Postcolonial Identity in Caribbean, South African, Indian & Sri Lankan
Caribbean: Art, Maps, and Diasporic Identity
Antillean Art and Walcott’s Shattered Histories
“Antillean art is this restoration of our shattered histories, our shards of vocabulary, our archipelago becoming a synonym for pieces broken off”? In his Nobel Prize speech, Derek Walcott explains that Caribbean, or Antillean, art is a way of rebuilding what history destroyed. Caribbean history was violently broken by slavery, colonialism, and forced migration. During the Middle Passage, Africans were taken away from their homes, languages, and traditions, causing deep losses in memory and identity. Because of this, Caribbean people did not receive a whole, continuous history, but only fragments. When Walcott speaks of “shattered histories” and “shards of vocabulary,” he refers to these broken pieces of language, culture, and memory that survived slavery and colonization.
Caribbean people speak creole languages made from African, European, and Indigenous elements, and their culture is built from many different origins. The image of the archipelago reinforces this idea: the Caribbean islands are separate fragments, like pieces broken off from a larger continent, especially Africa. Walcott does not see this brokenness as a weakness. Instead, he says that Antillean art gives new meaning by carefully putting these pieces back together. Art, poetry, rituals, and language become ways to survive and create. In this way, Caribbean art does not imitate Europe but builds a new identity from loss, memory, and strength.
Kei Miller: Maps Dismantling Colonial Thought
How does Kei Miller use maps to dismantle colonial thought in The Cartographer Tries to Map a Way to Zion? In The Cartographer Tries to Map a Way to Zion, Kei Miller uses maps to challenge colonial ways of understanding the Caribbean. The poem is structured as a dialogue between a cartographer and a Rastaman. The cartographer represents Western, colonial knowledge, believing that maps are scientific, neutral, and objective. He sees mapping as a way to create order and clarity. The Rastaman strongly disagrees and exposes the political nature of maps.
He argues that colonial maps erase what truly matters: poor people’s homes, small shops, daily life, suffering, and memory. While maps show borders, governments, and conquest, they leave Caribbean people “smaller than they were.” For the Rastaman, mapping is part of “Babylon,” a symbol of oppressive colonial systems. Miller dismantles colonial thought by showing that maps are not neutral tools but instruments of power. They shape how land is seen and controlled. The Rastaman proposes another kind of mapping, based on lived experience, oral history, spirituality, and memory. Zion, which represents freedom and a spiritual homeland, cannot be reached using colonial tools. True knowledge comes from walking the land and listening to its people, not from drawing lines on paper.
Grace Nichols: Hurricanes and Diasporic Identity
How does Grace Nichols use hurricanes to configure her diasporic Caribbean identity? In Hurricane Hits England, Grace Nichols uses the hurricane as a powerful symbol to show Caribbean identity in the diaspora. The poem describes a Caribbean woman living in England who feels emotionally divided, neither fully at home in England nor close to her Caribbean roots. When a hurricane hits England, an event normally associated with the Caribbean, it causes a strong emotional and spiritual change in her.
The hurricane represents the speaker’s Caribbean heritage arriving in England, just as Caribbean people migrated there. Through the storm, she reconnects with her ancestors and cultural roots by invoking figures such as Huracán, Oya, Shango, and Hurricane Hattie. These references link Indigenous Caribbean, African, and historical memories, showing that her identity is layered and transnational. Although the hurricane is frightening, it is also comforting. It breaks something “frozen” inside her, releasing emotions she had suppressed while living in a foreign land. By the end of the poem, she understands that identity is not limited to one nation. When she says “the earth is the earth is the earth,” she realizes that belonging is universal. The hurricane helps her bring together her Caribbean past and her life in England so she can feel complete again.
South Africa: Colonization, Apartheid, and Memory
Why South Africa Is a Unique Colonial Case
What makes South Africa a unique case in the history of colonization of the African continent? South Africa is a unique case in the history of African colonization because it experienced several phases of European settlement and a very long system of racial domination that continued well into the late twentieth century. The first Europeans to arrive were the Portuguese in the fifteenth century, followed by the Dutch in 1652, who established a permanent settlement at the Cape. These Dutch settlers, called Boers or Afrikaners, moved inland and took land from Indigenous groups like the Khoikhoi and the San. In the nineteenth century, the British took control of the Cape, causing conflict with the Boers and leading to the Anglo-Boer Wars from 1899 to 1902.
Unlike most African colonies, South Africa was not ruled directly by a European empire. Instead, it became a self-governing country controlled by white settlers. In 1910, the Union of South Africa was formed, and white people kept political power. The most distinctive feature of South Africa’s history is the introduction of apartheid in 1948, a legalized system of racial segregation imposed by the Afrikaner National Party. Apartheid controlled every aspect of life and lasted until 1994. Colonization therefore did not end with independence but continued internally, making South Africa’s case exceptional in Africa’s colonial history.
ANC and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission
ANC (African National Congress) & TRC (Truth and Reconciliation Commission). The African National Congress (ANC) and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) played a key role in shaping South Africa after apartheid. The ANC, founded in 1912, was the main political group that fought against apartheid and racial discrimination. After decades of protests, arrests, and exile, the ANC led negotiations with the apartheid government in the early 1990s. In 1994, it won South Africa’s first democratic elections, and Nelson Mandela became South Africa’s first Black president. The ANC helped build a new democratic state based on equality and universal rights.
The TRC was created in 1995 to help the country deal with the violence of the apartheid years. It was led by Desmond Tutu. The TRC was not a normal court. Instead of focusing on punishment, it aimed at truth and reconciliation (healing). Victims were invited to tell their stories publicly, while perpetrators could receive amnesty if they fully confessed their crimes. Together, the ANC and the TRC helped South Africa move from racial oppression to democracy by bringing political change and emotional healing. They chose forgiveness and reconciliation instead of revenge.
Miscegenation in Zakes Mda’s The Madonna of Excelsior
“An Outbreak of Miscegenation” from Zakes Mda’s The Madonna of Excelsior. The passage from The Madonna of Excelsior by Zakes Mda talks about sexual relationships between white men and black women during apartheid. This so-called “immorality” does not mean immoral behavior in a human or ethical sense. Instead, it refers to interracial relationships, which the apartheid government saw as a threat because they challenged ideas of white racial purity. This idea of “immorality” is linked to the Immorality Act of 1950, a law that made sexual relationships between people of different races illegal.
The novel refers to a real historical event called the “Excelsior Affair,” when white Afrikaner men were discovered to have had relationships with black women. The authorities described this as an “outbreak of miscegenation,” treating racial mixing as if it were a disease. Mda uses strong irony when he calls this period the “Golden Age of Immorality.” He suggests that interracial sexual exploitation started much earlier, with the first European settlers who desired Khoikhoi women, long before apartheid laws were created. The passage exposes the hypocrisy of white society, which punished black women while white men secretly broke their own laws. It also shows how the “coloured” population was born out of both oppression and survival under apartheid.
Christiaan Barnard and the First Heart Transplant
What does the story of the first heart transplant conducted by Dr Christiaan Barnard tell us about the history of South Africa? The story of the first heart transplant, performed in 1967 by Christiaan Barnard, shows the deep contradictions of apartheid South Africa. On the surface, the operation is a great scientific achievement and brought worldwide attention because it was among the first successful heart transplants. However, the story also shows how racist thinking influenced even medicine and ethics.
The heart donor, Clive Haupt, was classified as “coloured,” while the man who received the heart, Philip Blaiberg, was white. Under apartheid, this caused serious moral and political tension. Doctors felt they had to ask the white patient if he agreed to receive the heart of a coloured man, showing how racial ideology invaded the most basic idea of shared humanity. At the same time, the donor’s family agreed to the transplant, demonstrating kindness and humanity that contrasted with the cruelty of the system. The story shows that apartheid was not only a political system but also a way of thinking that distorted values, science, and human relationships. Even when South Africa made a big medical discovery, the country remained deeply divided by race, revealing the moral hypocrisy at the heart of its history.
Trevor Noah and Zoë Wicomb on ‘Coloured’ Identity
Trevor Noah’s Born a Crime and Zoë Wicomb’s Playing in the Light Both Born a Crime by Trevor Noah and Playing in the Light by Zoë Wicomb use the category “coloured” to expose how fake and unfair apartheid racial labels were. In Born a Crime, Trevor Noah explains that because he was mixed-race, his very birth was illegal under apartheid. He was seen as neither white nor black in a system that demanded strict separation. Just by existing, Trevor showed that apartheid laws were unnatural and cruel. His story makes it clear that race is not biological, but something society constructed and enforced through violence.
In Playing in the Light, Zoë Wicomb shows “coloured” identity through secrecy and denial. Marion’s parents pretend to be white so they can survive and avoid discrimination. To do this, they cut themselves off from their own community. This shows how apartheid forced people to hide who they really were in order to be safe and gain advantages. When the truth is revealed, it becomes clear that whiteness was often a performance, not something natural. Together, the two texts dismantle apartheid logic by showing that “coloured” identity exposes racial categories as unstable, invented, and deeply harmful, rather than natural or fixed.
India: Epics, Satyagraha, Emergency, Partition
Sita and Draupadi: Representations of Womanhood
Sita from the Ramayana and Draupadi from the Mahabharata are representations of Indian womanhood. Sita from the Ramayana and Draupadi from the Mahabharata show two different images of Indian womanhood, both shaped by patriarchy. Sita represents the ideal obedient and pure wife. After she is kidnapped by Ravana and rescued by her husband Rama, she is forced to prove her purity by walking through fire. This shows how patriarchal society expects women to constantly prove their loyalty and sexual purity, even when they are innocent victims. Sita’s suffering is silent and patient, and her worth is judged by her obedience and sacrifice.
Draupadi, however, stands for resistance and self-respect. When her husband loses her in a gambling game, she is dragged into the royal court and publicly humiliated. Unlike Sita, Draupadi speaks out, questioning the injustice done to her and demanding justice. Her anger reveals how cruel a male-dominated system is, especially one that treats women like property. Together, the stories of Sita and Draupadi show how patriarchy controls women’s bodies, honour, and voices. Whether women suffer silently like Sita or speak out like Draupadi, they are still trapped within male power and strict social rules.
Satyagraha: Gandhi’s Nonviolent Resistance
The term “satyagraha” encompasses Gandhi’s fight for the independence of India. Satyagraha is the philosophy of nonviolent resistance developed by Mahatma Gandhi. The term means “truth-force” or “holding on to truth.” It is based on the belief that moral truth and non-violence are stronger than physical force. Gandhi was inspired by Indian religious traditions, especially Hinduism and Jainism, as well as by Henry David Thoreau and his ideas on civil disobedience.
The Salt March of 1930, also known as the Dandi March, perfectly followed the principles of satyagraha. The British Salt Act made it illegal for Indians to collect their own salt, forcing them to buy it from the colonial government. Gandhi led a peaceful march of 241 miles from Sabarmati Ashram to the sea. When he picked up salt from the shore, he broke the law on purpose, but in a symbolic and non-violent way. The march required discipline, self-sacrifice, and peaceful resistance. Thousands of people were arrested, but no one fought back violently. The Salt March exposed the injustice of British rule and showed how moral resistance could weaken imperial power without bloodshed, making satyagraha a powerful political weapon.
Indira Gandhi, the Emergency and A Fine Balance
Who was Indira Gandhi and what episode of her administration was particularly controversial? A Fine Balance. Indira Gandhi was the first woman Prime Minister of India and the daughter of Jawaharlal Nehru. The most controversial time of her rule was the Emergency (1975–1977). During this period, she curtailed basic freedoms, arrested political opponents, controlled the media, and ruled without proper democratic limits. She said this was necessary because the country was unstable, but many people believed she was misusing her power.
In A Fine Balance, Rohinton Mistry strongly criticizes the Emergency by showing how it affected ordinary people. The novel focuses on poor and low-caste characters who suffer from police violence, forced sterilization, and public humiliation. Characters like Ishvar and Om are treated as bodies to be used, not as citizens with rights. The quote “when educated people are behaving like savages” highlights the moral collapse of authority. It shows that violence does not come from ignorance but from those in power who have lost ethical responsibility. The novel presents the Emergency as a betrayal of democracy and exposes how political power hurts the weakest people in society the most.
The Partition of India and Its Consequences
The Partition of India. The Partition of India took place in August 1947, at the end of British colonial rule. Independence was granted on 15 August 1947, while Partition was announced one day earlier, on 14 August. British India was divided into two new nations: India, meant to be a secular country with a Hindu majority, and Pakistan, created as a homeland for Muslims. Pakistan was initially formed with two separate regions, West Pakistan and East Pakistan, the latter becoming Bangladesh in 1971.
The United Kingdom played a major role in the Partition of India. For many years, the British used a “divide and rule” policy that increased differences between Hindus and Muslims through separate voting systems and special political rights. When independence could no longer be delayed, Britain decided to leave quickly and without proper planning. Lord Mountbatten, the last British ruler of India, oversaw this process. The borders were drawn in a hurry by Cyril Radcliffe, who had never been to India and had only a few weeks to finish the job. Important Indian leaders at the time included Jawaharlal Nehru, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, and Mahatma Gandhi, who opposed Partition.
The consequences were devastating. Millions of people were forced to leave their homes, and violence between Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs caused widespread death and suffering. The worst impact was felt in Punjab, Bengal, and Kashmir. Partition is still remembered as one of the most painful events in modern history, showing how rushed political decisions and sudden colonial withdrawal can destroy lives and leave deep, lasting trauma.
Is Caste Only an Indian Problem?
Is “Caste” solely an Indian problem? Caste is not only a problem in India, even though it began there. In India, caste discrimination has been illegal since 1950, but caste still exists in daily life through social behavior, marriage, jobs, and personal relationships. This creates a contradiction: caste is officially denied, but it is still practiced in society, especially against Dalits, who were once called “Untouchables.”
In her article The Specter of Caste, Yashica Dutt explains that caste has spread outside India through the Indian diaspora, especially to the United States. She focuses on modern America, particularly Silicon Valley, where upper-caste communities recreate caste hierarchies at work and in social spaces. Many Dalits hide their caste identity because they fear discrimination, exclusion, or losing job opportunities. Dutt refers to B. R. Ambedkar, a Dalit leader who helped write the Indian Constitution and fought for the complete abolition of caste. At the end of the article, she connects Dalit struggles to movements like Black Lives Matter and Say Her Name. By doing this, she shows that caste, racism, and sexism are linked systems of oppression. Dutt argues that caste is a threat to US democracy because it creates hidden social hierarchies that weaken equality, justice, and human dignity, even in countries that see themselves as fair and inclusive.
Sri Lanka and Colonial Legacies of Division
British Divide and Rule and the Civil War
How did the Divide and Rule policy performed by the British contribute to the Sri Lankan Civil War (1983–2009)? The British Divide and Rule policy played an important role in creating the ethnic tensions that later caused the Sri Lankan Civil War. During British colonial rule in Sri Lanka (1795–1948), the British governed by stressing differences between ethnic and religious groups, especially between the Sinhalese majority and the Tamil minority. Instead of encouraging unity, they ruled by separating communities and favoring some groups over others.
One major effect of this policy was seen in education and jobs. The British often preferred Tamils for government and office work because many Tamils had better access to English-language education, mainly through missionary schools in the north. This made many Sinhalese feel left out and treated unfairly in their own country. At the same time, these advantages tied Tamils closely to the colonial system. When Sri Lanka became independent in 1948, these divisions remained. Power moved to Sinhalese-led governments, which introduced policies that favored Sinhalese people. For example, Sinhalese was made the official language, and Tamil access to education and jobs was reduced. While these changes aimed to correct colonial favoritism, they increased ethnic tension. Over time, many Tamils felt more and more excluded, which led to demands for self-rule and finally to the start of the civil war in 1983. In this way, British Divide and Rule laid the foundations for long-lasting conflict in Sri Lanka.
Ondaatje’s Anil’s Ghost: Parallels with Guatemala
Michael Ondaatje’s Anil’s Ghost. What parallelism is there between the Guatemalan Civil War and the Sri Lankan Civil War? In Anil’s Ghost, Michael Ondaatje opens the novel with a scene from the Guatemalan Civil War to create a parallel with the Sri Lankan conflict. In both wars, the key similarity is the politics of disappearance. Ordinary people were taken away, killed, and made to disappear, leaving their families without answers. In both countries, forensic experts dig up mass graves to identify bodies and give respect to the dead.
However, the character Sarath Diyasena says that the Sri Lankan Civil War was even more brutal and unusual. In Guatemala, most violence came from the government, so it was clearer who was responsible. In Sri Lanka, violence came from three sides at the same time: the government, Tamil separatist groups, and Sinhalese insurgents. Because of this, there was no clear enemy. Sarath explains that the Sri Lankan war was not officially declared and was kept secret and confusing on purpose. People did not simply die; they disappeared. Bodies were burned, hidden, or moved again, so families could not mourn properly and justice could not be achieved. Unlike Greek tragedies, where loss is acknowledged, the violence in Sri Lanka erased both the victims and responsibility. The true cruelty of the war is not only death, but the way people were erased from memory, making the violence feel endless and inhuman.