Lowe was a dense, slow read that
took some time to unpack and comprehend. Sometimes her points were lost upon
me, and I felt the need to read sentences multiple times, often. Regardless,
her thoughts were provocative, and so blatant that they should have been voiced
much earlier than 2015. Our discussion in class (over the first two chapters)
aided me in reading the concluding chapters. I believe gaining a better
understanding of the way Lowe planned to use her definition of intimacies made
her book a more meaningful read.
I
came to understand that Lowe was using intimacies to grapple with the settler
colonialism, transatlantic slave trade and Indian and Chinese trades in goods
and people. Her entry points into deeper understating of these intimacies were captivating.
I haven’t heard of the novel Vanity Fair before
– I thought for a moment she meant the magazine – so her using the novel as an
entry point was intriguing. I almost missed – what I think is the point – of
colonial liberalism spreading. The British were able to control trade
throughout the world by making events accommodate their efforts. They managed
to have their “liberal” political agenda spread because they colonizers were
saving people from their barbaric ways. This was a narrative that continued to
occur as Lowe unpacked her intimacies of the four continents. There would be a
settler that came to a foreign or exotic land that was strange or backwards to
them and it need their (colonizers) influence and forward thinking ways. This
happened for Europeans in India, Africa, America and even China. The European
countries colonized and imposed their rules and regulations on these countries,
and ruined them in some way. The way Lowe talked about the “silk dealer” who
also deals in the unspoken opium trade that resulted in the silk that was
returned was an interesting narrative – that’s usually silenced.
This
book was most intriguing in how it told stories. Lowe picked the stories that
were silenced to tie in the archival text she read over, which sounded
grueling. The stores that impacted these major world events were fascinating, it
reminded me of the Trouillots expansion of the Haitian Revolution and it’s
larger impact on the global slave trade. She references, the rare, slave
authors text The Interesting Narrative of
the Life of Olaudah Equiano to later connect to the text of enlightened
scholars of the time, who make no reference to slavery. If they make references
to slavery, they are usually less than deplorable. Lowe made frequent
references to the lack of acknowledgment or reference to the larger global
issues propelling European life in the nineteenth century in texts and larger
debate. The early nineteenth century brought the discussion of abolition, emancipation
and “free labor,” but references of slave text and horrors of trading in people
were never largely discussed in European literature. I also found it
interesting that the archives Lowe read had no mention of the European dealing
in opium – named silk for archival records – and the abolition of slavery,
simply to begin dealing in “free labor” of Chinese labors, or enslaved people
who were differentiable. Her interweaving of the major archival events
interwoven with the excluded voices was a conventional approach to explaining
the intimacies of the four continents.
Lowe’s
use of Mill’s works to explain the nineteenth century rational of imperialist
free trade and colonialism was clever. Mill took no issue with the fact that he
wanted total despotic rule over “some” people, but European people were awarded
all of the liberties of governmental rule. Choosing to use Mill’s advocating
for further control over the Indian colonies, and eventually getting it in the
form of a “Governor-General-in-Council,” showed the cementing of European
colonial expansion.
While this text was a dense read, it brought
up a lot of interesting takes on intimacy. Lowe was able to weave larger
international intimacies with individual intimacies that impacted or resulted
in the other. It was a difficult, yet captivating read.
I agree that it was a dense read, and like you, I had to keep stopping and going back over things, or look up terms for definition. Even so, one can get a definition of dialectical, then a definition of teleology, and still not be certain what she means by a dialectical teleology. I found that sometimes two terms together have a history with a specific meaning attached, so it helps to look them up in quotes together.
ReplyDeleteI had to stop early on and go research the meaning of "fetishization of commodities", which I had just read about (I'm reading Marx for another class) and not quite understood. Wikipedia helped, eventually, but even that took a good 45 minutes of close reading.