published_or_final_version / abstract / toc / English / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

Thesis (Ph.D.)--York University, 2007. Graduate Programme in History. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 295-311). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&res_dat=xri:pqdiss&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:NR29335

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 33-35). Also available in print.

Thesis (M.A.)--Ohio University, August, 2009. / Title from PDF t.p. Release of full electronic text on OhioLINK has been delayed until September 1, 2014. Includes bibliographical references (p. 96-99)

Thesis (M.A.)--Acadia University, 1999. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 102-111). Also available on the Internet via the World Wide Web.

Brian John Hooper. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 118-149). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / Preface --- p.iv / Introduction --- p.vi / Chapter Chapter One: --- """The Matrix and Fusion in Hong Kong Anglophone Literature""" --- p.1 / Chapter Chapter Two: --- """The Matrix and its Malcontents in Acheson's Flagrant Harbour´ح" --- p.39 / Chapter Chapter Three: --- """Lee's Running Dog´ح" --- p.65 / Chapter Chapter Four: --- """Mo's Signifying Monkey King""" --- p.76 / Conclusion --- p.106 / Bibliography --- p.109

All bodies of critical discourse on any given literary canon seek visibility through self- celebration, subversion of competing critical ideas and identification with supposedly popular, scientific and incisive critical theories. Thus, the literary-critical quest for significance and visibility is, in essence, a quest for „space‟, „voice‟ and „authority‟ in the discussion of aspects of a given literary corpus. This research explores the politics of „space‟, „voice‟ and „authority‟ in „white critical thought‟ on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟. It unfolds in the context of the realisation that as a body of critical discourse on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟, „white critical thought‟ does not only emerge in an intellectual matrix in which it shares and competes for „space‟, „voice‟ and „authority‟ with other bodies of critical thought on the literary episteme in question; it also develops in the ambit of Euro-African cultural politics of hegemony and resistance. Thus, the research sets out to identify the ways in which „white critical thought‟ affirms and perpetuates or questions and negates European critical benchmarks and cultural models in the discussion of selected aspects of „the black Zimbabwean novel‟. The investigation considers the fissures at the heart of „white critical thought‟ as a critical discourse and the myriad of ways in which it interacts with competing critical discourses on the „the black Zimbabwean novel‟. It derives impetus from the fact that while other versions of critical thought on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟ have received extensive metacritical discussion elsewhere, „white critical thought‟ remains largely under-discussed. This phenomenon enables it to solidify into a settled body of critical thought. The metacritical discussion of „white critical thought‟ in this research constitutes part of the repertoire of efforts that will help check the solidification of critical discourses into hegemonic bodies of thought. The research makes use of Afrocentric and Postcolonial critical tenets to advance the contention that while „white critical thought‟ on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟ is fraught with fissures and contradictions that speak directly to its complexity and resistance to neat categorisation, it is largely vulnerable to identification as part of the paraphernalia of European cultural and intellectual hegemony in African literature and its criticism, given its tendency to discuss the literature outside the context of critical theories that emerge from the same culture and history with the literary corpus in question. / African Languages / D. Litt. et Phil. (African Languages)

All bodies of critical discourse on any given literary canon seek visibility through self- celebration, subversion of competing critical ideas and identification with supposedly popular, scientific and incisive critical theories. Thus, the literary-critical quest for significance and visibility is, in essence, a quest for „space‟, „voice‟ and „authority‟ in the discussion of aspects of a given literary corpus. This research explores the politics of „space‟, „voice‟ and „authority‟ in „white critical thought‟ on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟. It unfolds in the context of the realisation that as a body of critical discourse on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟, „white critical thought‟ does not only emerge in an intellectual matrix in which it shares and competes for „space‟, „voice‟ and „authority‟ with other bodies of critical thought on the literary episteme in question; it also develops in the ambit of Euro-African cultural politics of hegemony and resistance. Thus, the research sets out to identify the ways in which „white critical thought‟ affirms and perpetuates or questions and negates European critical benchmarks and cultural models in the discussion of selected aspects of „the black Zimbabwean novel‟. The investigation considers the fissures at the heart of „white critical thought‟ as a critical discourse and the myriad of ways in which it interacts with competing critical discourses on the „the black Zimbabwean novel‟. It derives impetus from the fact that while other versions of critical thought on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟ have received extensive metacritical discussion elsewhere, „white critical thought‟ remains largely under-discussed. This phenomenon enables it to solidify into a settled body of critical thought. The metacritical discussion of „white critical thought‟ in this research constitutes part of the repertoire of efforts that will help check the solidification of critical discourses into hegemonic bodies of thought. The research makes use of Afrocentric and Postcolonial critical tenets to advance the contention that while „white critical thought‟ on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟ is fraught with fissures and contradictions that speak directly to its complexity and resistance to neat categorisation, it is largely vulnerable to identification as part of the paraphernalia of European cultural and intellectual hegemony in African literature and its criticism, given its tendency to discuss the literature outside the context of critical theories that emerge from the same culture and history with the literary corpus in question. / African Languages / D. Litt. et Phil. (African Languages)

Text in English / Abstracts in English, Afrikaans and isiZulu / The present study deploys Ngugi wa Thiongo’s (2009) decolonial concepts of dismembering and re-membering to critically explore J. M Coetzee’s selected fiction. In my reading of the novels Waiting for the Barbarians, Foe and Disgrace, I relate concepts of dismembering and re-membering to decoloniality. In the rendition of Ngugi, dismembering refers to the displacement and dispossession of the colonised, and their mental colonisation through cultural imperialism. Re-membering becomes the decolonial effort to undo physical and psychological dismembering. In the same way in which, since the Berlin Conference of 1884/5, Africa was divided, mapped and colonised, the cultures and histories of Africans were dismembered and dominated. Concerns for the land are expressed in the mapping and the confiscation of land which is depicted in the native’s desert dwellings in Waiting for the Barbarians, Cruso’s clearing of the land in Foe and Petrus’s taking over of Lucy’s farm in Disgrace. Furthermore, Coetzee’s use of language is one important narrative strategy that is explored to ascertain how Coetzee negates or speaks for, of and about the colonised through the narrator focaliser. This study reveals the reflexive nature of the selected novels and seeks answers to the question of why Coetzee tends to make his “black” characters voiceless and rootless (and sometimes nameless)? Is Coetzee suggesting that they have been silenced by history, by colonialism, or is he suggesting that he, the author, has no right to speak on their behalf? In the mode of writing and story-telling, is Coetzee suggesting the impossibility of the coloniser to speak for the colonised or, in speaking of them, does he give the servant characters a voice and can this voice be theirs, or can it be considered reliable? Is Coetzee presenting the power of passivity as a means of resistance and re-membering? This study, from a decolonial perspective, engages with the complex way Coetzee handles voice and the question of the agency of the colonised. / Hierdie studie benut Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o (2009) se dekoloniale begrippe van verdeling en herindeling in ʼn kritiese beskouing van J. M. Coetzee se geselekteerde fiksie. In my vertolking van die romans Waiting for the Barbarians, Foe en Disgrace, bring ek die begrippe van verdeling en herindeling in verband met dekolonialisme. In Ngũgĩ se vertolking verwys verdeling na die verplasing en onteiening van die gekoloniseerdes, en hul geestelike kolonisering deur kulturele imperialisme. Herindeling word die dekoloniale poging om fisiese en sielkundige herindeling ongedaan te maak. Op dieselfde manier wat Afrika verdeel, gekarteer en gekoloniseer is sedert die Berlynse Konferensie van 1884/5, is Afrikane se kulture en geskiedenisse verdeel en gedomineer. Kommer oor die grond word te kenne gegee in die kartering en konfiskering van grond – soos uitgebeeld in die boorling se woestynverblyf in Waiting for the Barbarians, Cruso se opruiming van die grond in Foe en Petrus se oorname van Lucy se plaas in Disgrace. Verder is Coetzee se taalgebruik ʼn belangrike verhalende strategie wat bestudeer word om vas te stel hoe Coetzee die gekoloniseerde ontken of vir, van en oor die gekoloniseerde praat deur middel van die verteller/fokaliseerder. Hierdie studie openbaar die refleksiewe aard van die geselekteerde romans en soek vir antwoorde op die vraag van waarom Coetzee geneig is om sy “swart” karakters stemloos en wortelloos (en soms, naamloos) te maak. Suggereer Coetzee dat hulle deur die geskiedenis, deur kolonialisme, stilgemaak is – of suggereer hy dat hy, die outeur, nie die reg het om namens hulle te praat nie? Wil Coetzee deur sy manier van skryf en vertelling, aan die hand doen dat dit onmoontlik is dat die koloniseerder vir die gekoloniseerde kan praat; of, wanneer hy van hulle praat, gee hy aan die dienaarkarakters ʼn stem en kan dit hulle stem wees, of kan dit as betroubaar beskou word? Hou Coetzee die kraag van passiwiteit voor as ʼn vorm van weerstand en herindeling? Hierdie studie ondersoek, vanuit ʼn dekoloniale perspektief, die komplekse wyse waarop Coetzee stem en die vraag van die tussenkoms van die gekoloniseerde hanteer. / Ucwaningo lwamanje luchitha imiqondo ka-Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o (2009) yokuqothula nokujoyina kabusha ukungabuswa ngelinye izwe ekuhloliseni ngokucophelela ukuqamba okukhethiwe kukaJ.M. Coetzee. Ekufundeni kwami amanoveli i-Waiting for the Barbarians, Foe and Disgrace, ngichaza imiqondo yokuqothula futhi ukujoyina kabusha ekungabusweni ngelinye izwe. Ekuhumusheni kuka-Ngũgĩ, ukuqothula kubhekisela ekufudukeni nasekuthunjweni kwalabo ababuswa ngelinye izwe, kanye nengqondo yabo ekubusweni ngelinye izwe ngokusebenzisa imiphakathi yamasiko. Ukujoyina kabusha kuba wumzamo wokungabuswa ngelinye izwe ukulungisa ukuqothula kokukhubazeka ngokomzimba nangokwengqondo. Ngendlela efanayo lapho i-Afrika ihlukaniswe ngakhona, ihlelwe ibalazwe futhi ibuzwa ngelinye izwe kusukela kwiNgqungquthela yaseBerlin ka 1884/5, amasiko kanye nemilando yabantu base-Afrika yaqothulwa futhi yabuswa. Ukukhathazeka kwezwe kuboniswa ebalazweni nasekuthunjweni komhlaba - njengoba kuboniswe ezindaweni zokuhlala zasogwadule ku- Waiting for the Barbarians, ku-Cruso ukuhlanzwa komhlaba-enovelini i-Foe nakuPetrus ukuthatha ipulazi likaLucy enovelini i-Disgrace. Ngaphezu kwalokho, ukusetshenziswa kolimi lukaCoetzee kuyisisindo esisodwa esibalulekile sokulandisa esihlolisiswayo ukuze kuqinisekiswe ukuthi uCozezee uphikisa kanjani noma ukhuluma kanjani, futhi mayelana nababuswa ngelinye izwe ngokusebenzisa umlandisi. Lolu cwaningo lwembula uhlobo oluthile lokucabanga lwamanoveli akhethiwe futhi lufuna izimpendulo embuzweni wokuthi kungani uCoetzee ejwayele ukwenza "abalingisi" bakhe abamnyama bengabonakali futhi bangenasisekelo (futhi ngezinye izikhathi abangenalo igama). Ingabe uCoetzee uphakamisa ukuthi baye bathuliswa ngumlando, ngukubuswa ngelinye izwe, noma ingabe uphakamisa ukuthi yena, umbhali, akanalo ilungelo lokukhuluma egameni labo? Ngendlela yokubhala nokuxoxa ngezindaba, ingabe uCoetzee uphakamisa ukuthi akunakwenzeka ukuba obusa elinye izwe akhulumele ababuswayo kulelo zwe noma, uma ekhuluma ngabo, uyabanika abalingiswa abayinceku izwi futhi leli zwi lingaba ngelabo, noma lingathathwa njengelethembekile? Ingabe uCoetzee uveza amandla okungahambisani njengendlela yokumelana nokujoyina kabusha? Lolu cwaningo, kusukela embonweni wokungabuswa ngelinye izwe, luhambisana nendlela eyinkimbinkimbi uCoetzee alawula izwi kanye nombuzo wokumela ababuswayo. / English Studies / M.A. (Theory of Literature: (English Studies))