After the Empire: ‘The Francophone World and Posteolonial France Series Editor Valérie Orlando, no Wesleyaa University Advisory Board Robert Bernascon, Memphis Univerily Alec Hareaves, Florida State University Chima Kori, Central Michigan University rangoise Lionnet, UCLA pee CIVILIZATION Tracy D. Shapley- Whiting, Hamilton College rank Ula, Tule Uuenty AND ITS DISCONTENTS ‘his wei i ddan othe promotion of tla thought onan colonialism, wace about the Francophone world. After the Enyire provides foram for the publication of original work chat explore Francophone berate and cn | . Z ‘ma, polis history, and culture. The series problematizes nations of iden te) , tty and eile and neues the study ofthe Francophone worl’ relationship Y to France as an integral part of Frascophone expression, OF Suffocate Hearts ond Tortured Soul Seoking Subjecthood through ‘Modness in Froncophone Women’ Writing of Alea and the Caribbean by Valve Orlando EpITED BY TYLER STOVALL Paap Po Cll Catrall by GEORGES VAN DEN ABBEELE In Search of Shelter: Subjectety and Spaces of Loss in the ction of Paule Constant, by Margot Miler French Ciolztion ond ts Discontents: Nationotiom, Colonial, Race & exited by Tyler Stovall nd Georges Van Den Abbe° KOJEVE AND FANON: THE DESIRE FOR RECOGNITION AND THE FACT OF BLACKNESS Ethon Kleinberg “This chapter began asa reading of one work, Frantz Fanon Black Skin, ‘White Masks, which became an investigation ito the tension bebeen to separate themes: one from an ealy chapter ented “The Fact of Blak ‘nest and the secon from a section ofthe ast ehupter on "The Negro and Recognition” entitled "the Negra and Hegel.” But as {began exploring tis tension i earnest I elie at Tas dealing noe with ane igure but to: Fanon focus in his chapter on Hegel ison the "Desir for Recognition and his reading of hs thee requires a serious consideration of Hegel, but ‘of Hegel ax read by Alexandre Kojeve. Here rmastamnitthat ee more ob ‘ous choice would have been to read Fanoa in relation to Sartre, but as pertains these two themes the influence of Kojve i far ore direct andthe [tapostion of Kojéve and Fanon is far more elvidating especially in ‘understanding a phenomenon of hybridization in French plilowphy involving the teleclogial Hegelian dialectic and German phenomenology. Tn moving frm the two themes to the two Agures I ealized that what i at stake In understanding the internal tension in Fanon’ work i lage w= ‘derstanding of the relationship between these two philosophieal projects, ‘and the munications ofthis conflation on Fanons project andl our der. standing ofthe colonial stem, In Block Skin, White Masks, Fanon attempts to differentiate between the Master Save dalctic in Hoge (and hore its Kojive's reading of Hegel to ‘hich Tam refering) and the master and slve inthe cao sytem Tndoing so Fanon is attompting to ind third place fom which the colonia situation, distin! frm the Hegelian situation, cat be addessed. But a his attempt to distance the colonia sve from the Hegelian Slave, Fanon a tually parallels Hegels movements, Fann i correct in his diagnosis of en incompatibility between the Hegelian system and the colonial systexn but this becomes explicit notin hs entque ofthe diet, but in his phenom ‘nological investigation into “the Fat of laces" Ie sony through the conflation of the teleological Hegelian dialectic wth phenomenology tha the fundamental incompatibility ofthe Hegelian system and the colonia system becomes vibe T's ths incompatty that 1 wish to explore by frst looking at Fanon attempt to distance himself from Hegel and the subsequent subsumption Into the daeesi, and hen attempting to understand the bering tht the phenomenological eomponent of Fanon and Kee) has on this movement ‘Toward the end of Black Skin, White Mask in the section entitled “the Negro and Hegel,” Fanon attempts to distinguish his reading ofthe clo ‘al condition the black condition) from dhe Master Save diletic as pr posed by Hegel, Fanon presents a footnote on page 290 where he “sims Up" the distinctions between the wo. "hope Lh shown tht here the [sonal] master fers base fom the instr deserted by Hegel For Hegel thers espa, hee the mer Tg a the consciousness of ese What he ware x nt econ but wok Tnthesame wy the sve bere isin wo way dentable withthe [eget slow ne inaln the objet and finda it work the source fh ‘The Negro wants to be ike the mate, ‘Therefore be es lnpenden than the Hegelian ave |i Heel he slave turns fro the nase dtr ova he oj. ‘ere the save tus toward the maser and abandons he objet But by looking at this footnote in elation to Alexandre Kojves reading of Hegel we wl se that the two readings are setaly pall, equvocdl, In Kojtve' interpretation of Hegel, as presented in his seminar at the cole Patique des Heutes Bowles irom 1983 to 1939, the relation of the ‘Master tthe Save ithe result ofthe “Strugele for Reeogultion.” Kojove constructs « duals ontology (allowing Herdegaer not Hee!) in dite centating hotween an animallobjet word and human word “For a man to be traly human, for im tobe essentally sn realy diferent from an - mal, his human Desc must actually win out over bi animal Desire" This Inui Desi essentially efferent rom anal Desir, Animal De- sire inmediate gation, ts pure nation (being hung an eating) but as such the Terete bythe ative station af sucha desire wl have th same nature as tho things toward which that dese dreted 1 wl be a Uings 1 merely living Ian anal LS For the human to transcend the arimalojet rel and ultimately at- tain Self Consciousness, the hunan mast teansend given natural reality. man Desire must be directed toward a non-natural object, But the only thing that goes beyond the anal vali so dese anthers desir. Ths isto ay to desire the desire of another To be human hs to wish to be recognized 2s a human beng and ut as an ebjec or animal ‘Fanon follows this loge nel iin accord with Koj when Fanon states: Assoon as I deste Tam asking tbe considered. Tam not merely here and ow scale into thinness." For both Kojive and Fanon the fration of ‘man Dest isto ave tho value that I yepresent be the value desired by an Other. But for my vale tobe econ hy the Othe, the Other ust Bt sco me asa human and nts an anna or ting Here Kejve intros what he clans tobe the fusdaental difference tween the animal and the human ea: Nowall Dest dst for aval. The spree ale fo an nina sa Smal ie, A the Dees fa anal a in the al ys a tion of dae to preserve ise, Hanan De, thetfre, must wn ot oer ths de ‘Se fr presen. ether words, samantha hows is anna for the oa is hun Dest And that hy ‘ospeakof he "ogi ofl Connect topes he tk if ar an senna end)" ‘To be human, and thus worthy of an Other’ recognition, st put ones Jnuman Desir, the desire for recognition, abowe ones animal Desie, the desire to lve ere too, Fanon echoes Kojive in is esplnation of deine “I demand that notice be taken of my negating activity isa pursue something, tthe than if; insofar as Tc tte fr the eretion of human workl— that isa word of reciprocal recogitins™ In Fanons explanation iis a "demand that noice be take” tit recognition be gen, to is “negating sett” insofar a its in pure of something other than Mf. He spre pred to accept the rik of hi life forthe sk of his hum Desi, de ‘ce for recogition that wil be suid by the “creation of « human wordt sa world of roxio rengaiions”But in this statement there sa dlscord between Fanon and Kejve fly in Fano’ understanding of Hegel that ie basis of his iffretiton be tween the colonial suation and the Hegelian Master and Slve, Fanon as ‘sues that cere i reciprocal ralationship of region fn Hegel. which snot present in the colonial rlasonship between the whita master ad the back sve. This asumption is made when Favon asserts that “The oer, Ihawever, can recognize me without tryggle” an he attempt suppot this assertion vith a quote from Hegel: “The individu, who has wot staked his life, may, no doubt, be recognized as person, bit he has not attained the truth f this recognition as an independent sel consciousness" In Hegel ao ‘cording to Fanon, itisonlythe “that must stgele for recognition. Thene- fave any° who does nt engage inthe stigaefreecogiton who hs not stoked his, wl simply be recognized by the Ose, whois somehow ex- empt from the equation except as recognizn But the struggle for reeogition i a binary equation withthe necesnry condition that both putes see each other as equals, as worthy of each thers recogution. As sited above, the dei for recogiton an only be faliled by obtaining the Desize of another human, For at individual to achiew the recognition ofan Other, he must fst prove tat he his over ‘ome his animal Desires, that he has overeome is fer of death ais wor thy of my Desi. The only posible means af proving thi assertion is by risking one lf for the sake of one’s Dest, by proving that onc dese for "ecognition is more impoctaat than one's dese to Ive in a purely bsg. ‘a sense, "Therefore to speak ofthe oigaof Self Consciousness i nes sally o speak ofa fight tothe death fr reengniton® According to Kove, ‘he inital encounter between human beings necessary violent and po tently le But in Kojoves reading this struggle for recognition serves not only to Aistinguis the animal fom the human word but alo to distinguish to ‘lases of humans: thase who have vescomte ther anual Desires (Masters) ‘nl those who have not (Slaves). According to Kove, the urn wold i distinguished from the animal world bythe decison to ight far ecogiton 'o fight for pure prestige, Then the question is whether one sticks tothe fight and overcomes his animal Desire or doesn. Reis procely to this pint ‘hat the passage in Hegel, taken fom chapter 4of the Phenomenology of Spirit and quoted by Fanon, is addressed. The Slave may be seen a4 per- son," in the bolgial sense, but also because in sine say he has distin guished himself from the animal world (the world of objects). I want to ‘earmark this moment in Kojove hecase wl ater become er for our ‘understanding of Fanon, But the Slave has not attained the tath of his recognition 4s an independent Self Consesousnes.” he has not overcome bis fear of death and ths isnot recognized by the Other as worthy of recog. rion. Hore we se that che ble fr recogaltin sa para. fot combatants tra otto have overeome thelr animal Desires, dhon ‘one of them must de. one does do, chen he is returned to the inanimate form of mere thing and as such his recognition I of no valu tothe vitor sso must journey of to search for rection elewere sis an mu be the case, ane doedes that one would rather Ive than de and gives in to fe snimal Desite, then the tw hawe distinguished themsehes as un ‘equals. Tho vitor enslavesthe laser, who now recognizes the vitor as Mas- ter without being recognized himelf. But the Mastor i not susied with, ‘he recognition of a Save who has not proven tobe fly man and thus contnnesin search of validation, This contary to Fanos assvtion, there ino recognition posable with or without struggle. At this sage ofthe di let, for Hegel, lke for Fanon, theve ino reciproty of rcogaltion. “Te roti to Fanon ootte we now ee thatthe “mater” doesnt gh she conscinsnes the lave but, perhaps worse, gporesit as beneath hin, For Kejéve's Hegel and for Fanon the relationship ofthe Master the Slave is the ste: "What he wants from the ve snot recognition but wor" Bat the the question arses at what stages there reciprocity? The answer is atthe end of history Kojne tracks thi teleology that bins with the die tinction between Masterand Sve but is propelled by the Slave relationship to work The Slaves feed to work by the Master, and in turning othe ob ject the Slave develops a mastery over natwe that tansfonns the world. This transformation is sen in the elution of cvlization fom the Pagan Stat, through the Ciistan Worl, to the modem Bourgeois Word, ‘With the emergence of Chistian the entre “word” becomes world of pieudo-masters and poeudo-slaves or rather “masters Saver” The Master i no longer a concrete manifestation on earth but instead God shove. Once agln the Slaves confrontation with death is avoided though the eretion of an ater ie. The masterless Slaves do not overcome theit slavery untl they replace thelam with atheism overcoming ther fear of ath and ating Sel Consciousness. eis ony after this inal stage that ‘here canbe reciprocity of recognition, "Thus when Faion point to the abolition of avery without bate to pose the diferenoes betwoen the colonial station and the Hegelian dh Alec, he does not conteadictKojeve's Hegelian schema but stops int it ‘Hiri, the Negro sepd inthe nest af servtde was st ine lyhis master He dd net for his feed. Out of svery the Negro buttat the room wheve hi masters sod. Lik hos servants who ae allowed enc every year ode In the devi rom, he Negra eakng or ars “The Nego hasnt bese 4 Masten" ‘The satisfucton of overcoming the fear of death, of belng ecognized as ‘human being, of attaining Sel-Consciousness is denied the Negro iy ‘emancipation but this denials prelsely the deferal, dhe ack, that Koj Anticipates. It eats the dssatiafction tha s the mor of history at forces the Slive to work, to master nature, which leads to the Elighten ‘tent were he comes to terms with Universal Reason, a] eventually 0 the Revolution that wil replace theism with atheism where every than ove. ‘comes his fear of death and whose ftion wll the end of history and he ‘creation of «world of mutual recognition, « world of reciprocity. ‘When Fanon clams in his footnote that “the eck lave here sin no vay compatible with the [Hegelian] slave who Joss himself inthe objec tu find in his work the source of his Hberation,” one must ask “Why ‘When Fanon continue that the Noro wants to be ike the Master we «an respond that for Kove, to, the Slave wants tobe ike the Master in ‘overcoming his fear of death and moving toward Sell-Consciousnes. An! when Fanon points out that in Hegel the slave tims vay Som the Master and turns toward the obec," wo ean pot cut that hii by force and not by choice. The Master frees the Slve to work In wor, the Slave tums toward the object and eventually masters the object. Ironically Ii this mastery over the word of objects (freed upon the Slve by the Mas tee that allow the Slave to eventually overthrow the Master himsell. So ‘what isthe essential difference between the colonial sytem and the Hegelian sjtem that Panon i tying to emunciate? The answer is unlear so long ns Fanon attenpts to determine the df ferences from within the framework ofthe dialectic hei tying to equ. is desire to finda plac slong the Hegelian dialectic that wil event ally allow him into the dilete through vient and Maras action betrays Tis debt to Hegel Fanon ertque ls blunted wise he iin the iaeetie but its most pow ef in the phenomenologal investigation int the conditions prior tothe ‘Strugle for Recogaltion" The difeeace between the Hegelian an eo ‘al ystems is implicit in his understanding of the Pato Blackness” not xpi in his eritque ofthe dati itself There i an incompatty be ‘ween the system that Kojve is describing and the sytem that Fanon i ‘yng to understand, which i not sessed when Fanon steps into the lectic precisely because the determining moment is pir tothe daletc cojtVE AND FANON na What beomes cea in “Th Fat of Blackness” dh we shift our aon and no Fanon to read Kae tha economy of Hogs 3 fon isch ht dosnt allow pace for areal Other Faso sex tha te oro forte clnan the htoel progesion of Hog trend by Kojive the Ot the lac, nt died pase bea {recog itt svg or brent “he dnt Bt frie Soa ohih funn ela nea thers ptt tment o tonfntation he ft foe aqua he Neg om partition {ile Hops ileal ogra Tie retumto Rojec lectures wo renee that the srg for eooptondifrentnes wo rs of ma (Maer and Sle), But thre pr daly in Kop thats tween hunan beng td things Iii ie ditntonbetmen man nd hing at ately pul the Hagen dle question. TS Hogs tology, he ttle fr recon og between tro indole who both sk eogsiton sod ths bate coats the ance of sagen te hoy of Sl Conmcotsen a espresion of FT ovclping cn. Ia Kefve veating we find eran it ahs Stamp sndentand hows Wig” appea to See in hs iit {ental ad dose he Koon poet kono pt olga in ater to ade the may a objec en Aho spparnce int and feet ™ Th conto of Hoga lo tlogial dni with penomenlogy forces Kojve to conto wat nly ‘kon betwen ane (at Hoge But slo he lth be. twoenthefaman work andthe animal world (xin Hedge ant ay Cie oi ak so isp sh Tn the rage or rerio there an uel! omer por tothe conta wre the“ moat decrmine te ofl are Of he Others ptetly nan oe sina (a momen pera to Rope edgol eg Phenomenology of prt) The on vo es tht ntl sly osgie te Ober ss pte Inna sd at ‘ier tig or bet Te some sor of revo fret eel 0 tht conn ef nan pte an Be dah a age can ogi Seen nhs ight ent Hegean project ante placed ‘hina aay oct nl wong eptennogalosctrea tnusone. Atte bao ths srr i the ace he“ ‘otf fa self and not a jes to do the ook noth a ily Other bt to one Hk inset an homologs Ot in order that he ‘ayo pute a» lf rom xd, ok oi or ‘roche te cetera conf te hana potest of ner orthe Otherto be human, the Other mus be like me and ithe Othe ike sme then Tam not an object. Foun its ontological inception in Hegels ays. tem, the “that ist speaks, that his animal Destes and overeomes these Desires, that struggles for recognition and progresses toward Sale Gonsciousnes isa European “1” a whte “Land by all indications a mae *L"The Neo in his blackness isnot the sume, hei radlcally Other andi allowed into this economy places the whit self in question. To avoid this ‘Glenma the radelly Other label as object and excluded. ‘Within Koj phenomenological reading of Hegel the possible thing. ness ofthe Other, andthe subsequent possiblity of the tingness ofthe elf, {spolted to, Within the work of Fanon it bocomes expt: Tarsve in the ‘word anxious to make senso of things, my soul filled withthe desire to gt, tote origin ofthe world, but then I discovered myself an objet. an bs {pct ina world of other objects Fanon presents the phenomenoogial problem at hand but aso a subse ‘quent extent lemma, Fanon sts out upon the phenomenological tsk of attompeing to understand how ii that things make sense tous Inthe ‘worl we lve in only to discover tht within the epistemological famework that e investigating he ean object, Wi have determines thatthe atsiment of Sel-Consiousness is con tingeat upon the Desire ofthe Othe. To be hunnan i o wish to be recog. nized a sie, To return to a quote from Fanon, "As soon a I dese ‘aking toe considered. Iain not merely here and now, sealed into thing ness" But what ithe Other does no respond to your request? What the Other doesnot recagize yo as human potently bt fies you in the an Amal realm, as «things 1 merely ving , an animal L°® Here again servi to remember that for Kojve thet i ifference between the ‘imal realm and the object. Ia Kojtwe's constuction, tho struggle for recognition is contingent upon the nial visual confirmation that ehe op ‘ponent i potentially huinan belng and ot a mere objec. As a potential human, the saisfaction of one's dese for recognition a posity. The “Fact of Blackness" denies this posi “The back i aways already Be inthe realm of ehing. Its encoded in tis skins in the colonized word in which he lvs, He is denied acces Into the histreal progression by th gave ofthe white Other who ares any possiblity of teleslogial development by denying the possibilty of black SelEConsclousness, The black is “sealed into thingness” Further more, once relegated tothe position ofan objec, a “hing” in the seem ‘ofan Other and more specifiy the white Othe, the poset of ont: Toga investigation is dened erat only must he Bak man be bl; he mst be Bak in elation othe shite man Some er wil nk ton themselves to remind us Dat his ‘rooston has «conver, [sty th fase. The Hick man ha noone {Gl restance nthe eyes ofthe wie man Here wo seo the potently schizophrenic nature of this unbalanced uation. The black mnt not nly derstand his self a a black sel, but tls sa black selfn relation toa white self. By contrat the white selfs its tom totality. This there is no dialectic but a white salf thats whole and a Pack slf that split and fragmented. ‘The colonized people are denied a oxgiary sel, or rather the status of thelr sei place in permanent question by the process ofenonization "His [the bac’) metaphysics, of lass pretentionly, his customs and the sources on which they are based, were wiped out because they Were on flct with 2 clvlzation that he didnot know and that imposed itself on him." The colonized people are defined from without by the coloize, ‘they are dented aces to the economy f human Desire with the rsul that their deste for recogition i ft permanent unrequited. In Kojive the constiition ofthe self x within one's contra, one makes the choice between Master and Slave. In Fanoa’s understanding of the ‘oon system, itis determined by the colonzer: Saal into that enshig objecthod, I tured besechinly to ater, Tele erating ae, ding over my boy making ie frm encumbrance, ‘owing se once tore than gy td thoght lo, and by ang me ‘tof the word ening me toe But jst I read hooters, 1 Stunble andthe mova tho atte, the glnees ofthe othe aes there inthe ee in which chemical alain is aed by xj. Uw er ‘age I demanded an explanation, But oohing came. 1 bos spar. Now te Ftngmens have Bon ul together gan by anther ell Ini tempt to escape the objet ke state in which he has found himself, the black desires the rogition ofthe Otherto fee him from his tite of sbjec-He encurbrance He knows that th ecoguton of the Other wl fee him rom the world of ting, o ater tat he wl tur tot as a Human, Butta the Hegelian economy into which he hasbeen thrown, the Other whose recognition he desires, the Other whose recognition i of value to him ithe Maser Other, the white Other. And the white Other does not se the Backs Fa value. For the black, SelConssousess x denied, Hei ed by the ‘ga ofthe Other Hoe classed and he marked, He as no ontological re= Stance whe bursts apart. Fo the colonized, dhe beng thats recogpized bythe colonize snot constructed in the Kevin sense, but ven ine vay tata botanist gives name toa plant. kx his atte to construct selFin th ‘Wester metaphysical tditon Fanon discovers thatthe elements ta [se In been provided fr me not by ‘ves sesatons and perceptions prima. rly of tactile, westbulr,hinestetie, and visual character’ but by the ete, the white man, who had woven me ou ofa thousand deals, anecdotes, to. es" ‘The black, the colonize, is doniod history and is placed ina state of ex plicit Geaorfnke- He's thzown into «world of symbols nd meanings that ‘re not his own, Therefore atthe monet of atl confirmation pir to the possbily ofa struggle for recognition there ian epistemoogial assertion, ‘A moment when the Westem epistemology usurps the postion ofthe i igenous system of knowledge, incorporates, an subordinates totic cecurchy. From the very momen that the white colonize ses fot onto hi ‘colonial terior. ho has determined the habitants as less than e, unequal ‘and unworthy of his hua Desir, This “ut” i enforced by the color Of the inhabitants’ skin and the European understanding of what this ‘moans. The blak s redefined in Enrapesn terms a as sich it exchided from human potently: This moment of visual and taxnonical confine tion is tthe basis ofthe Hegelian dialect but might alo shed light ato the recent French obsession with the question of the vel. The vel doesnot allow for the immediate visual confirmation and reenforeement ofthe ‘Western epstemologia stricture that ditates ow one i to respond ty the Other Is the Other lke me and thus worthy of my recngnition, ithe Other les than me, a blak? a woman?, an unknown? The vel denis the visnal confirmation ofthe Osher as radially diferent ov homogenous, st threatening or tame, and thus disturbs the bass ofthis Western med by pointing to this originary moment of clasiiation that Isso cri fo Fanon. As a human, he i a black human, be is herded, he is cio, and th is fed by the color of his skin by the Fact of his skin: "My body was sven back ome spravled out, distorted, refashioned, png into moar ‘gon tht white winter day: The Nogrois a beast, the Negro sad, the Ne 70s vious, the Negro is ugh." Labeled a classified, denied the posubiity of Sol Consciousnes fillet withthe desir for recognition tat has no oe, de back sel al cally stable (that dy completely oete, unable to bin the world wth de Obes, ‘he whiten whe unmeelyprisoned me, Tok my self vay omy presence [refs an made ny an bj, What ela oul Igbo forme but detachent, «tering out, shemarhaging that cures to Hak blo chrogh all my by But Ta ot want ths oon, Hs hema tio. ALT ented ato be aman among ether tea ‘Unable tobe human bythe fat of his shin, the bck in reaction, in de Jensen desperation mst occupy the only space given hin: he must make uma an objet. | "The questioning of the eationship ofthe sl to the objec, self as cbt "the logal extension af Koji’ phenomenological investigation ato the feononyy of being in the Hegekan dialectic (this i especially true in © the work of Lace). But in Fanon there i also an important paiical di- "pension. One common extigue of the prablematie nature of spying | Marsst models othe colonial world, and thus aertique of Fanon’ pies, |sthat Marsism a the ei tothe Hegelian dalctic is in fc a contain ‘ofthe same epistemological structure that has dominated the wold forthe last two honed years. This ertiism exposes the hypocritical ature of sing the teleological fruition of historical development in non-Westom = couatres through the impostion of Westem European poieal and mot plysial values. By his logs, Marxism isnot the solution to colonialism but fhe logal conclusion of. Despite Fanon’ Marist tendencies, throug his phenomenological wok swe sc tht the intl problem occurs prior to any economic of historia determinant. By denying the black (the colonized) a human space in the Hegelian sem, the economic soltion that Marien can provide dae not "aes the fundamental cali prior to the dialectic the moment af ex. thosio, the denying of place, the refusal to recognize the radially Other, Ina Maras utopia the black wil sil e black and wills Ive nner the ‘nposition of an identity given him bythe whit, one that be ha half teralizad. Even inthe "modern" word where slavery i abolished, and se ence “ater much reluctance. hs conceded thatthe Negra is human ‘engin eto and in er analogous to te whito man,” the residue remains tdi inherent inthe fst enconnter®* Even in this modern word, Fanon lament: “Lam given no chance. Tam over-determined from without Tam © the slave nota dhe idea” eat others have of me but of my o#m sppet= ne," In word of given meanings, ho inital moment of coimation is ‘ated bythe epistemologial world into which you ae thrown Thus the fact of blackness is «constant state of breakdown inthe Hel- eggerian sense of tho word where things no longer show wp as making sense or having reason, the groundlesmess af the blacks postion i expli and this causes ansey. This ansety ls compounded by’ a reenforoementores 1 iat gh in ee Rat oh “Mai” al Fao” (Maer sndSi) Ia Engh Hegel ers 2 tonied «Lit on hr tne ae ‘en ny eit ne tani ne ea ee eo ‘taf ue os pp hed rs “HISTORICALLY PARTICULAR USES OF A UNIVERSAL SUBJECT” Donna Hunter 2 Prt Fao, Mlk Si Wie Ma, ws he Lam Mika (New York: Grove Press, 1967), 220-21, oe ele 5 Anovera oft tre ten by Ke and publi Jan ha Mae paar ot sc tepwatin cig enn of Spe Telcars ened tmordy Rayna Quan were bled by Cama naan iat ant Alan oe, Inaction tothe Reng of Heel es Nel hs 9 onal Un om ton oe enn of eel 6: Paola St Whe Mi 1. Ka rutin oh ogo Heel 6-1 Fume te MS 2: Kop oti othe ening of ep 1 10. Fat ct Sm, en 2 1, Rann sk ki, Whe Ms 318. 12 oj oti leae d eg, 0. 1 rats Fino oN Map Be ie Elon Su votes eon Pe Eo dS 8 "Pr Hen, We as 28, sect othe Reng eg 1 Pn lak Sin Whar ad 1 ann, ak te Mek. 1% Pann Fm Ns Magn Mae 08, tao, 19. Fanon, Black Skin, White Masks, 111. * 22, Fa, Nat a Bl, 1-18 my eaten 2. Fa, oa Ate ns Bey wy waa 22, Pam, ict Si, Whe Ma i 2. Fam, ck Si he Me 2 Po, a Ne Maple ny aan 25. Fanon, Black Skin, Whe Mosk, 222 thin a volune devoted to new dress in historogrphy, this chapter examines an old direction in the historiography of the French Revolution, fut fro a vantage point afforded by new porspecives. It does so not tofu "ther distance new from ol or to champion one over the other, but rather to stuate beliefs that now seem passé o eactionary inthe contet ofthe 190 and 1900s, hen they wer a state and pogressive if not radical ‘esponse to paticulr intellect ad pola neds, The old direction in (question isthe one that universlized the achievement of tho French Rev- Futon, making ithe heritage ofall rod ovng individuals egurdless + of els race, or gender, CR, James (1901-1959) and Anna Julia Cooper (1858-1964), Anglophone descendants of Afcans brought across the ‘Ailnticas slaves, recogiaed an celebrated ther own liberation in the e~ | logy that had fed the slaves at least biey daring the French Revol- | fon James, the internationally fons poles for world revolution, and © Gaoper, the les well-known Arercan educator, bh wrote about what the French Revoltio ad the thinking 8st prepared tad done fr the cause ‘of ablton: James, in Black Jacobi Tneeint LOwvcrture and the San Domingo Recoation (1938) and Cooper, inn 1985 dissertation forthe Sorbonne on Freach attudes toward siverydurig the French Revolu- toa, stay that deals extensively with the slave eo inSaint-Domingue Tn recent years, a uber of works have appeared that addres the probes and problematic of rniverslty in acutrlly diver world, in