I have been thinking about colonisation, medievalism, and
fantasy all at once in the past couple of weeks. One of the things I’ve noticed
is that fantasy stories that critique colonisation and imperialism very rarely
do it in medievalist settings. Robin Hobb and Naomi Novik whose work I’ve
mentioned in other posts don’t use them. Neither do Terry Pratchett in Nation or Snuff (which is in part about indigenous peoples), Nora K. Jemisin
in her Inheritance trilogy, or (from
memory) any of the authors in Nalo Hopkinson and Uppinder Mehan’s So Long Been Dreaming: Postcolonial Science
Fiction and Fantasy. This is a quick, and definitely not exhaustive list.
And there are a lot of people whose writing isn’t part of the western
publishing genre that I’m working with.
Hobb, Pratchett, and Novik all use nineteenth-century-type
worlds; the latter two creating alternate histories (in Nation for Pratchett, Snuff is
a Discworld book). There’s some logic to this: the nineteenth century was the
heyday of European imperialism around the globe, what better time to draw on
for a critique of the practice? None of the works I’m thinking about – or have
mentioned here, are Steampunk as such, but the discussions that have been going
on around that sub-genre and its ability to critique and be transgressive are
reasonably applicable. Like medievalism, Steampunk has been accused of having
inherent racist nostalgic leanings – of yearning for a time of ‘white power’.
And not without some justification. Although I won’t link to them, there are
white supremacist web-forums which praise both for their supposedly monochrome
visions. But Steampunk also has its defenders. Probably the most active is
Jaymee ‘Jha’ Goh, a self-described steampunk postcolonialist who blogs here.
The decision not to use medievalist settings is uncommon
enough to rate comment. Readers who reviewed Hobb’s Soldier Son books on Goodreads,
for example, often commented on the unconventional setting. I wonder how much
the use of non-medievalist setting to critique imperialism is a deliberate
tactic on the part of the authors. Whether they turn to a ‘Victorianist’
setting or not, they certainly tend to turn away from medievalist conventions.
Looking at my list of examples in the first paragraph, this probably isn’t
surprising – none of those authors are genre hacks; most if not all are known
for being unconventional. Even if
none of them made conscious decisions to be non-medievalist,
the settings are telling. They work against genre expectations on multiple
levels. I’d really like to know if there are books out that use a medievalist
setting but are significantly engaged in critiquing colonisalism.
No comments:
Post a Comment