wretched-of-the-earth-frantz-fanon

160 THE WRETCHED OF THE EARTHON NATIONAL CULTURE161colonized intellectual, at the very moment when he undertakesa work of art, fails to realize he is using techniques and a'''''''F,uaF,'-' borrowed from the occupier. He is content to cloakthese instruments in a style that is meant to be national but whichis strangely reminiscent of exoticism. The colonized intellectualwho returns to his people through works of art behaveslike a foreigner. Sometimes he will not hesitate to use the localdialects to demonstrate his desire to be as close tothe ideas he expresses,related to thelCllCl.:lUdl is preocaninventory of particularisms.people, he clings merely to a visveneer.1 hIS veneer, however, is merely a reflection of asubterranean life in perpetual renewal. This reification,which seems all too obvious and characteristic of the people, isin fact but inert, already invalidated outcome of the many,and not always coherent, adaptations of a more fundamentalsubstance beset with radical changes. Instead of seeking out thissubstance, the intellectual lets himself be mesmerized by thesemummified fragments which, now consolidated, signify, on thecontrary, negation, obsolescence, and fabrication. Culture neverhas the translucency of custom. Culture eminently anyform of simplification. In its essence it is the opposite ofcustom, which is always a deterioration of culture. Seeking tostick to tradition or reviving neglected traditions is notgoing against history, but against one's people. When a peoplestruggle against a mercilessmeaning. What was a technique"'''''H.d''\.,Cmay, in this phase, be radically doomed.an underdeveloped country undergoing armed struggleare fundamentally unstable and crisscrossed by centrifugal forces.This is why the intellectual often risks being out of step. Thepeoples who have waged the struggle are increasingly imperme-too closely,a vulgar op­seeking tonothing bettertimes.In the field of visual arts, for example, the colonized creatorwho at all costs wants to create a work of art of national significanceconfines himself to stereotyping details. These artists,despite having been immersed in modern techniques and influencedby the major contemporary trends in painting andarchitecture, turn their backs on foreign culture, challenge it,and, setting out in search of the true national culture, they givepreference to what they think to be the abiding features of nationalart. But these creators forget that modes of thought, diet,modern techniques of communication, language, andhave dialectically reorganized the mind of the people andthe abiding features that as safeguardsnial period are in the process of undergoing enormoustransformations.This creator,paradoxically enough, to the past, and so looks at what isvant to the What he aims for in his inner intentionalityis the detritus ofsocial thought, external appearances, relics, andknowledge in time. The colonized intellectual, however,for cultural authenticity, must recognize that nationalis first and foremost the national reality. He must press onuntil he reaches that place of bubbling trepidation from whichknowledge willBefore independence the colonized painter was insensitive tothe national landscape. He favored therefore the nonrepresentationalor, more often, specialized in still life. After independencehis desire to reunite with the people confines him to apoint by point representation of national reality which is flat,untroubled, motionless, reminiscent of death ratherThe educated circles ecstatic over such careful