Research: Classics and Colonialism

In the introduction of Classics and Colonialism, a collection of essays on the Classical Tradition within British-Imperial and colonial politics, Barbara Goff defines the necessary terms for understanding the discourse of “postcolonial” analysis. To better understand what is meant by “postcolonial,” Goff first defines Imperialism through the words of Said, in his work Orientalism, as meaning “the practice, the theory, and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling a distant territory;” while “colonialism” is described as the inevitable consequence of this metropolitan influence extended into foreign regions (typically through coercion,) described by Said as “the implanting of settlements on distant territory” (2) After providing such definitions, Goff elucidates the term “postcolonial” by its contextual basis, as described by Anne Loomba: “‘post’ meaning ‘temporal, as in coming after, and ideological as in supplanting.” So, essentially, “postcolonial” analyses wishes to supplant the ideological views of colonial predecessors.
Throughout the development and evolution of postcolonial studies, the term itself has evolved to more specifics meanings. For example, one such meaning is that given by Moore-Gilbert, stating that postcolonialism is the “analysis of cultural forms which mediate, challenge and reflect upon the relations of domination and subordination… between (and often within) nations, races and cultures, which characteristically have their roots in the history of modern European colonialism and imperialism'”. In this meaning, there is a recognition of European influence, and as such a beginning to develop cognizance of the limitations of European bias in expanding postcolonial thought. One such recognition of this limitation is articulated poignantly by Van Binsbergen in response to the Afrocentric project titled Black Athena Martin Bernal, stating “…inside as well as outside scholarship, creating a viable and acceptable alternative to Eurocentrism is the most important intellectual challenge of our time.” This response in cogent terms verifies the importance of postcolonialism as a movement to informing multiple perspectives and developing a broader view and more objective view of cultural history.
Goff presents two models for defining classical objects as they are presented in modern history through a “pushing/pulling” analysis. As Goff explains, in a “pushing” scenario, a classical object survives by “its own inherent qualities, because it is endowed with enough beauty, truth, and general importance to enable it to set its own agenda.” Goff sites the Aenid by Virgil as an example of this object, pushing its way through history, for how universally acclaimed and respected the work is that it sets itself apart in general from its age as “fundamentally transcendent.” The definition provided for a “pulling” object is of one that is “far from dictating its own terms, [it] may be put to work in the service of various projects and may become a counter in conflicts not of its own making.” This is how I view the reinvention of Alexander the Great within the political and scholarly discourse of the British Empire. Alexander is both an icon that is pushing and pulling his way through history for the inherent qualities and authority his legend possess.