Handwritten in Lagos: Selfhood and Textuality in Colonial Petitions

Q1 Arts and Humanities History in Africa Pub Date : 2021-06-01 DOI:10.1017/hia.2021.4
Tunde Decker
{"title":"Handwritten in Lagos: Selfhood and Textuality in Colonial Petitions","authors":"Tunde Decker","doi":"10.1017/hia.2021.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper asks a methodological question: In what way can petitions written in the colonial period introduce us to the persona of the writers – that is, as against mainstream interpretation given to them as mere archival sources? Doesn’t the very nature of the petitions introduce us to the selfhood of those “caught up” in the often-mentioned “sophisticated” concepts of nationalism, politics, power, imperialism, urbanity, and colonialism? What, and how, do petitions tell us about the “interior version” of colonial society as seen in the individual? In an attempt at a deeper understanding of colonial Lagos, this paper examines an alternative feature of petitions as entry into the selfhood of colonial subjects rather than mainstream interpretations of the documents as qualitative exposition to “grand” historical phenomena. Selfhood as examined here is presented as it was constructed by petitions written in Lagos between 1940 and 1960 with a particular focus on three. Their deficiencies in “standards of grammar” notwithstanding, the words are also examined to allow for a demonstration of their qualities as texts: their meanings in singular and collaborative contexts, the gaps they exposed, the information they concealed, the disconnections in chronology they indicated, the “ethics” of grammar they “relegated” for more “substantial expose” of the self, the information they privileged the reader to hear, the identity they formed in the personas they constructed and the voice they generated. This paper suggests that these strands analyzed together affirm the textuality of petitions written by everyday people in colonial Lagos and that these point to the potentiality of such documents to further contribute to the substantial comprehension of the inner qualities of self-identity in Lagos and Nigeria’s colonial history.","PeriodicalId":39318,"journal":{"name":"History in Africa","volume":"48 1","pages":"355 - 382"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/hia.2021.4","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History in Africa","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/hia.2021.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract This paper asks a methodological question: In what way can petitions written in the colonial period introduce us to the persona of the writers – that is, as against mainstream interpretation given to them as mere archival sources? Doesn’t the very nature of the petitions introduce us to the selfhood of those “caught up” in the often-mentioned “sophisticated” concepts of nationalism, politics, power, imperialism, urbanity, and colonialism? What, and how, do petitions tell us about the “interior version” of colonial society as seen in the individual? In an attempt at a deeper understanding of colonial Lagos, this paper examines an alternative feature of petitions as entry into the selfhood of colonial subjects rather than mainstream interpretations of the documents as qualitative exposition to “grand” historical phenomena. Selfhood as examined here is presented as it was constructed by petitions written in Lagos between 1940 and 1960 with a particular focus on three. Their deficiencies in “standards of grammar” notwithstanding, the words are also examined to allow for a demonstration of their qualities as texts: their meanings in singular and collaborative contexts, the gaps they exposed, the information they concealed, the disconnections in chronology they indicated, the “ethics” of grammar they “relegated” for more “substantial expose” of the self, the information they privileged the reader to hear, the identity they formed in the personas they constructed and the voice they generated. This paper suggests that these strands analyzed together affirm the textuality of petitions written by everyday people in colonial Lagos and that these point to the potentiality of such documents to further contribute to the substantial comprehension of the inner qualities of self-identity in Lagos and Nigeria’s colonial history.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
拉各斯手写:殖民请愿书中的自我和文本性
摘要本文提出了一个方法论问题:殖民时期写的请愿书以什么方式向我们介绍作家的个性——也就是说,相对于仅仅作为档案来源的主流解释?请愿书的本质难道不让我们了解那些“陷入”经常被提及的民族主义、政治、权力、帝国主义、城市化和殖民主义“复杂”概念的人的自我吗?请愿书告诉我们,在个人身上看到的殖民社会的“内部版本”是什么,以及如何告诉我们的?为了更深入地理解殖民地拉各斯,本文考察了请愿书的另一个特征,即进入殖民主体的自我状态,而不是将文件的主流解释作为对“宏大”历史现象的定性阐述。这里所考察的自我是由1940年至1960年间在拉各斯写的请愿书构建的,特别关注三个方面。尽管它们在“语法标准”方面存在缺陷,但也对这些单词进行了检查,以展示它们作为文本的品质:它们在单数和协作上下文中的含义、它们暴露出的差距、它们隐藏的信息、它们所表示的年表中的脱节,他们“贬低”语法的“伦理”,以更“实质性地暴露”自我,他们让读者听到的信息,他们在构建的人物角色中形成的身份,以及他们产生的声音。本文认为,这些共同分析的线索肯定了拉各斯殖民地普通人写的请愿书的文本性,并指出这些文件有可能进一步有助于深入理解拉各斯和尼日利亚殖民历史中自我认同的内在品质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
History in Africa
History in Africa Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
A Tapestry of Human-Induced and Climate-Driven Environmental Change in Western Uganda: The Ndali Crater Lakes Region Writing a Colonial Legal History of Northern Nigeria: An Analysis of Methods and Sources Cyber History: Homespun Historians, Ethnonationalism, and Recasting Yorùbá Oral Traditions in the Age of Social Media A Class of Their Own: Newspaper Obituaries and the Colonial Public Sphere in Lagos, 1880–1920 Wiriyamu and the Colonial Archive: Reading It Against the Grain? Along the Grain? Read It at All! – ERRATUM
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1