sweet Buns’ when he gets the job as a plaster mixer:
Even the old Plaster Captain up on the platform stopped working to watch. It was terrifying. “Where did you learn that?” “It’s like making dough for pan dulce.” […] You use it for European bread and sweet buns.” Ha ha ha, Sweet Buns! So the new job has a new name to go with it. (TL, 92)
Interestingly, while his mother chose the middle name William to address her son, his father (who’s name most probably is William) decides to call him Harry.
“It’s bread and board. You’ll bunk there with your pals, Harry.” Yes, sir.” (Harry. It will be Harry now?) […] Harry Shepherd looked out the window. Whoever pays the bill, names the boy. (TL, 116)
This scene is also the most significant in terms of the connection of power and naming. Althusser’s concepts of interpellation states that entities are created by “being addressed, hailed, or named because this naming places the individual in a social structure relative to the name” (McLaren, 105).
In the case of the adolescent William Harrison Shepherd, the creation of his identity continues as he attends the Potomac Academy. Arriving there and
The Analysis 51 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler being given names by his fellow students, Althusser’s notion of interpellation can be observed nicely.
The Greek boy named Damos says, “Hey Mexico, comeer,” but he also says, “Hey Brush Ape.” Bull’s Eye told them to watch out, the kid from Mexico is ace at firearms, maybe he used to ride with Pancho Villa. Now they use that name: Pancho Villa. (TL, 120)
In all the scenes mentioned so far, HWS never resists the names given to him, accepting the identity coming with the interpellation and the forms of power connected with it. Nevertheless, as HWS gets older, also his identity becomes more stable.
In the following scene it is Frida, who choses a name for HWS after returning from Washington to Mexico, and because of the friendship which they develop, HWS later in his life (see TL, 368, 375, 377, 384, 391, 472) continues to use ‘Insólito’ or ‘Sóli’ as his identification.
“Kicked out for what, chulito?” “For a scandal.” “Involving?” “Another student.” “Another student and?” Her hair practically standing on end. “Conducta insólita. Irregular conduct. Señora, no more can be said. You would have to put me out on the street if you knew the rest.” She crossed her arms and smiled. “That’s what I’m going to call you: Insólito.” (TL, 160)
The emancipation progress in terms of naming has only one concrete case in which HWS is asked how he would like to be addressed. It is Arthur Gold, his lawyer, who asks
The Analysis 52 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
“Mr. Shepherd. Should I call you Harry?” “No. Just Shepherd is fine. Without the “Mr.” (TL, 488)
As Judith Butler argues, Althusserl’s interpellation is not an identification of something already existing, but the production of a subject who
becomes subject only through its response to the call. […] The fundamental idea in Butler’s work, as in Derrida’s, Freud’s and Foucault’s, is that social naming is alienating and that its source is some form of pernicious Power. (Alcoff)
In the case of HWS’ empowering process, it becomes complete with the success of his first book. From then on he mostly uses a combination of his initials plus his family name ‘Shepherd’.
4.2.3. A student, a cook, a secretary, an author, a communist
Returning to the central thesis of the intertwining of power, knowledge and discourse, it is in Washington that teenage HWS has to experience it personally for the first time: the military power exerted on destitute people, as well as in which ways truth is being constructed by the media and the political powers behind them.
Being allowed to come with Bull’s Eye on his Saturday shopping tour, they are being caught up in the Bonus Army marches of July 28, 1932. It was the World War I veterans and their families protesting for the money that was promised to them for fighting in the Argonne. But instead of justice, President Herbert Hoover, Major Dwight Eisenhower, and General Douglas MacArthur sent in their armies to disperse the uprising, leaving many dead or wounded.
The Analysis 53 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
In his [H. Hoover’s] opinion the Bonus Army consists of Communists and persons with criminal records. The editorial writer applauded MacArthur for sparing the public treasury: The nation is being bled dry by persons like these who offend the common decency. “Why would the paper say they’re criminals?” “They were treated like criminals,” Bull’s Eye replied. “So people want to think it. The paper says whatever they want.” (TL, 143)
The contestation of power found in this scene, with the superior power defending their power brutally is another case of the equation ‘Truth = Power & Discourse” holding true. It also raises questions of a critique of democracy in general, as the political system (i.e. the power structure) is portrayed as an unscrupulous entity using its power to change the discourse / truth according to their needs. It is not only politics being challenged, but society as a whole. “So people want to think it. The paper says whatever they want” clearly aims at the public opinion, i.e., the people themselves choosing a truth.
As the story continues, the spreading of the word by the newspapers, hence, the transportation of ideology, becomes an ever more important and prominent feature of the novel. So far, though, it does not influence HWS’ life directly.
After being dispelled from Potomac Academy for the ‘irregular conduct’ (TL, 160) with Bull’s Eye, HWS returns to Mexico and his mother. Throughout the novel, Barbara Kingsolver never reveals in detail what this ‘conduct’ actually was. As the title suggests, the occurrences that remain hidden from the reader’s knowledge make up an important aspect of the story. It remains with the audience to draw the larger picture of the events and to create their own perspective on the truth as it is displayed through the plot of TL.
Remembering Michel Foucault’s life as a homosexual, the parallels to HWS’ are apparent, though: discovering their ‘Otherness’ as adolescents, they had to face a discourse which regarded homosexuality as being deviant from the commonly agreed on monogamist, heterosexual, and Catholic modes of relationships. For HWS this meant, as just mentioned above that, on the one
The Analysis 54 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler hand, he had to leave Potomac Academy, but also, on the other hand that later he was classified ‘4F’ by the armed forces and was not sent to the war in Europe. Similarily to Michel Foucault in France, the predominant discourse with its power structures in the 1940s USA also aimed at normalizing behavior. “They offered to put me [HWS] in a psychiatric hospital, to get me sorted out.“ (TL, 494)
Taking a closer look, though, both incidents have positive effects in the novel, even if - in the chain of events - both are later used in the interrogations by the HUAC to enforce their truth of HWS as a communist subject in order to destroy his career.
You were determined unfit for reasons of mental and sexual deviance, is that correct? MR. SHEPHERD: I was found only sane enough for the Civilian Services, sir. My mental capacities were deemed adequate for handling the country’s most important national treasures. (TL, 638)
The notebook telling about the events that followed the Veterans’ March was never read by anyone except for HWS, who ordered Victory Brown (his typist) to destroy it in 1947. Again, this lacuna leaves the reader out of knowledge about what really happened between HWS and Bull’s Eye in Washington. It is only hinted at that the pages could cause some harm for the reasons of homophobia discussed just above.
It isn’t my [V.B.] place to give an opinion about the burning. I’m a typist. But he made it plain he didn’t want that little book to reach the public view. Nor any of these personal writings, truth be told. (TL, 145)
Remembering the discussion of the written word versus the spoken in TPB again the danger of the written down is hinted at: left to one’s own interpretation, such knowledge can be misunderstood by the reader, which eventually could cause some harm. Hence, words derive their meaning mostly from the context (i.e. the discourse) they are used in. So HWS decided to have the second Potomac notebook burned, as he considered the knowledge which it contained dangerous for his life.
The Analysis 55 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Having returned to Mexico from Washington, he is remembered by Diego Rivera as ‘Sweet Buns’ and offered a job as his plaster mixer and also as the household cook. But it does not take long until HWS’ intellect is discovered, along with his nightly writing and his knowledge of using a typewriter, which eventually makes him Diego’s typist.
A tiresome day. Being the Painter’s typist is harder than mixing his plaster. The worst of it isn’t the typing but his interrogations. He says cleverness in a servant is not always a good thing. Candelaria, for example, could straighten all the papers on his desk and come away with no more idea of what’s written there than Fulang Chang the monkey. (TL, 188)
Again the power of knowledge is pointed out in this scene and the following. The reason for the interrogations is that Rivera is soon to provide shelter to the Russian revolutionist Lev Trotsky, who is given asylum in Mexico. Therefore, precautions need to be taken, and to make sure that HWS is no spy of the GPU, his “record of events will be submitted to Señora Frida for weekly inspections, or at any other time she requires, for purposes of security.” (TL, 195)
For the first time, HWS’ words now have an audience and the responsibility coming with the task of “To record for history the important things that happen.” (TL, 195) changes his style of writing also. Moreover, soon he will experience first hand, how much power comes with his words, or in this case, with the knowledge of languages.
It is at the “Commission of Inquiry into the Charges Made Against Lev Davidovich Trotsky in the Moscow Trials” (TL, 211) that his translation is picked up word for word by the Washington Post.
Hanging is what it feels like! A twenty-year-old galopino who knows nothing about politics could have mistaken yes for no, a renunciar for a renacer, and then what? History could hang on it. Lives could be lost, for the sake of a wrong word. (TL, 214)
The Analysis 56 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
As the events continue, HWS leaves the house of Diego and Frida to work as one of Lev Trotsky’s secretaries, along with Van. Apart from the attraction HWS feels towards Van, it is especially the personality of Trotsky, his knowledge and determination, which HWS enjoys and profits from most. Here it is not only HWS who gains knowledge of the events in Russia, but obviously also the reader. The insider’s knowledge which Trotsky provides is very significant for the key theory of my thesis ‘Truth = Power & Discourse”, and often presented with humor, as in the following scene.
[HWS] Stalin uses hair cream? Careful, lad,” said Lev. “That knowledge alone could get you the firing squad.” The penalty for the charges against Lev is death. Yet he seems in good spirits, despite the newspapers from France and the United States calling him a villain, and the Mexican ones calling him a “villain in our midst.” (TL, 211)
Here again, the connection of knowledge and power is pointed out and juxtaposed with the press’ role of shaping opinions, hence, creating truths. In a conversation between HWS, Lev and Van just a few pages before, such a function of journalism is presented very sharply.
“But newspapers have a duty to truth,” Van said. Lev clucked his tongue. “They tell the truth only as the exception. Zola wrote that the mendacity of the press could be divided into two groups: the yellow press lies every day without hesitating. But others, like the Times, speak the truth on all inconsequential occasions, so they can deceive the public with the requisite authority when it becomes necessary.” […] “I don’t mean to offend the journalists; they aren’t any different from other people. They’re merely the megaphones of the other people.” (TL, 207)
As discussed above in the scene of the veterans’ riot, Kingsolver seems to hint that what the media produces is a conscious choice or focalization of a larger opinion (i.e. the public’s). But once again it is not clearly mentioned who these ‘other people’ really are. Concerning the creation of truth by the power to speak, I argue that over the course of the story this notion changes: what the
The Analysis 57 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler press produces is not only a representation of the public discourse, but an enforced creation and transportation of ideology.
With the events continuing in the ‘Casa Trotsky’, a first action climax is reached with first attempt on Lev’s life, eventually killing nobody and leaving only one wounded. The incident is, of course, picked up by the newspapers, creating their own version of the event.
The Mexican newspapers are calling him a “half-mad artist” and “irresponsible pirate.” Guilt and blame in this story are already established—Trotsky did it himself […]. Once a truth is established in newsprint, none other can exist. (TL, 315)
The idea of established truths is then further fortified when HWS gets to know Lev’s account of Stalin’s succession to Lenin. While Lev Trotsky was on the way to recover from an illness, Lenin died from a stroke. Stalin wired him that they had decided to have a private, quiet instead of a ‘large state funeral’ (319). But soon Lev found out that Stalin had deceived him and used his absence to ascend to power. The key element in that scene is the funeral speech in front of a scared people longing for a new leader, and once more the role of the media in creating truth.
[HWS] “But instead of you [Trotsky], Stalin spoke at the funeral.” “The newspapers said I had refused to come, declining to be disturbed from my vacation. He told that story openly. But not from the platform, of course. At the funeral he spoke of leadership and reassurance. How he accepted the mantle of the people’s trust, when others had shirked it.... Everyone knew of whom he spoke.” (TL, 320)
The connection of truth, power, and discourse is expressed even more directly in the scene of the second assassination attempt on Lev, which eventually killed him. Whilst The Guardian reports that ‘According to one of this bodyguards Trotsky's last words before he became unconscious were "I think Stalin has finished the job he has started”.’ (The Guardian, online), Kingsolver provides a different version of his last conscious moments.
The Analysis 58 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Lev closed his eyes, obviously struggling for words. “There is no hope they will...tell the truth about this. Unless. You keep that man alive. […] He meant the newspapers. A dead assailant could become anyone, a victim himself. Another mad artist hired by Trotsky in a plot gone wrong, his final practical joke. Lies are infinite in number, and the truth so small and singular. [my emphasis] (TL, 325)
Again, Kingsolver points at the connection between knowledge and truth. A lacuna, the unknown, provides the most fruitful ground for the antipode of truth, the lie to flourish. To tell a ‘real’ truth you need to have a maximum of knowledge; to create a truth, at least some form of power is needed, even if it is gained by knowledge, or its application, respectively, as in the case of HWS.
The news reports following the murder of Trotsky in TL, (326) once more show the gap between what the reader has learned about Lev and his representation in the press, which cannot be understood in any other ways than being lies. So, to maintain its power, the Soviet regime used this power to create its own version of truth denouncing Trotsky as a ‘traitor’, saboteur, ‘murderer and international spy’ (TL, 326ff).
As the casa Trotsky is falling apart after the assassination, with the police running investigations against the household staff, having taken all of HWS’ notebooks, it is Frida, in the novel, who provides the opportunity for HWS to leave the country. Overseeing a shipment of her paintings to New York, HWS is supposed to become her ‘consignment marshal’ (TL, 334).
Hence, it is in 1940 that HWS arrives in the USA, to find out that his father had died, leaving him some money and a ‘Chevrolet Roadster, the very model Mr. Shepherd learned to drive in Mexico’ (TL, 349). Eventually, he choses Ashville, North Carolina, to settle down, making his living once more as a cook, teaching Spanish and with the ‘safest war job of the war […] which was to oversee moving many shipments of famous pictures from the museum in Washington, D.C., to the Biltmore House’ (TL, 358).
It is in 1943, that he discovers that Frida had managed to rescue his only treasure from the police: she had sent his notebooks and writings as a gift,
The Analysis 59 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler hidden in a parcel to HWS along with her other paintings. With his memories regained, his career as an author could finally begin.
Concerning the key theory that ‘Truth = Power & Discourse’, I will continue to focus on the role of the media, primarily the press. Hence, during the war, the articles about non-American ‘aliens’ cannot be seen in any other ways than nationalist propaganda. Being paranoid about the enemy within, Germans, Italians and especially the ‘Japs’ (or ‘Nips’) are denoted as the ‘enemy race’ which is ‘dangerous to the peace and safety of the nation’ (TL, 379-380). It can be argued now, that such anxiousness is an ideological contestation of the foreign powers and the values they represent. The denotations and connotations they create for the public are - by the authority of the media and the state agencies – the discourse which supports in the people the actions against humanity, i.e. war.
In terms of propaganda, Kingsolver allows the reader to see how the natural world was used for the defamation of the ‘Other’. In the Life Magazine article ‘Japanese Beetle: Voracious, Libidinous, Prolific’ as in ‘Kamikaze Peril Reaches Asheville’ (TL, 385), the natural world is literally as well as metaphorically applied to the people of Japan. By juxtaposing key words, they align natural to social and psychological features and, thus, give shape to the anti-Japanese discourse.
Japanese beetles, unlike the Japanese, are without guile. There are, however, many parallels between the two. Both are small but very numerous and prolific, as well as voracious, greedy and devouring. Both have single-track minds. (TL, 384)
The conclusion of the articles is always that there is a need to fight back, be it the Japanese people or the beetle. Concerning the truths created by the historical articles, Kingsolver says the following:
The Analysis 60 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Some of the events are so unbelievable, I decided to use historical figures and actual news clips from the New York Times and other sources to anchor the reader’s attention to the facts. I didn’t want these uncomfortable truths to be dismissed as simply an author’s fancy. (Kingsolver, About the Lacuna)
The gap between what is fact and what is merely a creation of truth becomes even more apparent when HWS’ novels are a success. Hailed as the newcomer author of the US, his first book is already received frenetically. But with history taking its course, only two of his novels are “flying off the bookstore shelves from coast to coast” (TL, 409).
Hence, as after World War II the Cold War is about to commence, HWS is concerned about this change of discourse. Kingsolver once more points at the power of fear as the momentum of giving force to control a people.
Two words put together, curtain and iron, have worked alchemy on a kettle of tepid minds and anxious hearts. The power of words is awful, Frida. […] The radio makes everything worse, because of the knack for amplifying dull sounds. Any two words spoken in haste might become law of the land. But you never know which two. (TL, 408)
Kingsolver continues her critique of those in power and the role of the media to spread their interests by showing how the national psyche was trimmed to become hegemonic. Turning against everything that deviates from the American way of life, it is the Red Scare (another use of the concept of fear) which is put into the minds and lives of people in the US of the late 1940s.
Hence, whilst in HWS’ first two novels the critique of the ruthless in power struggling to defend their position was accepted by the public as a welcome distraction (i.e. escape) from the wartime austerities, his third book never went into print due to his critique of the political leaders and their use of the atom bomb. Added up with his own past connections to Rivera and Trotsky, HWS soon becomes a victim of the HUAC’s communist hunt which puts his career to an end.
The Analysis 61 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Concerning the power of the word to create truths, Kingsolver explicitly shows how the ruling elite uses the media to reinforce its ideology of anti- communism. The following scene from TL is a beautiful assembly of historical and biblical references, showing the creation of truth in the context of its discourse. For its significance I provide it almost unabridged:
When that bomb went off over Japan, when we saw that an entire city could be turned to fire and gas, it changed the psychology of this country. And when I say ‘psychology,’ I mean that very literally. It’s the radio, you see. The radio makes everyone feel the same thing at the same time. Instead of millions of various thoughts, one big psychological fixation. The radio commands our gut response. Are you following me?” “Yes. I’ve seen that.” “That bomb scared the holy Moses out of us. We became horrified in our hearts that we had used it. […] The radio. It creates for us a psychology. Here’s what happened to fear itself. Winston Churchill said, ‘iron curtain.’ Did you see how they all went crazy over that?” […] “Then Truman said, ‘Every nation must decide.’ You are standing on one side of that curtain, my friend, or else you are on the other. And John Edgar Hoover, my God, this man. John Edgar Hoover says this curtain is what separates us from Satan and perhaps also the disease of leprosy. Did you happen to hear his testimony to Congress?” […] “‘The mad march of Red fascism in America. Teaching our youth a way of life that will destroy the sanctity of the home and respect for authority. Communism is not a political party but an evil and malignant way of life’—these are his words. A disease condition. A quarantine is necessary to keep it from infecting the nation.” (TL, 490-492)
Hence, in such a discourse, it does not take long until HWS is declared an ‘international Communist’ (TL, 619) and put to trial by the communist hunters. Especially a few words from one of HWS’ books are taken up by the media and the committee on Un-American Activities (TL, 634ff) in order to put the final stamp as a communist on its author. Taken out of context, they are used with exactly the opposite meaning of how HWS used them in his novel.
The Analysis 62 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Our leader is an empty sack. You could just as well knock him over, put a head with horns on a stick, and follow that. Most of us never choose to believe in the nation, we just come up short on better ideas. (TL, 473, 619, 648)
Hence, with the end of the novel the equation ‘Truth = Power & Discourse’ can be beautifully observed in TL, By the power they inherit, the leaders of a super-structure (i.e. the state apparatus) make use of the discourse (i.e. of anti-communism) in order to create a reality (i.e. a truth) which gains its force from the fear of their political and social opponents (i.e. the Other’s way of life).
As I also showed, throughout the novel the connection between knowledge and power is a central aspect that eventually finds its climax in the defamation of HWS’ life. Gaining knowledge meant for HWS to empower himself to follow his passion, which itself was gaining knowledge, reading, and then writing books. The truth that Kingsolver provides then for the reader results from the knowledge coming from the HWS’ experiences (i.e. in shape of his writings) in contrast to the ‘reality’ created by the media.
The Analysis 63 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
5. Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL
As my discussion of the relations of power, knowledge and discourse have shown, both, The Poisonwood Bible as well as The Lacuna offer fields of interpretation on various levels. Being set in the postcolonial contexts of Africa as well as Mexico, Kingsolver provides stories which offer insights into the histories of the countries and the cultures of their peoples. In the following part of my analysis, Homi Bhabha’s concepts of ‘hybridity’ and ‘third space’ will be employed in addition to my analysis of Foucault’s discourse/power discussion.
5.1. Hybridity in The Poisonwood Bible
Having lived herself at the age of seven with her parents in the Congo for a year in 1963, Kingsolver says that she “wrote the book, not because of a brief adventure I had in place of second grade, but because as an adult I’m interested in cultural imperialism and post-colonial history” (Kingsolver.com, About The Poisonwood Bible).
One question to be addressed is then, of course, to what extent can Barbara Kingsolver be called a postcolonial author? Remembering Spivak’s and Bhabha’s ideas on the ‘subaltern’, the migrated and the ‘displaced’, Kingsolver, as an American, belongs to neither of the categories which would allow her voice to be deemed authentically postcolonial. Having been compared to Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, TPB would then be just another case of imperialist literature, having given voice to the people of the Congo by a white, American writer. But as Jussawalla argues:
Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL 64 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
[…] even if she or the author (conflating the authorial voice into that of the character) may be from a colonizing race, because of the empathetic and sympathetic connection to the land and its people, we can look at this work metaphorically as “postcolonial”. (Jussawalla, 9)
Once more, it is the importance of knowledge and her historical expertise which empowers Kingsolver to portray the Congo in a way which does not make TPB another imperialist novel.
I read a lot of books about the political, social, and natural history of Africa and the Congo. […] I found some self-published memoirs written by missionaries to the Congo in the 50’s and 60’s, which were gems, giving me details of missionary life and attitudes from the era. […] Likewise, I daily perused an ancient, enormous, two-volume Kikongo- French dictionary, compiled early in the century (by a missionary). I hoped to grasp the music and subtlety of this amazing African language, with its infinite capacity for being misunderstood and mistranslated. (Kingsolver, About The Poisonwood Bible).
Hence, Jussuwalla (26-27) concludes:
Barbara Kingsolver fulfills all the characteristics necessary for the literary paradigm of the postcolonial novel. There is no nostalgia in her work for the exotic. She is fully aware of the wrongs of postcolonial neo- colonialism, the unjust arrests, the unequal distribution of power and money, the rich and corrupt politicians buying themselves palaces with gold leafed chandeliers while the people boil food in old hub-caps.
Thus, the ‘third spaces’, which Kingsolver creates in TPB derive from the various ‘hybrid’ characters and the setting of the novel. On the one hand, there is the Price family being displaced to the Congo by their patriarch father’s spiritual, imperialist drive. On the other hand, there is the Congo and its people in the 1950s, with their independence just gained after an age of colonial control, but on the way into a new form of imperialist dominance in shape of their new CIA-puppet leader Joseph Désiré Mobutu.
The colonial oppression and exploitation by the Belgians as well as the USA, is mirrored in Nathan’s dominion over his family. As mentioned, Nathan does control his wife and daughters using the power of his patriarchy and the words of the Bible. Nevertheless, in TPB he never speaks for himself but is
Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL 65 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler only represented through the narrations of his female family members. Hence, it is the marginalized, the ‘subaltern’ women who speak for the power center represented in Nathan.
The displacement to Africa, then, means a double marginalization for the women of the Price family. Firstly, in the religious, patriarchal discourse of Nathan, women are subordinate to the male masters of their families. This position does not differ very much from the role women have in the African discourse. Secondly, as white women in Africa, their ‘otherness’ pushes them to the very border of society. From this position of power isolation, though, the Price women develop their own ways for surviving in the Congo. (cf. Arnold and Bicman, 276)
Again it seems that knowledge, or rather intelligence, allows the characters in the novel to look beyond the limitations of their Western epistemes. Being forced into a new environment, the members of the Price family individually develop their ‘third spaces’ in the course of their stay in Africa. This, though, does not apply to Nathan. Paralleled by his loss of power due to his elitist self- perception, there is no alteration of his personality or his perception of the Congo. His incapability to adapt to the new environment, in fact, eventually drives him insane and to his death. Hence, it could be argued that the personal creation of a ‘third space’ is a strategy necessary to survive in a new environment.
Concerning the female members of the Prices, they also show varying degrees of ‘third space’ adoption. Representing the innocence of the child, Ruth May can be seen as the purest character, who has not been conditioned by the Western discourse and, hence, is free to experience the ‘other’ without bias. Playing ‘Mother, May I?’ with the children of Kilanga, Ruth May establishes the most undistorted contact to the ‘other’. The sections of the book she tells often refer to her dreams and the stage of being between sleeping and waking, which represents the way she experiences Africa, as well as a mystical foreshadowing of her fate.
Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL 66 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
I dreamed I climbed away up to the top of the alligator pear tree and was a-looking down at all of them, the teeny little children with crooked cowboy legs and their big eyes looking up […] And I could see Mommy Mommy, the top of her. I could see everything she was thinking, like Jesus does. She was thinking about animals. Sometimes when you wake up you can't tell if it was dreaming or real. (TPB, 244)
As Ruth May eventually gets bitten by a snake and dies, she is turned into ‘The eyes in the trees’ (TPB, 610) watching over her family from an unknown space between life and death, real and mystically imagined.
Concerning the hybridity of the other family members, Leah and Adah offer a wide range of interpretation. In the case of Leah, her character is transformed most during the stay in Kilanga: being at first very absorbed by her father’s missionary, colonial discourse, she soon starts to question the western values represented by Nathan. Being isolated from her accustomed environment of Bethlehem, Georgia, such displacement puts her in a threefold subaltern position. Firstly, as the daughter of patriarch Nathan, secondly, as a white in Africa, and, thirdly, because she is a woman. As the latter two factors cannot be overcome in her present situation, it is primarily her father whose value system and power she has to fight in order to emancipate herself in the first place. As discussed in my section on power/knowledge, the hunting scene (TPB, 380 ff) is the crucial turning point for Leah in which she breaks not only with her father’s dominion, but also with the local traditions of Kilanga.
At this point, the role of Anatole is very important for her development as a hybrid character. Anatole, the local schoolteacher and ‘hybrid’ character himself, is her only friend, apart from two boys, Pascal and Nelson. From Anatole Leah learns the most about the languages, cultures and history of the Congo and eventually realizes that Africa is a system on its own which cannot be understood from a colonial, “superior” perspective. “I decided right then to stop pretending I knew more than I did. I would be myself, Leah Price, eager to learn all there is to know” (TPB, 259; quoted in Arnold and Bicman, 276).
Anatole also supports her drive to take part in the village hunt, and because of his treating Leah with respect and the knowledge he shares, she falls in love
Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL 67 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler with him. Their interchange alters her perception of Africa and its cultures, which allows her to see her former colonialist attitude. Anatole and Leah eventually get married, creating a ‘hybrid’ partnership in which both influence each other positively: they switch between three languages, educate each other and have four sons together, hence, creating a ‘third space’ of knowledge and identity. Nevertheless, as Arnold and Bicman (283) argue, Leah’s position after all remains subaltern as a woman in Africa. Despite that inside their marriage they consider each other as equals, being female still restricts her chances of being heard in the gendered discourse of Africa.
Another very fertile character in TPB for Bhabha’s concepts of ‘hybridity’ is Adah, the Leah’s twin sister. Adah was born disabled which in the western discourse always defines her as the freakish ‘other’. Even though she suffers from hemiplegia, she is remarkably intelligent.
When I finish reading a book from front to back, I read it back to front. It is a different book, back to front, and you can learn new things from it. (TPB, 66)
Nevertheless, because her ‘otherness’ she decides not to speak, to remain silent. Coming to Africa, though, she realizes that her physical handicap is considered a normal aspect of life there, although in some African traditions, twins are supposed to be left by their mothers in order to avoid the wrath of the gods.
[Leah to Nelson] You never saw twins? He shook his head with conviction. 'Any woman who has baza should take the two babies to the forest after they are born and leave them there. She takes them fast, right away. That is very very very necessary. (TPB, 240)
Adah, hence, is not only presented as the ‘other’ within the family or as a white woman in the Congo, but also as someone who is would not have been supposed to exist. Being a twin is
Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL 68 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
creating in her an ambivalence that also metaphorically represents the hybrid space, as Adah can achieve integrity neither in the Western nor in African conceptions of her “self.” (Hölbling and Tally, 317).
But it is exactly her (often sarcastic and melancholic) perspective, combined with her ability to read texts backwards and forwards, which allows her to read the world between the lines, hence, that ‘third space of enunciation’. (cf. ibid)
But it is not only the members of the Price family who develop some form of ‘hybridity’: it can also be found with the people of Kilanga. Apart from Anatole, Tata Ndu is an important character with one detail standing out as western. The chief of the village is “dressed just out of this world, with a tall hat and glasses and a cloth drapery dress and swishing an animal's tail back and forth” (TPB, 30); his glasses, though, have no lenses, which can be seen as a form of ’mimicry’. As Bhabha (120) argues, such
metonymic strategy produces the signifier of colonial mimicry as the affect of hybridity – at once a mode of appropriation and resistance, from the disciplined to the desiring. As the discriminated object, the metonym of presence becomes the support of an authoritarian voyeurism, all the better to exhibit the eye of power.
He then continues with a quote from Lacan:
Mimicry reveals something in so far as it is distinct from what might be called itself that is behind. The effect of mimicry is camouflage, in the strictly technical sense. It is not a question of harmonizing with the background but, against a mottled background, of being mottled […] (Lacan quoted in Bhabha, 110)
The empty glasses as such camouflage, hence, wonderfully depict the ‘eye of power’, the colonial perspective which is useless for the African people. In the church election, then, Tata Ndu uses the frame (i.e. the glasses) of the western understanding of democracy to vote Jesus out of the church.
For a detailed discussion of “hybridity” in TPB, I suggest reading Hölbling and Tally, ”Emulp Der Eno:” Reading Against the Grain”; as well as Arnold and Bicman, “Postcolonial Reality: A Hybrid Love-Story”.
Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL 69 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
5.2. Hybridity in The Lacuna
Even if in TL Homi Bhabha’s concepts of ‘hybridity’ are not as prominent as in TPB, there are various features to be found which are worth discussing. Firstly, the character of HWS being exposed to the displacement which results from his mother‘s way of life. Secondly, in the debate about the function of art in reference to the survival of cultures represented in the painter Diego Rivera, as well as in HWS’ authorship; and thirdly, from the ‘translational’ point of view, with history unfolding from the 1920s to the 1950s.
Taking a look at the life of HWS, Spivak’s concepts of the ‘subaltern’ can be applied to the protagonist of TL. Having to leave the US as a boy, he is displaced to live in Mexico and with his identity not developed, he belongs neither to the one discourse, nor the other. Bhabha’s ‘translational’ aspects can be found right at the beginning of the novel.
When Mother was leaving Father […] taking the child to Mexico, and nothing to do but stand in the corridor of the cold little house, waiting to be told. The exchanges were never good: taking a train, a father and then no father. Don Enrique from the consulate in Washington, then Enrique in Mother’s bedroom. Everything changes now, while you stand shivering in the corridor waiting to slip through one world into the next. (TL, 7)
In Spivak’s terms, HWS would be doubly marginalized, as a child as well as a migrant. The advantage HWS has, though, is that he fluently speaks both English and Spanish, which allows him to understand better what is happening around him. But even though he is half Mexican, he does not find any friends with the boys of his age, which stands for the social isolation mirrored in the Isla Pixol itself that he has to live on, where he is seen as a colonizer.
Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL 70 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
The village boys collecting oysters came into the cove and said this beach belonged to them. They screamed Vete rubio, go away blond boy, scramble away like a crab over the coral rocks. […] oyster boys to scream at a rubio who is not rubio, with hair as Mexican black as Mother’s. When they look, do they see anything at all? (TL, 44)
The last sentence of the quote above might also be seen as a trace of the colonizer’s superior perspective, which HWS as a child is exposed to and represents strongly in Don Enrique and the ‘American oil men’.
The oil men said the sooner the Mexican oil industry collapses, the better, so they can take it over and make it run straight. One told his theory about why America is forward and Mexico is backward: when the English arrived in the New World, they saw no good use for Indians, and killed them. But the Spaniards discovered a native populace long accustomed to serving masters (Azteca), so the empire yoked these willing servants to its plows to create New Spain. […] “The mestizo is torn by his opposing racial impulses. His intellect dreams of high-minded social reforms, but his brute desires make him tear apart every advance his country manages to build. Do you understand this, young man?” Yes, only, which half of the mestizo brain is the selfish brute: the Indian or the Spanish? (TL, 79f)
Nevertheless, as the last sentence shows, HWS has not picked up the racial discourse of the adults surrounding him, but from early on questions the ‘truths’ he encounters. But because of his subaltern position, there is no escape from remaining silent and enduring his situation.
As the story continues, and with HWS entering the household of Frida, the search for his identity goes on. Being somewhere “in-between”, Frida points out the specialness of HWS’ person.
Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL 71 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
“You don’t have a lot of heat in your blood, is the problem. You’re not completely Mexican, and not all gringo either. You’re like this house, Insólito. A double person made of two different boxes.” “That might be true, señora, Frida.” “In the house of your mother, a taste for beauty and poetry. Secret passions, I suspect. And in the gringo side, a head that’s always thinking and surviving.” (TL, 168)
Hence, the ‘two different boxes’ (ibid.) can be seen as the substance for HWS emerging as ‘the boundary […] from which something begins its presencing’ (Bhabha, 5). The terminology of hybridity is once even mentioned directly when later ‘Van was surprised to learn the “native typist” is also of hybrid origin, half gringo.’ (TL, 205)
The feature of migration and displacement in TL not only runs one way, though, but is, in fact, tripled in the novel. After spending a few years in Mexico as a boy, HWS is sent back to the United States to attend school where his social isolation continues because of his double ethnic heritage. Being ‘othered’ there by his fellow schoolmates, HWS remains in a subaltern position.
The Greek boy named Damos says, “Hey Mexico, comeer,” but he also says, “Hey Brush Ape.” Bull’s Eye told them to watch out, the kid from Mexico is ace at firearms, maybe he used to ride with Pancho Villa. Now they use that name: Pancho Villa. It took a while to recognize it because they pronounce it something like Pants Ville: Hey, Pantsville, comeer! (TL, 120)
His only friend during this period is ‘Bull’s Eye’, whom HWS has his first homosexual experiences with, which eventually also leads to his dismissal from the Potomac Academy for Boys and the return to Mexico, which means the third displacement in HWS’ life. In terms of marginalization, HWS’ homosexuality - at a time when it was mostly regarded a mental defect – pushes him further to the borders of society and adds to the idea that HWS is a member of the subaltern strata.
Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL 72 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
The forth displacement in HWS’ life occurs when he is forced to leave Mexico due to the investigations the police run on the murder of Lev Trotsky. The exodus takes HWS through various regions of the United States until he finally decides on Ashville, North Carolina, to settle down. There he also writes his books which themselves have as a subject the search of the ancient Mexican people for a home and identity. Bhabha says that ‘the truest eye may now belong to the migrants double vision’ (Bhabha, 5), and the success of HWS’ books in TL is portrayed as the result of his power of observation and intelligence.
In terms of hybridity, hence, I would argue that HWS is a character that definitely can be called ‘hybrid’, as just discussed.
The second aspect to be discussed within the frame of ‘hybridity’ is addressed in Bhabha’s Location of Culture as the ‘Survival of Culture’ (Bhabha, 171). In this chapter, Bhabha argues that the project of postcolonial critics is to become ‘witness to the unequal and uneven forces of cultural representation involved in the contest for political and social authority’ (Bhabha, 171). In TL, both Diego Rivera’s and HWS’ art works on such representation by reinventing the voice and identity of the (ancient) people of Mexico. Hence, it can be argued, that these two characters are portrayed as postcolonial critics whose
perspectives […] intervene in those ideological discourses of modernity that attempt to give a hegemonic ‘normality’ to the uneven development and the differential, often disadvantaged, histories of nations, races communities, peoples. (Bhabha, 171)
As a painter, Diego Rivera shows with his murals not only the history of the first people of Mexico, but creates with its symbolism a basis for the reinvention of a national identity which emerges as the result of the colonial experience and the liberation from it.
Presidents and soldiers and Indians, all coming alive. The sun opens its eyes, a landscape grows like grass, and today fire came out of the volcano. Señor Alva says the Painter is working his way toward the
Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL 73 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
beginning of time, at the mural’s center, where the eagle will sit on a cactus and eat the serpent, home at last. (TL, 104)
Such reinventions of new symbolisms for a national identity is essential to Bhabha:
To reconstitute the discourse of cultural difference demands not simply a change of cultural contents and symbols; a replacement within the same time-frame of representation is never adequate. It requires a radical revision of the social temporality in which emergent histories may be written, the rearticulation of the ‘sign’ in which cultural identities may be inscribed. (Bhabha, 171)
In case of TL, it is not only Diego Rivera’s ‘muralismo’ to which Bhabha’s concepts can be applied, which further point to the translational dimensions of culture, but also – in more general terms – to the implicit critique Barbara Kingsolver offers regarding the change in the American social psyche after World War II. The relationship of politics and art is often addressed in this context, with Mexico working to contrast the US.
[Mexico] has such a different sense of itself as a work in progress. It's useful to explore a psyche from outside or on the borderline: how we got frozen in the US, while in Mexico artists have leave to be political. Why are we so terrified of that word, communism – the anti-Christ? It's like living in a world where grownups still believe in the bogeyman. (Kingsolver, in Jaggi)
Bhabha also addresses the field of aesthetics and art in The Location of Culture, which applies to not only to HWS, but also TL in general:
There is even a growing conviction that the affective experience of social marginality […] transforms our critical strategies. It forces us to confront the concept of culture outside objets d’art or beyond the canonization of the ‘idea’ of aesthetics [i.e. Rivera and his murals], to engage with culture as an uneven, incomplete production of meaning and value, often composed of incommensurable demands and practices, produced in the act of social survival. (Bhabha, 172)
Apart from art, it is HWS’ learning about the history and cultures of Mexico as a youth (combined with his critical interpretation of its modes of
Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL 74 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler representation from the colonizer’s perspective) that is contrasted by the knowledge he gains in the course of the novel by experiencing the people and their country. Moreover, (and apart from only) living with the artists and communist revolutionaries Rivera, Kahlo, and Trotsky, the discourse HWS is surrounded by shapes his world view in such ways that his representation of it in his novels will later get him into trouble in the prevailing discourse of the 1950s USA. Together these two factors open the space ‘in-between’ for the readers to make up their own picture of the historical events.
The critique, which Kingsolver offers, portrays the obsession of those being in power in the US, longing for capitalist hegemony and fighting against the multiple perspectives of the ‘interstices’.
As Bhabha argues, history plays a central role for the emergence of ‘hybridities’ as well as for world literature itself:
Where once the transmission of national traditions was the major theme of a world literature, perhaps we can now suggest that transnational histories of migrants, the colonized, or political refugees – these border and frontier conditions – may be the terrain of world literature. […] Our task remains […] to show how historical agency is transformed through the signifying process; how the historical event is represented in a discourse that is somehow beyond control. (Bhabha, 12)
This is exactly what Kingsolver achieved in TL. On the one hand, we have the hybrid character HWS who, on the micro level, is in search of his identity with history’s events as the macro level representing the discourse being in constant flux. On the other hand, this search for identity is mirrored by the nations’ (the USA, Mexico, USSR) quest of constructing their identities in times of rapid historical changes (i.e. post Word War II).
The transformation which Kingsolver portrays, especially in the field of politics, invites the readers to critically rethink their (especially from an US- American point of view) own history, culture, and politics.
The language of critique is effective not because it keeps for ever separate the terms of the master and the slave, the mercantilist and the Marxist, but to the extent to which it overcomes the given grounds of
Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL 75 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
opposition and opens up a space of 'translation': a place of hybridity, figuratively speaking, where the construction of a political object that is new, neither the one nor the Other, properly alienates our political expectations, and changes, as it must, the very forms of our recognition of the 'moment' of politics. (Bhabha, 25)
As Kingsolver explains it herself, when writing TL she was
interested in national identity, curious about why my country seems so vocally to identify patriotism with completion, perfection, as though we're a finished product, not a work in progress. […] [the] period that came to define being unAmerican on a national level . . . It frightened people so badly, we've never gotten over it. (Kingsolver, in Jaggi)
By showing and contrasting the cultures as wells as the histories of the USA, Mexico, and the USSR, Kingsolver ‘opens up [that] space of 'translation': a place of hybridity’ (Bhabha, 25) which allows the readers to rethink their national as well as their personal identity. The answers to the questions posed by the novel, though, Kingsolver does not give, but leaves them to be a lacuna, a (third) space to be filled by the reader.
Hybridity in Kingsolver’s TPB and TL 76 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
6. Conclusion
As the works of Michel Foucault and Homi Bhabha illustrate, the search for truth and social identity is a highly complex one. Deconstructing the notion of a universally accessible truth, it was Michel Foucault who in the second half of the twentieth century offered a new approach to the questions posed by post- modernity.
Taking a close look at the emergence of the “enlightened” sciences (i.e. historical, medical, sociological, psychological), Foucault showed that power and knowledge are irreversibly connected and used to create discourses which reinforce the status of those in power and their paradigms, respectively. Breaking his theories down to the equation “Truth = Power & Discourse”, The Poisonwood Bible as well as The Lacuna by Barbara Kingsolver offer vast materials for the analysis of Foucault’s theories.
In case of TPB, Kingsolver has crafted a novel in which the power of the word and knowledge plays a central role for the characters in their experiences of Africa. In the collision of Western and Congolese discourses, the exodus of the Price family shows how ambivalent ‘truth’ can be and how much depends on our perspective on the world. As human beings we are not only part of a discourse but at the same time also its creators. Hence, power and knowledge are – as in Foucault’s conception – in constant flux, which eventually allows new perspectives to evolve. With the patriarch father Nathan, Kingsolver shows that the lack of a capability to adopt to new knowledge (i.e. to a different discourse) results in a contestation and eventual loss of power: “what does not bend breaks”, or “idleness is death”, are famous proverbs which might represent Nathan’s character and fate. For the other family members (apart from Ruth May), being cast into such a different discourse creates a means of emancipating themselves from the tyrannical rule of Nathan. By telling the story from the very different perspectives of the Price women, Kingsolver beautifully points at the multiplicities of truths which exist in our world.
Conclusion 77 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Taking a look at The Lacuna, Foucault’s concepts can also be found throughout this novel. Again, the power of knowledge plays not only a crucial role in the development and emancipation of the main character HWS, but also for the reader to distinguish between the facts as they are presented by HWS in contrast to the creation of truth by the media. Especially the role of the media in transporting the ideology of the federal super-structure is a prominent feature which is represented in the equation “Truth = Power & Discourse”.
Using Homi Bhabha’s work as an addition to and elaboration of Foucault, I argue that in both novels the experience of migration, the ‘in-between space’, is a central feature for the development of identities and emergence of something new that is neither the one nor the other.
In The Poisonwood Bible, Kingsolver shows how the experience of another discourse changes the characters identities. Bhabha’s concepts are very useful in that context to point out how the intercultural experience alters the character’s perception of the world. In a complex construction of metaphors and symbolisms, Kingsolver manages to craft a novel that deconstructs the dominant colonial perspective. This not only gives a new voice to the colonized, but opens up the ‘hybrid space’ which is made of more than the sum of its parts.
In The Lacuna, the concepts of ‘hybridity’ are not as prominent as in TPB. Apart from the ‘hybrid’ character HWS, it is the unequal representation of the historical characters and events which invites the reader to rethink their own (American) history and identity. On the one hand, there is the diary-like narration of HWS which is contrasted by, on the other hand, the accounts of the media transporting the ideologies of the dominant discourse. Entangled in arts, history politics, and cultures, Kingsolver leaves it to the reader to fill the ‘third-space’.
Conclusion 78 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
7. Bibliography
Primary Sources:
Kingsolver, Barbara (2000). The Poisonwood Bible. Faber and Faber Limited: London.
Kingsolver Barbara (2010). The Lacuna. Faber and Faber Limited: London.
Secondary Sources:
Arnold, Karin and Bicman, Vida (2007). “Postcolonial Reality: A Hybrid Love- Story”. In Walter W. Hölbling & Justine Tally, eds. Theories & Texts. LIT Verlag GmbH & Co. KG: Wien. 255-284.
Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin (2006). The Post-Colonial Studies Reader. Routledge: Oxford.
Bhabha, Homi K. (1994). The Location of Culture. Routledge: Oxford.
Drabble, Margaret (1992). ed. The Oxford Companion to English Literature. OUP: Oxford.
Fillingham, Lydia (1993). Foucault for Beginners. Writers and Readers Publishing: New York
Foucault, Michel (1977). Discipline and Punish. The Birth of the Prison. Vintage Books: New York.
Kritzman, Lawrence D. (2007). Michel Foucault. Politics, Philosophy, Culture. Interviews and other writings 1977 – 1984. Routledge: New York.
Häusler, Johannes and Hermes, Daniel (2007). “The Prison and the Flaming Tower”. In Walter W. Hölbling & Justine Tally, eds. Theories & Texts. LIT Verlag GmbH & Co. KG: Wien. 231-246.
Bibliography 79 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Hölbling, Walter and Tally, Justine (2007). “”Emulp Der Eno:” Reading Against the Grain”. In Walter W. Hölbling & Justine Tally, eds. Theories & Texts. LIT Verlag GmbH & Co. KG: Wien. 309- 324.
Huddart, David (2006). Homi K. Bhabha. Routledge: New York.
McLaren, Margaret A. (2002). Feminism, Foucault, and Embodied Subjectivity. State University of New York Press: Albany
Mills, Sara (2003). Michel Foucault. Routledge: New York.
Prado, C.G. (1995). Starting with Foucault: An Introduction to Genealogy. Boulder: Westview.
Rutherford, Jonathan (1990). „The Third Space. Interview with Homi Bhabha“. In: Rutherford, Jonathan, ed. Identity: Community, Culture, Difference. Lawrence and Wishart: London. 207-221.
Said, Edward W. (1983). The World, the Text, and the Critic. Harvard University Press: Cambridge.
Said, Edward W. (1978). “Orientalism”. In: Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin (2006). ed. The Post-Colonial Studies Reader. Routledge: Oxford. 24-27.
WEB
Alcoff, Linda Martin. WHO’S AFRAID OF IDENTITY POLITICS? http://www.alcoff.com/content/afraidid.html [2012, June 25]
Armstrong, Cherryl and Fontaine, Sheryl I. The Power of Naming: Names that Create and Define the Discipline. http://wpacouncil.org/archives/13n1- 2/13n1-2armstrong.pdf [2012, June 25]
Bentham, Jeremy. The Panopticon Writings. Ed. Miran Bozovic. London: Verso, 1995. http://cartome.org/panopticon2.htm [2011, November 14]
Bird, Alexander. Thomas Kuhn. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/thomas-kuhn [2011, November 15]
Bibliography 80 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang Von. Faust. The Project Gutenberg EBook of Faust. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14591/14591-h/14591-h.htm [2012, July 29]
Gómez, Laura E. Off-White in an Age of White Supremacy: Mexican Elites and the Rights of Indians and Blacks in Nineteenth-Century New Mexico, http://www.law.uh.edu/hernandez50/Lauragomez.pdf [2012, July 4]
Gutting, Gary. Michel Foucault, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/foucault/ [2011, November 7]
Jaggi, Maya. A life in writing: Barbara Kingsolver. http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/jun/12/life-in-writing-barbara- kingsolver [2012, August 15]
Jussawalla, Feroza. Reading and Teaching Barbara Kingsolver’s Poisonwood Bible as Postcolonial. http://rua.ua.es/dspace/bitstream/10045/1280/1/RAEI_16_12.pdf [2012, July 15]
Kingsovler, Barbara. About the Lacuna. http://www.kingsolver.com/faq/about-the-lacuna.html [2012, July 1]
Poulos, Jennifer (1996). Frantz Fanon. http://www.english.emory.edu/Bahri/Fanon.html [2012, June 30]
Sing, Amardeep. Mimicry and Hybridity in Plain English, http://www.lehigh.edu/~amsp/2009/05/mimicry-and-hybridity-in-plain- english.html [2011, November 30]
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. Can the Subaltern Speak? http://www.mcgill.ca/files/crclaw-discourse/Can_the_subaltern_speak.pdf [2012, July 3]
The Guardian, Death of Trotsky, 22 August 1940. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/1940/aug/22/russia.fromthearchive [2012, June 30]
The King James Bible. ‚The Gospel According to Saint John’, in: The Project Gutenberg EBook of The King James Bible. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/10/10-h/10- h.htm#The_Gospel_According_to_Saint_John. [2012, June 30]
Trochim, William M.K. (2006). Positivism & Post-Positivism. http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/positvsm.php [2012, August 11]
Bibliography 81 Knowledge, Power and Hybridity in Barbara Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible and The Lacuna; by Johannes Häusler
Vermeulen, Timotheus and van der Akker, Robin (2010). Notes on metamodernism. Journal of Aesthetics & Culture, Vol. 2, 2010. http://www.aestheticsandculture.net/index.php/jac/article/view/5677/630 6 [2012, August 13]
Wikipedia. Homi K. Bhabha. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homi_K._Bhabha [2012, July 3]
Wikipedia. Metamodernism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamodernism [2012, August 13]
Young, Robert. Postpositivist Realism and the Return of the Same: The Rational Subject and Post(post)modern Liberalism. http://clogic.eserver.org/2002/young.html [2012, August 12]
Bibliography 82