An unnamed magistrate in an unnamed remote outpost sympathizes with the native people of the land that his empire is commandeering, and he bears the consequences for his dissent. The novel illustrates the complexity involved in standing against a powerful but wrong-headed entity, the audacity of attempting to defy what everyone else sees as the natural course of history. What is remarkable about Coetzee’s protagonist is that he is not a noble, saintly martyr for a cause, but rather a man whose stance is the product of incidence. He is not always searching for the side of right or crusading for the downtrodden; he has never sought anything more than a comfortable and stable position. But he sees the injustice and dehumanization of the empire, and he cannot countenance it. He falls into the gears of the empire machine but refuses to be crushed.
Coetzee presents a strong indictment of senseless bureaucracy and merciless imperialism. He shows the terrifying results of a society ruled by baseless fear. He deftly imparts a conviction of how essentially necessary justice and humanity are in all political and social intercourse.
1 comment:
"Essentially necessary" is redundent; but that justice and humanity are necessary... Is this a controversial position? Would Coetzee have been justified in writing a novel to hammer a nail which is already neatly in place?
I think the novel is great, but I don't think its message is that simple. Sure imperialism is bad, but defending citizens is why governments are formed (at least initially). The regard governments have for outsiders (barbarians) is usually none.
This is why the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive attack is even feasibly justifiable. Bush was just executing one of the essential jobs of the state; that is, defending people from outsiders.
What Coetzee is trying to say in WFTB is (in my opinion) citizens of a nation worry and thus allow the state to act upon threats that we will be left waiting for to no avail (just as the novel ends). That even when it seems justifiable to protect one's state from attack we have to be brave and step backand really try to assess the threat as if it were not we who it amy or may not be aimed against.
In this sense, WFTB stresses that although there are no enforcable rules of war, the citizens of a democracy are responsible in as much as they are "the Empire" or states conscience and must remain a strong conscience even in the face of fear.
Post a Comment