Milli mála - 01.01.2013, Page 133
133
Arguments of critics such as Sara Suleri suggest a similar correla-
tion. Thus Suleri argues that “both the categories of ‘woman’ and
‘race’ assume the status of metaphors, so that each rhetoric of
oppression can serve equally as a mirrored allegory for the other”
(Suleri 1995: 276). Additionally, some aspects of Kadiatu Kanneh’s
paper on “Feminism and the Colonial Body” emphasise the sym-
bolical meaning of imperialism as a male power dominating a
“female” dependency. Kanneh states that the “feminising of colo-
nised territory is, of course, a trope in colonial thought” (Kanneh
1995: 346) and that the “discourse of rape between coloniser, and
colonised country” is familiar in these terms (ibid, 347). This line of
thought is confirmed by Ania Loomba, who points out that “from
the beginning of the colonial period till its end (and beyond),
female bodies symbolise the conquered land” (Loomba 1998: 152).
Furthermore, some aspects of postcolonial theory itself are close-
ly related to feminist thinking. For instance, it is clear that some of
Edward Said’s arguments relate to the kind of oppression practised
within a patriarchal power structure. Therefore Said’s assertion that
imperialism and colonialism are both “supported and perhaps even
impelled by impressive ideological formations that include notions
that certain territories and people require and beseech domination”
(Said 1993: 8, his emphasis) clearly reflects those aspects of patriar-
chal oppression that are first and foremost engendered by the belief
that it is the nature of women to be controlled by men. Moreover,
Said’s classification of West and East into the “One” and the “Other”
and his general thesis of Occidental self-assumed knowledge as
equalling power over the “subject” Orient mirrors the typical patri-
archal classification of men and women into “form / matter”, “intel-
lect / body”, “activity / passivity”, “the One / the Other.” Importantly,
also, the relationship of West and East was often seen as that of a
strong and weak partner: “Many terms were used to express the
relation: […] The Oriental is irrational, depraved (fallen), childlike,
‘different’; thus the European is rational, virtuous, mature, ‘nor-
mal’” (Said 1995: 40). We can very easily relate most aspects of this
categorisation to the long-standing patriarchal conception of wom-
en as subordinate, irrational and “fallen.” Just as woman has had her
actions, feelings, and thoughts defined according to male, phallo-
INGIBJÖRG ÁGúSTSDÓTTIR