Ntombizikhona Valela
After reading Frantz
Fanon's three books (Black Skin, White Masks, A Dying Colonialism, The
Wretched of the Earth) it is clear that he acknowledges the importance of
the role women in the realization of freedom for colonized people. It is
especially emphasized in A Dying Colonialism where we see women active in the
liberation struggle in Algeria. I think Fanon is one of the first writers that
acknowledges women and for a man writing at that point in history I view it as
quite profound because he's not mentioning women at those moments in history where
women's roles are undeniable, but he describes women's roles in such a way as
to place them in the everyday moments of the struggle for liberation. I
contrast his writing with the South African anti-apartheid history that seems
to make the role of women an extraordinary event that pops up here and there
such as the famous 1956 women's march to the Union Buildings and the less
mentioned 1913 anti-pass protest led by Charlotte Maxeke. So I found it
shocking that Fanon would face heavy criticism as anti-feminist or anti-black
woman by some feminists that Sharpley-Whiting cites in this book.
Sharpley-Whiting, without seeming biased offers clarity that clears Fanon's
name.
Sharpley-Whiting's
first defense of Fanon is her analysis of Fanon's critique of Mayotte Capécia
who was a Martinican novelist and one of the first black female novelists to be
an award-winning writer which is found in Black Skin, White Masks. Fanon
is critical of Capécia because she writes about a black woman's desire to be
French as this is the only way she can acquire human dignity. Her identity is
determined by her winning the love of a Frenchman. This heroine hates black
people and wants nothing to do with marrying a black man since black people are
not seen as human beings. Pro-Capécia feminists accuse Fanon as being
anti-woman/anti-feminists because his reading of Capécia's novel Je suis
martiniquais is that of a woman wanting validation from a man, rather than
her using him for upward mobility- which they argue as being the case. I interpreted
this attack on Fanon as a particular group of feminists rallying around a
prominent woman and defending her at all costs, which I think is understandable
because she is one of the very few (if the not the only woman) at that time who
is representing women among men. Capécia is an example of what women can
achieve. Therefore when someone especially a man challenges her, it should be
our duty to clap back at that man and show him up to be the misogynist that he
is for not allowing another woman to share the space he occupies when she has
earned her place on that platform. Sharpley-Whiting points out that these
feminists are wrong because, for the sake of an argument they have
misinterpreted Capécia's novel and the protagonist's intentions for wanting to
be French. It is clear that this woman views “Frenchness” as the ultimate thing
to aspire to in order to shake off the shame of being black. Black Skin,
White Masks is about the psychological trauma that Fanon goes through of
not being recognized as being equal to white people; of not being human enough
no matter how smart or eloquent he is because of his blackness.
Sharpley-Whitting spends time unraveling Capécia's book revealing the heartbreaking
state of the author's inferiority complex that it becomes very clear that
Fanon's has been unfairly accused of being a misogynist.
I think a contemporary example would be the recent backlash against bell hooks for calling Beyoncé anti-feminist and a terrorist against young girls. Beyoncé is arguably the only black woman right now who is as successful as she is in the male dominated music industry. She is arguably the most influential artist of this generation right now. So when bell hooks her called out as somewhat being anti-feminist, in collusion with the patriarchal capitalist system and not in control of her image as a result, it was only inevitable for someone to step up in defense of Beyoncé. bell hooks, speaking at the New School, used the cover of Time Magazine as a reference for her argument where Beyoncé poses in a panty and training bra and is thus (according to hooks) imaged as a sexualized little girl to be preyed on. During this talk, hooks weighed in on 12 Years a Slave where she criticizes the portrayal of black women as sex objects who (in her words) "F*** on demand". It was not surprising that such heavy criticism would be unleashed on hooks. Just as was the case with Capécia, there's a defense at all costs of Beyoncé without actually investigating why someone like hooks would make such claims. We are quick to protect rather than engage and debate. I was especially disappointed with the lack of debate among the panelists who were in conversation with hooks. In the case of Fanon, it seems that men are not allowed at all to critique a woman. It's as though it is impossible for a man to be feminist and critical of women.
The most shocking part
of the book for me was the attack on Fanon's writing of women's roles in the
Algerian liberation war. When I read A Dying Colonialism I was very
impressed with the mention of women and their part in Algeria's independence.
Fanon places women first and almost at the heart of the liberation movement.
Women could go where men could not because of the wearing of the veil. The veil
was a useful tool of camouflage and the hiding of weapons and bombs. The
unveiled woman became the perfect disguise as Algerian women could pose as
French settler women and this could allow them to successfully plant bombs in restaurants
and other parts of the settler's part of town. The role women played in the
struggle changed family structures and transformed women as equal to men. A
Dying Colonialism showed that moments of discomfort in a society's history
provided an opportunity for the transformation of that society. A country’s
liberation went hand-in-hand with the liberation of the woman. This book shows
Fanon's optimism for a transformed society in which all people are equal. I
think it is important to note that Fanon was writing during the war, writing
what he observed Algerian people do. To critique based on hindsight, where
women have been forced to return subservience, I think is wrong on the part of
the feminists who criticize him. I agree with Sharpley-Whiting on this point.
The writings of Fanon would also inform black feminism and the role of women in
movements like the Black Panther party where women sought to be active
participants in the liberation of black people beyond them serving the needs of
men. It's as though these critics of Fanon want to have a monopoly over
commentary on female participation in liberation movements at all costs. Yet,
as Sharpley-Whiting argues, if Fanon had never mentioned women he would've been
called out as sexist. Fanon doesn't win either way.
I must confess that had
a man written this book, I would've have probably not been so ready to agree
with the arguments even though they are true and I’m not quite sure what to
make of this. I think it's great that feminists can call each other out when
it’s valid. Sharpley-Whiting does this excellently and reminds all of us that
feminism is not exclusive to women, but that it’s something both men and women
can aspire to because it seeks to have everyone recognized as equal. I think
Fanon's love for humanity regardless of gender or race is his greatest legacy
and we ought to honor him for it.
Reference:
Sharpley-Whiting, T.,
1998, Frantz Fanon: Conflicts and Feminisms, Rowman & Littlefield
Publishers: Oxford.
