| Sunday, April 29, 2007 4:49PM | | | | Phillips and Gurnah | Posted By: Luke Epplin
|
At the start of the conversation with Caryl Phillips and Abdulrazak Gurnah, the moderator Radhikah Jones made a comment that reminded me of the cultural differences between the United States and the United Kingdom, where both of the participants live: “We’ll try to end on time this afternoon, because I know that both Caryl and Abdulrazak are eager to watch the Cricket World Cup.” The Cricket World Cup? I’m an avid sports fan, but the Cricket World Cup is not among the topics that my father and I discuss every week. I’m embarrassed to admit that I didn’t even realize that a world cup for cricket existed. Thankfully, Caryl Phillips gave us the name of a bar in midtown that would be broadcasting the championship game. (Australia won by 53 runs over Sri Lanka, by the way. Apparently, Australia has dominated the cricket world cup for some time now.)
Both authors spoke about immigrating and how living in a foreign land leads to a split identity. Radhikah Jones noted that the technique of split narratives is prevalent in both of the authors’ novels. “It has to be,” Gurnah said. “If you’re writing a novel about people who migrate and thus have a plural sense of their identities, then the split narrative becomes necessary. The form must mirror the subject matter in this case, so there will inevitably be fractures and dislocations in the structure.” The themes of immigration and dual identities penetrate their novels and biographies. Phillips mentioned how disappointed his parents initially were when he mentioned that he wanted to be a writer. “My mother was an immigrant who had to sacrifice her time and energy so that he children could succeed in this new land. So you can imagine how upset she was when I told her that I wasn’t going to be a doctor or a lawyer or any other safe profession.” We’re all grateful that Phillips had the strength to pursue what has become a lauded writing career.
The conversation ended with a brief discussion about the usefulness of the term “postcolonialism.” Gurnah is a professor of English and thus finds the term useful for categorizing works on syllabi and in the classroom. But he doesn’t feel that the term is useful or relevant to writers anymore. Phillips agreed: “It doesn’t make sense anymore. Most postcolonial nations we’re talking about have been free for over fifty years. When do countries stop being postcolonial and start being nations?” Perhaps it is time to abandon this term. These writers certainly don’t need any such term to apply to their varied and impressive body of work.
| | | |
| | |
|
