A white man within you

Her paper on the conquest of Mexico City dealing with the aftermath of colonization aims to dissect the post-colonial struggle for people always oscillating between what feels “foreign” and “similar”. Just as she proceeded to read her paper, Dr Tahmiya Zaman kept referring to a ‘white man’ that always resides within herself. Initially it did not make sense as she started off to describe a state of change and loss that overshadows the existence of a post-colonial state. It was later however, when the recurring theme of adaptability was highlighted through her paper that I began to draw similar analogies from some of the profound ideas stemming from nineteenth century post-colonial literature. 

Narrating her firsthand experience in Mexico City, Dr Zaman expands upon the real-life dilemma that strikes an individual conforming to a post-colonial background. This dilemma transforms into a bigger  stakeholder when the individual finds itself in another post-colonial country. This is where her analysis of what feels foreign and what is internalized as similar first make an appearance. In doing so, she sheds light upon the different experiences of people just as they struggle to fight back the colonial hangover. In efforts to redeem itself and its history, she mentions an existence of a constant Mexico City; one that is subjected to change, yet one that remains unchanged and loyal to its origin. This is where she makes the distinction between a ‘change that occurs from loss’ as it becomes imperative to identify what fragments of a colonized nation are altered to suit the needs of the settler and what is swept under the rug completely. At this instance her notion of a white man seeking refuge within herself becomes even more bewildering. How can one talk about the large scale historical and cultural cleaning engineered by the white man and still give him refuge? This question does more than just perpetuate a state of utter confusion. It subsequently kick-starts a thought process to emulate this conflict that one has with himself. What exactly is foreign and what is familiar? What can he claim as his own what is a mere imposition of foreignism? For Dr Zaman it is this site of confusion that needs to be resolved to fully undergo decolonization, the former coming solely with the acceptance of a white man within yourself.  

What we make of the white man’s refuge is open to several interpretations. From me it is the merger of history of the colonized with that of the colonizer. It is the acceptance of what came about due to colonization as your own. It is about transcending the question of language or sacrificial traditions. It is about the coexistence of the two different factions within us. This is how Dr Zaman understood colonialism and its traces in Mexico City in particular. Following from this, it is crucial to comprehend what this means in the larger scheme of things. Whether it is Fanon’s diagnosis of colonized mind feeling like a stranger within their own land or Memmi's critique of Europe being a consolidation of cultural inheritance from the colonized; they all aim to eradicate a sense of alienation. Hence giving refuge to the white man within you is the act of breaking free from the shackles of confusion that consume the colonized. It is embarking upon life that claims your mind, your land and the world you inhibit as your own.