Englisch

Untersuchung zum gesellschaftlichen Einfluss der „River’s of Blood“-Rede von Enoch Powell

November 19, 2013 Comments Off Englisch Geschichte

Enoch Powell war ein brillanter Redner, ein Autodidakt, aber auch ein Verfechter des alten Empires. In einer Rede, die enorme Sprengkraft hatte und diese schlussendlich auch entfaltete, verweist er auf eine antike römische Rede von Vergil. In dieser Arbeit habe ich die gesellschaftlichen Auswirkungen untersucht, die durch diese Rede ausgelöst wurden.Im heutigen Kontext von immer größeren Flüchtlingsströmen eine Beurteilung, die leider immer noch sehr aktuell ist.

1. Einleitung und Vorgehensweise

Enoch Powell hielt am 20.April 1968 in Birmingham eine Rede, die von Seiten der Medien schnell den Namen Rivers of Blood bekam. In dieser Rede befürchtete Powell in Anlehnung an Vergil, dass der Fluss Tiber wieder mit Strömen voller Blut bedeckt sein könnte, wenn die Einwanderung vor allem farbiger Menschen weitergehe.

Durch diese und andere Äußerungen hat Powell eine Resonanz hervorgerufen, wie sie nach dem Ende des Zweiten Weltkrieges seines Gleichen sucht. Medien, Gesellschaft und Politiker sahen Powells Rede entweder als Aufruf zum Rassismus und Rassenhass oder als Ausdruck echter und tatsächlicher Gegebenheiten. Was waren also die Konsequenzen von Powells Rede? Welche Auswirkungen haben sich in der Politik und in der Gesellschaft entwickelt? Deshalb soll mit dieser Arbeit weder erläutert werden, ob Enoch Powell die Wahlen von 1970 für Heath gewonnen hat, noch ob er ein Rassist oder Faschist war, da solche Analysen unmöglich verlässliche Aussagen hervorbringen und keinen wichtigen Erkenntnisgewinn erzielen würde. Es ist vielmehr von Bedeutung, ob es Powell gelungen ist, Einfluss auf Politik und/oder Gesellschaft auszuüben. Dazu werden in dieser Arbeit die Wahlprogramme der beiden großen Parteien, Labour und Konservative, aus den Wahljahren 1966 und 1970 verglichen. Des Weiteren werden die Gesetze gegen Einwanderung von 1968 und 1971 sowie die Political and Economical Planning (PEP) Reporte gegenüber gestellt. Während erster Teil sich auf die Folgen im politischen Bereich konzentriert, wird der zweite Abschnitt die Gesellschaft im Auge haben. Dabei werden unterschiedliche Umfragen zur Parteiwahrnehmung herangezogen und Reaktionen aus der weißen wie farbigen Bevölkerungsschicht dargestellt. Zeitungsartikel der Times sollen dabei sinnbildlich die Rolle der Medien repräsentieren und die einzelnen Unterpunkte unterfüttern.

2. Zeitliche Einordnung und Besonderheiten der britischen Situation nach 1945

Nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg musste Großbritannien erkennen, dass es seinen Status als Weltmacht und koloniale Eroberernation endgültig verloren hatte. Jedoch stießen patriotische Haltungen mit dieser Realität zusammen und sorgten in der Gesellschaft für Spannungen. So kollidierten der während des Zweiten Weltkrieges propagierte Patriotismus mit der Angst, dass die geschlossene insulare britische Gesellschaft durch Einwanderung unterlaufen werden könnte. Mit den afro-amerikanischen GIs, die ab 1942 in den englischen Städten stationiert waren, wurden erste Diskussionen geführt, wie man mit den verschiedenen Herkünften (races) umgehen sollte.

Dieses Gefühl der Veränderung und Fremdartigkeit dehnte sich auch auf den Verlust Indiens aus, da der Verzicht des britischen Empire auf Indien zeitgleich seine Auflösung einleitete. Indien ist in jeder Betrachtung von Dekolonialisierung ein Schlüsselfall, da es nicht nur das größte, sondern auch das erste Land nach 1945 war, welches unabhängig wurde. Für das Vereinigte Königreich bedeutete dies darüber hinaus, dass es sich in Abhängigkeit von den Vereinigten Staaten befand. Dies wird wiederum deutlich, wenn man sich die Suezkrise Mitte der 50er Jahre anschaut. Obwohl eine militärisch gelungene Aktion den Suezkanal wieder in englisch-französische Hand führte, erzwang die amerikanische Administration die Übergabe an Ägypten, um Spannungen mit der Sowjetunion zu vermeiden.

Mit diesen Voraussetzungen stellt sich die Frage, wie sich dies auf die Konzeptionen der Staatenzugehörigkeit und Definition des Englischen oder Britischen ausgewirkt hat. In der ersten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts war citizenship als Konzept unter der intellektuellen Elite weit verbreitet und unterstützte die Rolle des Patriotismus als Erhalter des höheren Ideals von citizenship. Die zeitgenössische Elite nahm dabei aber eine homogene Nationalkultur als Basis für eine erfolgreiche Staatsangehörigkeit an, sowohl lokal als auch international.

Die patriotische Identifikation mit der englischen nationalen Identität (nationhood) verdient eine nähere Analyse. Das Konzept der englischen race war nicht zwangsläufig rassistisch und der Nährboden für Intoleranz. In der Nachkriegszeit und im Laufe des Wirtschaftsaufschwungs ging der Diskurs zu citizenship in gemeinsame Werte über, die weniger auf „rassische“ Aspekte blickten. So sagte T.H. Marshall 1950, dass citizenship nur das gleiche Recht auf diverse Rechte repräsentiere, welches durch die Rechtsprechung abgesichert sei .

Trotz der anfänglichen Unwichtigkeit der Herkunft oder race stellte sich im Laufe der 1950er Jahre eine Skepsis ein, ob Einwanderung bestimmter ethnischer Gruppen nicht zu Problemen führen könnte. Im Vergleich zu den europäischen Nachbarn scheint dies durchaus gerechtfertigt, da Britannien noch mehr Einwanderer über die Verflechtungen des British Commonwealth erreichten . Der British Nationality Act von 1948 legte fest, dass jeder, der nicht die britische Staatsbürgerschaft hatte oder ein Commonwealth-Bürger war, bei der Einreise kontrolliert wurde. Dieser Beschluss erweiterte somit die Staatsangehörigkeit um das Vereinigte Königreich und deren Kolonien, verringerte aber die Bedeutung allgemeiner und übergreifender Werte und Rechte . Auch wenn um 1950 die Zahl der nicht-weißen Einwanderer noch gering war, so schien aber der Status als britischer Bürger unkontrollierbar zu sein und erzeugte Fragen über race relations in Britannien .

Jene Einwanderer arbeiteten hauptsächlich in Branchen, die unattraktiv, ungesund und schlecht bezahlt waren und ungern von Einheimischen aufgesucht wurden . Andererseits herrschte oft der Glaube bei den Arbeitsmigranten vor, dass es sich nur um eine temporäre Auswanderung handeln würde. Die Rückkehr war eingeplant und der Assimilationswille sowie die Bereitschaft dazu waren gering. Die Empfängerstaaten ihrerseits erwarteten „Gäste“ und keine Einwanderer und unternahmen nicht viel, um die Menschen in irgendeiner Form zu integrieren. Mit der Zeit stellte sich eine Reihe von unbeabsichtigten und unerwarteten Vorzügen für die Einwanderer ein, während sie die europäischen Wohlfahrtsstaaten mit aufbauten. So wurde es ihnen ermöglicht, ihre Familien nachzuholen und einen ständigen Wohnsitz zu erhalten . Nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg übernahmen Einwanderer also eine wichtige Rolle in den Ökonomien Westeuropas. Sie füllten die Lücke im Niedriglohnsektor, die aufgrund des Wirtschaftswachstums und der Nachfrage nach hoch qualifizierten Arbeitern entstand .

Allerdings waren die Einwanderer – nicht nur in Großbritannien – keine homogene Gruppe und wurden dementsprechend auch unterschiedlich wahrgenommen. Neuankömmlinge aus Indien und der Karibik kamen in großen Zahlen und wurden auch aufgrund ihrer Hautfarbe zur Hauptaufmerksamkeit der Öffentlichkeit. Aber auch Iren und Gruppen anderer Europäer wanderten in ebenfalls großen Zahlen ein. In den ersten Jahren nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg übertrafen die Osteuropäer beispielsweise sogar die Zahlen der Einwanderer aus der Karibik. Diese Zahlen wurden vom britischen Staat kontrolliert und gesteuert, wobei dies nicht auf die Iren, karibischen Einwanderer und Asiaten aus dem indischen Subkontinent zutrifft. Farbige und asiatische Einwanderer wurden eine lange Zeit derart betrachtet, dass deren Einwanderung keine großen Auswirkungen auf die britische Gesellschaft nehmen würde. Gleichzeitig wurden europäische Einwanderer als Arbeitskräfte aber bevorzugt, was andeutet, dass die Einwanderung Dunkelhäutiger und von Asiaten weniger erstrebens- und unterstützenswert war. Parallel stieg die Einwanderung aus der Karibik und dem indischen Subkontinent an, so dass schwarze und asiatische Gemeinschaften sichtbarer wurden und das empfundene Dilemma entstand, wie man die Einwanderung aus diesen Regionen reglementieren könnte. Bis 1962 hatten Einwanderer aus der Karibik und Asien das Recht, in Britannien ohne Kontrollen einzuwandern .

Diesem Druck sah sich die konservative MacMillan-Regierung (1957-63) ausgeliefert und schränkte die Einreisebestimmungen für Commonwealth-Bürger ein. Im Commonwealth Immigrants Act von 1962 erlaubte die Regierung die Einreise nur noch für Ausländer, die einen der zahlenmäßig limitierten Voucher erhalten hatten. Im Laufe der Verabschiedung in 1962 jedoch wurde die Einreisewelle übertroffen, da befürchtet wurde, aufgrund der neuen Regelung später nicht mehr einwandern zu können. Das Voucher-System für Arbeitserlaubnisse konnte jedoch missbraucht werden, so dass bereits eingewanderte Personen die Voucher für andere einreisewillige Ausländer nutzten, um die Einreise nach Großbritannien zu ermöglichen .

Allerdings begünstigten politische Institutionen auch Einwanderung. Ein Beispiel sind rekrutierte Frauen, die für den National Health Service arbeiteten und zumeist nicht aus Großbritannien stammten.

Labour wollte ihrerseits von 1964-70 die ineffektiven Einreisekontrollen verbessern und die Diskriminierung gegen bereits ansässige Einwanderer eindämmen – eine Diskriminierung, die auf Vorurteile gegen die nationalen und ethnischen Herkünfte der Einwanderer basierte. Dennoch stand diesem eine konservative Gruppe – der Monday Club – entgegen, die bis in die 70er Jahre und teilweise darüber hinaus Einfluss auf Politik und Gesellschaft ausübte. Einer seiner Vorläufer war Lord Salisbury, der Einwanderung als ein großes Problem bezeichnete, welches im Laufe der Zeit sein „hässliches Gesicht“ zeigen werde. Damit zeigte sich die Ansiedlung bedeutender Gemeinschaften von nicht-weißen Einwanderern, die für diese Gruppe nicht die gleichen kulturellen Werte wie die Gemeinschaft teilten, als eine langzeitige Bedrohung für die Definition für englishness .

Rahmenbedingungen, die man auch nicht ausblenden darf, sind Vorkommnisse in Verbindung mit dem Thema Einwanderung in 1967 und 1968. Dazu gehören Rassenunruhen in den USA vor und nach der Ermordung Martin Luther Kings im April 1968, Debatten über das Race Relation Bill in Westminster, die Kontroverse über Sikh Busfahrer in Enoch Powells Gemeinde Wolverhampton und Powells politischer Machtkampf gegen Ted Heath.

3. Kennzeichen und Grenzen der Wirkmächtigkeit

Was heute unter Vielfalt (diversity) verstanden wird, war in den Augen von Enoch Powell eine Gefahr für Demokratie und musste durch eine homogene britische Gesellschaft verhindert werden . Zentral in Powells Gedanken waren patriotische Traditionen, die nationhood in Großbritannien untermauerten. Powell stellte sich insofern an die Seite der öffentlichen Meinung, weil er Staatsangehörigkeit durch Nationalität und Patriotismus definierte. Die Vermittlung von Staatsangehörigkeit von sub-nationalen Identitäten würde die allgemeine Natur von Staatsangehörigkeit innerhalb von Gesellschaften untergraben und eine Kommunalisierung wie in Indien erzeugen, so Powell. Deshalb wollte er sich auch stärker vom Commonwealth loslösen, als es einige Zeitgenossen formulierten. Aus romantischem und nicht realistischem Denken habe man angenommen, man könne keine Einwanderungskontrollen für Commonwealth-Bürger einführen und damit ein Problem erzeugt, welches Großbritannien nun gefährde . Um dagegen vorzugehen, sprach sich Powell für einen Einwanderungsstopp und für aktive Zurückwanderungsmaßnahmen (repatriation) aus .

Im Januar 2003 wurde Powells persönliches Archiv geöffnet. Darin lassen sich neue Erkenntnisse zu Powells Gedanken über Einwanderung und vor allem zu den Gründen seiner Rede von 1968 ziehen. Historiker meinten, Powells primäre Sorge war eine post-imperiales Verlangen, alle Verbindungen mit dem Neuen Commonwealth aufzubrechen. Jedoch zeigen Briefe aus seiner Zeit nach Indien 1943-46, dass seine ablehnende Haltungen schon davor erkennbar war. Diese Ablehnung rührte von einer anscheinend liberalen Hingabe zu nationaler Homogenität als eine Voraussetzung für Demokratie. Sein Beispiel deutet an, dass die britische Haltung gegenüber Masseneinwanderung mehr mit der Erfahrung des Empires zu tun hat, als mit Nachkriegsveränderungen in nationaler Identität.

3.1. Auswirkung auf die Politik

3.1.1. Wahlprogramme von Labour und den Konservativen in den Jahren 1966 und 1970

Auch wenn es minimale Unterschiede sein mögen, so sind in den Wahljahren 1966 und 1970 nicht nur Unterschiede zwischen den Parteien erkennbar, sondern auch innerhalb der Parteiprogramme.

Zuerst sollen beide Parteien losgelöst voneinander betrachtet und die Entwicklung der Programme von Labour und den Konservativen separat analysiert werden. In ihrem Manifest von 1966 ist bemerkenswert, dass Labour ausländische Güter als Gefahr erklärt und vor sinkenden Einkommen warnt. Dass ihr vordergründigstes Thema Wirtschaft und die Bekämpfung der Arbeitslosigkeit sind, steht dabei außer Frage. Dennoch unterstützt und fördert sie damit die Angst vor dem Fremden, weil sie den Anschein erzeugt, dass rein britische Erzeugnisse keine Gefahr für Löhne darstellen. Gleichzeitig respektiert Labour aber die unterschiedlichen Kulturen und Traditionen der Schotten und Waliser. Der Einwanderung aus Übersee werden dabei aber nur wenige Zeilen gewidmet. Für Einwanderung fordert sie die Fortführung von realistischen Kontrollen, die in Kombination mit einem Programm für racial equality die racial harmony verbessern sollen. Darüber hinaus wurde eine Kommission einberufen, die die gesetzliche Lage von Ausländern und Commonwealth-Bürgern nach der Möglichkeit der Abschiebung prüfen soll.

Vier Jahre später haben sich einige Punkte verändert. Zuerst fällt auf, dass sich das Thema race nun auch am Anfang eingefunden hat. Darin beschreibt Labour, dass die Gleichheit aller Bürger bewahrt werden müsse und keine Diskriminierung aufgrund von Geschlecht, Religion, race oder Hautfarbe geduldet werden könne. Dabei werden aber auch Einwanderer-Ghettos angesprochen, deren Entfaltung verhindert werden soll. Labour bemerkt, dass sich die Einwanderer vor allem in den alten und herabgekommenen Großstadtkernen niederlassen. Im Vergleich zum vorherigen Programm nehmen die race relations weniger Platz ein. Einwanderung soll weiterhin stark kontrolliert werden und niedriger als in den Jahren zuvor sein. Dadurch soll es möglich sein, den Fokus auf bessere race relations zu lenken. Dazu soll es ein spezielles urban programme geben, welches Stadtteile mit hohen Migrantenanteilen unterstützen soll. Der Race Relations Act habe den Ansporn zu Rassenhass in den Bereichen Wohnungssuche, Arbeitsplatz und Kreditaufnahmen entzogen.

Bei Labour ist zu erkennen, dass das Thema Einwanderung mehr Aufmerksamkeit bekommt und vor allem im sozialen und ökonomischen Bereich angegangen werden soll. Einwanderung soll weiterhin kontrolliert werden, wobei ausgelassen wird, ob damit auch weiße oder nur nicht-weiße Einwanderer gemeint sind. Die Möglichkeit nach der Abschiebung spielt im Wahlprogramm von 1970 keine Rolle mehr. Ein Einfluss, der vor der Furcht vor Kommunalisierung herrührt und sich für eine breite Rückführung der Einwanderer in die Heimatländer ausspricht, ist bei Labour also nicht ersichtlich.

Wenn man sich nun die Wahlprogramme der Konservativen in den Jahren 1966 und 1970 anschaut, ist eine ähnliche Entwicklung auszumachen. Die Konservativen nehmen 1966 die Einwanderungsfrage mit auf in ihr Programm der Sozialpolitik. Dabei soll es eine gerechte Behandlung von Einwanderern geben, die mit einer strikteren Einreiseregulierung gepaart wird. Allerdings wird im Laufe des Programms Einwanderung als Problem beschrieben, obwohl alle in Britannien lebenden Einwanderer mit Respekt als gleichwertige Bürger angesehen werden sollen. Ein Einreisesystem soll eingeführt werden, dass bei der Einreise die Dauer des Aufenthalts festlegen soll, um später eine dauerhafte oder zeitlich begrenzte Aufenthaltsgenehmigung zu erhalten. Bei der Einreise sollen Einwanderer die Namen möglicher Einwanderer aus der Familie nennen, damit ihre Anzahl bekannt ist. Dabei soll die Anzahl der Familienangehörigen und deren mögliche Einwanderung Ausschlag für die Erlaubnis des Nachzuges sein. Einwanderer, die bereits in Britannien sind, sollen Hilfen erhalten, falls sie wieder ins Ursprungsland zu ihrer Familie oder mit der Familie wieder ins Heimatland zurückkehren wollen. Die Konservativen räumen Einwanderung weit aus mehr Wichtigkeit ein als Labour, obwohl das Manifest der Konservativen nur halb so lang ist. Inhaltlich ist es bereits ziemlich nah an den Forderungen von Powell.

Bevor auf das Wahlprogramm der Konservativen von 1970 eingegangen wird, soll ein kurzer Einschub gewährt werden, inwiefern sich Enoch Powells Rede aus dem Parteiprogramm bewegt hat, um etwaige Einflüsse seitens Powell aufzudecken. Denn ob er sich mit seiner Rede Mühe gab, innerhalb der Parteirichtlinien zu bleiben, wird kontrovers diskutiert. Der Fakt, dass die Tories in der Opposition waren, bedeutet zuallererst, dass die Maßnahmen im Bezug zur Einwanderung in keinem politischen Entscheidungsprozess eingeflossen sind, um in einem Kompromiss gegebenenfalls verändert zu werden. Bereits im Februar 1965 forderte Sir Alec Douglas-Home, Parteivorsitzender der Konservativen und ehemaliger Premierminister, in der Opposition, dass man für eine Zurückführung illegaler und legaler Einwanderer in ihre Heimatländer aktiv werben und die Anzahl der Einwanderer reduzieren müsse. Der Daily Express machte die Ähnlichkeit zwischen Heath und Powell deutlich, bildete aber einen Unterschied in der Rhetorik heraus. Aber nicht nur in der Rhetorik unterschieden sich Powell und die Parteipolitik der Tories: während Powell in seiner Rede von einer maximal großen Rückwanderung spricht, verfolgt die Konservative Partei unter Heath eine Unterstützung für Einwanderer, die auswandern wollen; ein Versprechen, welches 1971 eingelöst wird . Dadurch scheint die Möglichkeit der Einflussnahme sich nur auf den Feldern der Rhetorik und der maximal großen repatriation zu bewegen.

Im Vergleich zu Labour rücken auch die Konservativen Einwanderung vier Jahre später an den Anfang ihres Programms. Wie Labour wollen die Konservativen Rassenunruhen bekämpfen sowie Masseneinwanderung regulieren und eindämmen. Im Vergleich zum Manifest zuvor wird Einwanderung aber nicht mehr in der Überschrift als ein Problem tituliert. Im Abschnitt race relations and immigration werden vielmehr sozio-ökonomische Voraussetzungen als Schlüsselpunkte für die Verringerung der Rassenunruhen genannt. Nichtsdestotrotz werden auch bei den Konservativen die Probleme der Ghettoisierung, die Verarmung und der Zerfall der Innenstädte mit Einwanderung verbunden. Für die Einwanderung aus Übersee schlagen die Konservativen deshalb ein neues Einreisesystem vor. Es sei richtig für bereits eingewanderte Commonwealth-Bürger, die Familie auch nach Großbritannien zu holen. Aber in Zukunft werden Arbeitserlaubnisse nicht auch gleichzeitig permanente Niederlassungserlaubnisse für den Einwanderer und seine Familie bedeuten. Solche Genehmigungen sollen nur für spezielle Berufe in speziellen Regionen für eine begrenzte Zeit – normalerweise zwölf Monate – ausgestellt werden. Zusätzlich soll es Hilfe und Unterstützung für Einwanderer geben, die zurück in ihre Heimat wollen, aber niemand soll gegen seinen Willen gezwungen werden, Britannien zu verlassen.

Abschließend lässt sich feststellen, dass Powell keinen inhaltlichen Einfluss auf die Wahlprogramme von Labour und den Konservativen ausübte. Labour bleibt seiner Linie treu und erwähnt mit keinem Wort repatriation. Dieses Schlagwort ist bei den Konservativen bereits vor Powells Rede zu erkennen und wird 1970 fortgeführt. Was aber bei beiden Programmen auffällt, ist, dass 1970 Einwanderung eine größere Rolle spielt und Probleme rund um Einwanderung nun auch mit sozio-ökonomischen Aspekten verbunden werden und in diese Richtung bekämpft werden sollen . Ob dies ein alleiniger Verdienst der Rede von Enoch Powell ist, ist allerdings fragwürdig.

3.1.2. Einwanderungsgesetze von 1968 und 1971 sowie Political and Economical Planning Reports

Die Einwanderungsgesetze aus den Jahren 1968 und 1971 stehen in einer langen Reihe von Verordnungen und Debatten, die die strengere Reglementierung und Kontrolle von vorrangig nicht-weißen Einwanderern beinhalten. Mit dem British Nationality Act von 1948 und dem Europäischen Niederlassungsabkommen 1955, sowie den Immigration Acts von 1962, 1968 und 1971 wurde die Macht des Staates bezüglich Ausweisungsmöglichkeiten erweitert. Mit der einzigen Ausnahmen des Europäischen Niederlassungsabkommens, welches etwaigen Abzuschiebenden Rechte zur Gerichtsvertretung zusprach, dehnten die restlichen Beschlüsse die Möglichkeiten aus, Einwanderer auszuweisen. Insbesondere traf dies auf Bürger des Commonwealth – vor allem aus der Karibik – zu, die somit auf die Stufe eines Ausländers herab gestuft wurden. Der wichtigste Gradmesser, wer der Ausweisung ausgeliefert war und wer nicht, war das Merkmal der race. Dies wird im Beschluss von 1971 sichtbar, in dem das Aufenthaltsrecht für vorwiegend Weiße, sogenannte patrials gestattet, für vorwiegend Nicht-Weiße, sogenannte non-patrials untersagt wird.

Während Powells Einfluss auf die Wahlprogramme von Labour und Tories also eher gering war und der Commonwealth Immigrants Act von 1968 am 01.März vor Powells Rede beschlossen wurde, sind Parallelen in den Inhalten Powells und dem folgenden Immigration Act von 1971 erkennbar. So wurden schwarze Commonwealth-Bürger als genauso fremd angesehen, wie die restlichen Ausländer. Die britische Identität wurde enger um die britische Heimatinsel(n) gezogen und Verantwortlichkeiten rund um das Empire wurden unbeachtet gelassen. Der Immigration Act von 1971 ging insofern so weit wie möglich, als dass er die vorherigen Rechte der Commonwealth-Bürger deutlich einschränkte, z.B. beinhaltete der Beschluss, dass Commonwealth Bürger ab 1973 ausgewiesen werden konnten .

Allerdings steht der Immigration Act von 1971 in einer Linie mit vorhergehenden und nachfolgenden Beschlüssen, der damit in einer Reihe restriktiver Gesetzgebungen steht. Einen besonderen Einfluss Powells zu proklamieren, bleibt also problematisch .

Die Political and Economical Planning (PEP)-Reporte nehmen in aktuellen Forschungsdiskussionen eine wichtige Rolle ein, weil sie in vielen Fällen Orientierungspunkte für damalig zukünftige Entscheidungen eingenommen haben. Der PEP-Report aus dem April von 1967 stellte fest, dass es in vielen Bereichen variierende Formen von Diskriminierung gab. In den untersuchten Bereichen des Arbeitsplatzes, bei der Wohnungssuche und bei Dienstleistungen habe es allerdings große Unterschiede innerhalb der Einwanderergruppe gegeben, so dass davon ausgegangen werden kann, dass der Hauptgrund für Diskriminierung die Hautfarbe war. Ungarn und Zyprioten mussten dementsprechend wesentlich weniger unter Diskriminierung leiden als Asiaten bzw. Inder und vor allem dunkelhäutige Einwanderer aus der Karibik. Die These wurde aufgestellt, dass je unterschiedlicher eine Person in der äußeren Erscheinung war, desto höher war die Wahrscheinlichkeit und Intensität der Diskriminierung. Asiaten bzw. Inder waren im Gegensatz zu farbigen West Indies in einigen Berufsfeldern durchaus etabliert und angesehen, weshalb angenommen wurde, dass aufgrund der besseren Aufnahme der indischen bzw. asiatischen Einwanderer die zweite Generation dieser Einwanderergruppe mit weniger Diskriminierung konfrontiert werden wird. Die vorwiegend angetroffene Form der Diskriminierung bezog sich auf „rassische“ Merkmale, die sich meistens auf Minderheiten konzentrierte, die aufgrund ihrer Hautfarbe oder Herkunftsland anders waren. Die Gründe für Diskriminierung reichten von nicht begründeter kompletter Ablehnung, gefühltem öffentlichen Druck bis hin zu der Behauptung, dass jene Einwanderer zu schlecht ausgebildet bzw. schlechte Mieter seien. Der Bericht weist daraufhin, dass diese Gründe auch Begründungen zum eigenen Schutz oder Lügen seien könnten, dennoch ergeben sich dadurch negative Auswirkungen. Derartige Stereotypisierungen verursachten Benachteiligungen aller nicht-weißen Bürger, weil es Einwanderer in separate Gruppen ausgrenzt und Parallelgesellschaften geschaffen werden. Darüber hinaus werden gut qualifizierte farbige Einwanderer aufgrund ihrer Hautfarbe für schlechter ausgebildet gehalten. Auf der anderen Seite existieren aber auch einige Berichte mit positiven Erfahrungen seitens weißer Arbeitgeber. In dem Bericht wird hervorgehoben, dass es in diesen Fällen möglich war, Vorurteile mit guten eigenen Erlebnissen zu beseitigen.

Die PEP-Berichte aus den Jahren 1972-75 setzen dennoch ein ähnlich gezeichnetes Bild fort. Weiterhin gibt es schlechte Berufe für nicht-weiße Arbeiter. Die Diskriminierung in ungelernten Berufen wurde bei 46% bemessen, wobei gelernte Berufe nur noch eine Diskriminierung von 20% ausmachten. Hauptgrund der Diskriminierung ist immer noch die Hautfarbe.

Der Einfluss Powells auf zukünftige Politik wird in der Forschung so beschrieben, dass Powell seinen Parteivorsitzenden mit seiner Rede dazu drängte, in der darauffolgenden Zeit eine striktere Einwanderungspolitik anzustreben und letztendlich auch durchzusetzen . Zu sehen ist dies in der detaillierteren Aufstellung, die es bei den Wahlen 1966 noch nicht gibt. Dass es zumindest nicht allein Powells Einfluss zu verdanken ist, dass die parteipolitische Linie genauer formuliert wurde, ist an den zahlreichen ideologisch vergleichbaren Parteikollegen Powells bei den Tories erkennbar. Anhand des Einwanderungsgesetzes von 1971 kann man diesen Punkt stützen, da dort die Einreisebestimmungen der nicht-weißen Einwanderer beschränkt wurden. Dadurch wurde eine homogenere britische Gesellschaft gekräftigt, während einer Kommunalisierung in den Augen Powells entgegengearbeitet wurde. Dennoch wurden Inhalte der Rede, wie z.B. eine Obergrenze für die Einreise von Familienangehörigen, abgelehnt.

Des Weiteren scheinen PEP-Reporte Einfluss ausgeübt haben, da in beiden Wahlprogrammen sozio-ökonomische Faktoren eine entscheidend wichtigere Rolle in den Wahlprogrammen von 1970 spielen. Jedoch wird auf Diskriminierung im alltäglichen Leben mit Diskriminierung im institutionellen Rahmen bei den Einwanderungsgesetzen geantwortet.

3.2. Auswirkung auf die Gesellschaft

3.2.1. Wahrnehmung der Parteien und Enoch Powells zum Thema Einwanderung

Eine Umfrage wenige Tage nach der Rede Powells fand heraus, dass 96% der Menschen von der Rede gehört oder gelesen hatten . Wie sich dieser Wert auf die Wahrnehmung der Parteien und deren Programme bezüglich Einwanderung ausgewirkt hat, soll im folgenden Kapitel analysiert werden. Dazu werden zwei Umfragen von Donley T. Studlar herangezogen, der zum einen vergleichende Analyse zu den wahrgenommenen Unterschieden im Bereich Einwanderung in den Wahljahren 1964, 1966 und 1970 getätigt hat . Die Wahrnehmung von Parteiunterschieden ist deshalb von Bedeutung, weil die Wählerschaft dadurch Vorstellungen der Parteien mit der eigenen vergleichen kann, um sich damit entweder zu identifizieren oder diese abzulehnen. Wenn sich aber keine Unterschiede auftun, dann kann sich kein Wahlverhalten auf Inhalte zurückführen lassen. Andererseits hat er eine langfristige Studie veröffentlicht, in der er untersuchte, inwiefern die öffentlich Meinung, die Einwandererfrage und Enoch Powell zueinander standen und sich gegenseitig tangierten.

Wie Studlar in seiner ersten Umfrage herausgefand, war die Wählerschaft gegenüber dem Thema Einwanderung in den Jahren 1964, 1966 und 1970 gleichbleibend verteilt eingestellt. Auch wenn sich die politischen Rahmenbedingungen änderten, veränderte sich die Einstellung gegenüber Einwanderung nicht. Einwanderung war wegen der Debatte um Enoch Powell als Thema am gegenwärtigsten im Wahlkampf von 1970. Die Politik der Siegerpartei 1970, der Konservativen, verfolgte aber eine Politik, die eher weniger der Befragten befürworteten. Wie in ihrem Wahlprogramm nachzulesen, unterstützte sie eine Einwanderung der engsten Familienangehörigen der bereits Eingewanderten und einiger Facharbeiter. Das Wahlprogramm von Labour und der Konservativen haben sich in diesem Punkt nicht unterschieden. Jedoch war die Wählerschaft stark gegen Einwanderung eingestellt. Da gleichzeitig über 75% der Öffentlichkeit eine Vorstellung von Powells Vorschlägen hatten, folgert Studlar, dass die Einstellung der Wählerschaft enger mit der Powells verbunden war als mit den Parteien. Da die Parteiunterschiede und deren Inhalte sehr gering waren, ist deshalb möglich, dass viele Wähler die Gedanken Powells mit den Inhalten der Konservativen vermischt und somit konservativ gewählt haben. Studlar geht auch auf eine Studie von Butler und Stokes ein, die für die Wahlen von 1964 und 1966 eine geringere Relevanz für das Thema Einwanderung ausgemacht haben. So gesehen waren die wahrgenommenen Parteiunterschiede in diesem Bereich auch gering. Deshalb barg das Thema Einwanderung in sich große Möglichkeiten, um das offensichtliche Gleichgewicht in der Einwandererfrage durch Profilierungsarbeit zu verändern. 1970 machten 57% der Befragten in der Butler und Stokes Studie die Konservativen als restriktivere Partei aus; der Unterschied zu Labour stieg von 14% aus 1966 auf beinahe 50% in 1970; im Gegenzug fiel die Anzahl der Menschen, die keinen Unterschied sahen, um 35%. Es gibt im Zusammenhang damit aber keine Verknüpfung zwischen der eigenen Haltung gegenüber Einwanderung und der Wahrnehmung der Parteiinhalte. Das bedeutet, dass eine Person, die gegen Einwanderung ist, diese Haltung nicht notwendigerweise auf die Konservativen projiziert. Personen, denen Einwanderung ein wichtiges Thema ist, sehen jedoch eher Unterschiede zwischen Labour und den Konservativen.

Studlar hat in seiner zweiten langfristigen Umfrage versucht, die Einwanderungsfrage und den Einfluss Enoch Powells zu identifizieren. Er bezieht sich dabei auf Gallup-Studien, die darstellen, dass es von 1959-72 ein homogenes Bild gab. Lediglich 1964 gibt es ein schwaches Bild für Einwanderung und 1968 gegen Einwanderung. Des Weiteren geben überwiegend mindestens 80% an, dass es in ihrem Bezirk keine Probleme mit Einwanderern gibt. Somit ist die Schlussfolgerung möglich, dass die britische Öffentlichkeit sich von den politischen Debatten und Entscheidungen nicht hat beeinflussen lassen, auch nicht von Powell.

Auf der anderen Seite erfahren all Beschlüsse zu Einwanderung (bis auf 1971 aufgrund der geringeren öffentlichen Bekanntmachung) breite Zustimmung. Von November 1961 bis September 1972 wird eine durchschnittliche Anerkennung von 69,5% erfasst. Inwiefern dann die weitere Radikalisierung Powells auf Zuspruch treffen konnte, bleibt schwer zu erklären. Die Zurückführung der Einwanderer in ihre Heimatländer stößt in den Jahren zwischen 1968 bis 1972 nämlich bereits auf weniger Unterstützung: durchschnittlich 56,6% positiv, 36,3% negativ. Bereits bevor Powells Rede gibt es Befürworter dieser Idee, somit muss der Einfluss Powells in Frage gestellt werden.

Auch wenn Powells Bekanntheit durch seine Rede stark zunahm und seine Inhalte bei weiten Teilen der Bevölkerung bekannt waren, zieht Studlar das Fazit, dass Powell nur einen sehr kurzfristigen Einfluss nach seiner Rede im April 1968 hatte. Bemerkenswert erscheint dennoch, dass viele Befragten keine schlechten Erfahrungen mit Einwanderung gemacht haben sollen, es aber eine breite Zustimmung unter den Befragten zu den Einwanderungsgesetzen gab. In diesem Punkt könnte u.a. ein Einfluss Powells liegen, der auch nicht nach seiner Birmingham-Rede von 1968 müde wurde, vor den Gefahren der Einwanderung zu warnen.

3.2.2. Reaktionen der Powell-Befürworter und Powell-Gegner

Nach der Rede erhielt Powell ca. 100.000 Briefe aus der Bevölkerung, die keinem eindeutigen sozialen Milieu zugerechnet werden können. Die Befürchtungen, die Powell in seiner Rede äußerte, können in den zugestellten Briefen oder Leserbriefen an die Times wiedergefunden werden . Angst durch Kommunalisierung eine Auflösung der demokratischen und britischen Kultur hervorzurufen oder Sorgen vor wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Folgen, die durch Einwanderer als Arbeitnehmer resultierten , wie der Wille, sich mit Powell zu solidarisieren, um für das Recht der freien Meinungsäußerung zu kämpfen , sind ebenso wiederkehrende Bilder, wie Befürchtungen nach dem Empire nun auch das Vaterland auszuhändigen . Die Reaktion war nicht überall gleich, aber vor allem in den Midlands reagierten Arbeiter mit Protesten und forderten, dass farbige Menschen nicht in Branchen arbeiten sollten, die ihnen zuvor verschlossen waren. Die meisten der Demonstrationen wurden in Powells Wahlkreis abgehalten. Insgesamt nahmen bei den Demonstrationen in den drei Wochen nach der Rede 10-12.000 Personen teil. Rassistische Äußerungen werden allerdings vor allem auf allgemein schlechte soziale Verhältnisse und unsichere Beschäftigungsverhältnisse zurückgeführt. Jedoch waren Hafenarbeiter, die zu einem großen Teil bei den Streikaktionen mitgemacht haben, zu dieser Zeit in einem sicheren Beschäftigungsklima. Fred Lindop vermutet, dass die geschlossene Gemeinschaft der Hafenarbeiter ein Grund für die überproportional große Unterstützung Powells war, weil sie eher eine Gefahr durch Außenstehende sahen. Des Weiteren haben die Hafenarbeiter in den Jahren von 1945-70 zu den Industriezweigen gehört, die am häufigsten gestreikt haben. Somit wäre eine Affinität und Bereitschaft für Powell auf die Straße zu gehen vorhanden. Dennoch gab es in den folgenden Jahren (1969-74) mehrere politische Streikaktionen, die sich gegen wirtschaftliche Gegebenheiten in den Zeiten von Labour und Tory drehten. Einwanderung spielte bald keine Rolle mehr . In der Times werden auch die Gewerkschaften in das Blickfeld gerückt und spiegeln ein zweiseitiges Bild wider. In einem Artikel nach Powells Rede erklärt Dennis Herbert Harmston, warum er Powell als Gewerkschafter unterstützt, wobei auch seine Zugehörigkeit zu einer nationalistischen Partei erwähnt wird, die von Oswald Mosley gegründet wurde . Ebenso sind Gewerkschafter aber auch zu den Gegnern Powells zu zählen, die herausstellen, dass Powells Äußerungen zu Einwanderung in vielen Punkten gegen die Grundsätze der Gewerkschaften stehen .

Berichte vom Leitartikel bis hin zu veröffentlichten Leserbriefen in der Times äußern auch Unterstützung für Powells Ansichten. Diese beinhalten die Notwendigkeit von Einwanderungskontrollen, Obergrenzen für Einwanderer und repatriation. Viele haben auch Ängste vor Überbevölkerung sowie wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Nachteilen. Derartige Inhalte sind bereits vor Powells Rede zu lesen, werden aber danach in der Times eindeutig häufiger. Eine Suche nach „Enoch Powell AND immigration“ zeigt, dass Zeitungsartikel in der Times vor Powells Rede im Vergleich zum Zeitraum danach ungleich seltener erscheinen . Viele befürworten auch, dass Powell aufrichtig war, das Thema anzusprechen. Diese Gruppe pocht meist auf das Recht der freien Meinungsäußerung und protestieren gegen den Rauswurf aus Heaths Schattenkabinett .

Erfahrungen der einheimischen Bevölkerung mit Einwanderern werden in einer Umfrage aus dem Jahr 1970 dargelegt. Darin wird nach der Rezeption von Einwanderern bis 1968 gesagt, dass 37% der Befragten das Einwandererproblem im Vergleich zu persönlichen Problemen für nicht wichtig erachten. Eine ähnlich hohe Prozentzahl sagten, dass sie dieses Problem für gar nicht wichtig ansehen. Nur 9% äußerten, dass dies sehr wichtig sei. Innerhalb dieser Umfrage wurde auch ein besonderer Augenmerk auf fünf Einwanderergebiete gelegt, in denen besonders viele Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund hingezogen sind. Dort fanden 38% das Einwandererproblem für nicht wichtig, 30% gar nicht wichtig, 14% sehr wichtig und 18% ziemlich wichtig. Die beiden letzten Gruppen wurden gefragt, warum das Problem für sie wichtig oder ziemlich wichtig sei. 31% der Befragten äußerten Ängste über den Verfall der Region, 25% hatten Furcht vor Mischehe und 22% Furcht vor einer Mehrheit der Einwanderer in der Region. Diese Äußerungen unterstützen die These, dass die Ängste sich vor allem im sozio-kulturellen Bereich befinden .

Neben einer Gallup Umfrage existieren viele Berichte von farbigen Einwanderern oder Briten, die nach Powells Rede zum ersten Mal mit aggressivem Verhalten konfrontiert wurden . Auch wenn die meisten Demonstrationen friedlich verliefen, so gibt es zahlreiche Berichte , die bezeugen, dass es nach der Rede Powells vermehrt zu Übergriffen gegenüber der nicht-weißen Bevölkerung gekommen ist. Ironisch daran ist, dass Powell die Gefahr einer Überbevölkerung durch Einwanderer höher einschätzte, als mögliche Rassenunruhen aufgrund seiner Rede . Selbstverständlich waren die Verhältnisse in Großbritannien weit davon entfernt, „amerikanische Ausmaße“ anzunehmen, allerdings waren die Diskurse vergleichbar. Stuart Hall meinte dazu, dass Powells Erzählweise – eher als seine Wortwahl – annehmen lasse, dass es eine natürliche und unausweichliche Minderwertigkeit oder Unterlegenheit der nicht-weißen Bevölkerung gebe ; eine Sichtweise, die auch in der Times geteilt wurde . Inwiefern diese Ansicht auch zu Gewalttaten oder Beschimpfungen geführt hat, ist schwer zu deuten. In der Forschung gibt es eine zweigeteilte Meinung, ob Powell auch für Gewalttaten verantwortlich war. Auf der einen Seite sagte sich Powell immer von jeglicher Gewalt los und verneinte, ein Rassist im Sinne rassischer Diskriminierung oder Gewaltausübung zu sein. Auf der anderen Seite kann man sich in einer bereits aufgeheizten Situation nicht der Verantwortung entziehen, wenn man derartige Aussagen tätigt. Um also herauszufinden, ob eine potentiell-mögliche Beeinflussung, wenn auch nicht intendierte, vorhanden war, ist es sinnvoll einen genaueren Blick auf Powells Wortwahl zu wenden. Dazu ist es hilfreich, den Unterschied zwischen racism und racialism im englischen Gebrauch zu klären. Der Begriff racism steht für den Glauben, dass manche Menschen ethisch oder rassisch minderwertig sind, während racialism tendiert, die ungerechte Behandlung von nicht-weißen Menschen zu beinhalten. Powell wurde u.a. harsch kritisiert, weil er das abwertende Wort piccaninnies benutzte. Auch wenn Powell in dem Fall eine andere Person zitiert, markiert dies seine Rede als racist (rassistisch), weil er hier Personen mir negativ besetzten Merkmalen versieht und einer rassischen Minderwertigkeit gleichsetzt. Allerdings kann die Rede auch als racialist betrachtet werden, weil Powell einerseits fordert, nur nicht-weiße Personen von weiterer Einwanderung abzuhalten und er verkennt, dass vor allem nicht-weiße Personen der Diskriminierung ausgesetzt sind .

Dementsprechend ist eine Aufwiegelung einzelner, wenn auch weniger, Bevölkerungsteile zumindest theoretisch möglich. Dennoch erhielten Organisationen, die rassistische Gewalt proklamierten wenig Unterstützung. Selbst wirkmächtige Organisationen am rechten Flügel, wie die National Front, die in den späten 60er Jahren aus Greater British Movement, League of Empire Loyalists, British National Party und Racial Preservation Society gebildet wurde, hielt sich im politischen Spektrum auf und rief zu keiner rassischen Gewalt auf.

Auch wenn Rassismus und Diskriminierung durch Parteien am rechten Spektrum nicht aktiv propagiert wurden, so hilft ein Blick in den PEP-Report vom April 1967 dennoch weiter, um auf Diskriminierung hinzuweisen. Jener PEP-Report konzentrierte sich auf Diskriminierung und fand heraus, dass eine hohes Maß an Diskriminierung in vielen Bereichen des sozialen Lebens stattfand. Unter den untersuchten ethnischen Gruppen wurden Personen aus der Karibik zu 45%, Inder zu 35% und Pakistaner zu 34% diskriminiert. Dabei fiel folgendes auf: je höher die Bildung und besser die Fähigkeiten der englischen Sprache waren, desto mehr Diskriminierung trat auf.

Viele Gegner Powells kritisierten ihn nicht nur wegen seiner Rede, sondern auch wegen seiner Darstellungen und allgemeiner Sichtweise auf Einwanderung. Interessanterweise wurden in der Times mehrheitlich Powell-kritische Artikel inklusive Leserbriefe abgedruckt. Dies ist deshalb bemerkenswert, weil die Times traditionell als konservativ angesehen wird und doch Powell in mehreren Artikeln scharf kritisiert . Dennoch hatte er gerade auch in den eigenen Reihen für viele Gegenstimmen gesorgt, die ihm falsche oder sogar bewusst verfälschende Daten vorwarfen oder mit Oswald Mosley vergliechen . Ein häufig geäußerter Kritikpunkt war auch die übermäßige Stereotypisierung, die vielen nicht-weißen Bürgern die Chance nahm, sich aus einem Umfeld geprägt von Diskriminierung und Vorurteilen heraus zu bewegen. Einerseits verhinderte dies einen sozialen Aufstieg, andererseits aber auch den Kontakt zur einheimischen Kultur, so dass eine Abgrenzung verstärkt werde.

Des Weiteren wird die Frage aufgeworfen, was unter Staatsangehörigkeit zu verstehen wäre, wenn Powell sagt, dass ein Einwandererkind, das in Großbritannien auf die Welt kommt, nicht automatisch auch Brite/Britin sei. Die Fragen, wer bei solchen Gegebenheiten zu entscheiden habe, wer britisch sei und wer nicht, wie lange man seine Herkunft nachweisen müsse, ob es nur eine Frage der Hautfarbe sei, würde umgehend zu Rassenhass führen und weist indirekt auf die Praktiken in Nazi-Deutschland und dem Ariernachweis hin.

Viele in der Times zu Wort kommenden Gegner weisen dabei auch aufgrund ihres akademischen Hintergrundes auf wissenschaftliche Inhalte zurück. Prof. Richard Rose, Universität von Strathclyde in Glasgow, bezog sich beispielsweise auf Umfragen, die belegten, dass große Teile der Bevölkerung einen gerechten Umgang mit Einwanderern wünschten. Außerdem zeigten die Umfragen auch, dass Politik und Presse diesem Thema mehr Bedeutung widmeten, als dies in der Bevölkerung geschah. Diejenigen, die glaubten für die leidtragenden Briten zu sprechen, seien nur eine unrepräsentative Minderheit . Ebenfalls werden die PEP-Berichte zitiert oder Inhalte dessen angesprochen, wie z.B. die ungleiche Verteilung des Wohlstandes oder die generelle Wichtigkeit der sozio-ökonomischen Vorraussetzungen .

In den Artikeln der Times sind die Reaktionen der in Powells Rede adressierten Einwanderer überwiegend mit denen der übrigen Kritiker vergleichbar. Wie zuvor dargestellt, waren viele Gruppierungen einheimischer weißer Briten trotz diskriminierender Darstellungen nicht gewillt, sich zu rassistischen oder gewalttätigen Handlungen hinreißen zu lassen. Diese Radikalisierung auf Seiten der Einwanderer fand in den Darstellungen der Times ebenfalls nicht statt. Führende Einwandererorganisationen sprachen sich für friedliche Mittel aus, die den Weg des demokratischen Systems wählten, um für die eigenen Rechte zu kämpfen . So kritisieren Diplomaten aus Jamaica, Trinidad und Tobago sowie Guyana und Barbados Powell für seine einseitige Kampagne gegen Einwanderer aus der Karibik. Er verleugne den Beitrag, den Einwanderer für die Wirtschaft und Sozialsysteme nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg geleistet haben, sowie den Beitrag während des Kriegs, als Briten und Bürger der Karibik Seite an Seite kämpften .

Neben dem Beitrag der vergangenen Jahrzehnte für die britische Wirtschaft wird die Zurückführung einer großen Anzahl von Einwanderern immer wieder als Gefahr für die britische Wirtschaft gesehen. Im Gegensatz zu den Stimmen, die Einwanderer als eine Gefahr für die Wirtschaft sehen, wird in anderen Berichten dargelegt, dass Einwanderer auch eine Verbindung zu ihrer Heimat aufrecht erhalten und damit Großbritannien wichtige Absatzmärkte erhalten bleiben . Ein weiterer Bericht wirft außerdem einen kritischen Blick auf die Darstellung, dass Einwanderer vor allem Geld kosten würden. Als Gegenbeispiel wird Deutschland herangezogen, welches u.a. durch die Gastarbeiter ein Wirtschaftswunder verzeichnen konnte. Die Studie Economic Impact of Commonwealth Immigration für das National Institute of Economic and Social Research kommt dabei zum Ergebnis, dass es keinen Abfall der einheimischen Lebensstandards gebe, sondern sich die Lebensstandards wohl eher verbesserten. Nichtsdestotrotz muss Geld investiert werden, um die Lebensstandards der Einwanderer auf die der Einheimischen zu bekommen .

Eine weitere häufig dargestellte Gruppe, die Powell kritisierte, ist die anglikanische Kirche. Neben dem Bischof von Stepney ist es auch Domherr Collins der St. Paul‘s Cathedral, der nicht nur Powells einseitige Darstellung der „Fakten“ und die Darstellung der Einwanderer als Sündenbock für zahlreiche anders geartete Probleme moniert, sondern Enoch Powell auch mit Adolf Hitler vergleicht .

Abschließend lässt sich für den Einfluss Powells auf den gesellschaftlich-öffentlichen Bereich folgendes Bild zeichnen. Wenn die wirtschaftliche Lage Großbritanniens mit der potentiellen Aggressivität gegenüber nicht-weißen Personen in Verbindung gebracht wird, scheint klar zu werden, dass viele Ressentiments aufgrund von ökonomischen Schwierigkeiten entstehen. Ist die Wirtschaftslage gut, stellen Einwanderer keine Probleme dar; steigt die Arbeitslosigkeit, so werden Einwanderer dafür (mit-)verantwortlich gemacht. Dadurch werden Widersprüche erzeugt, die u.a. Bereiche wie den Wohnungsmarkt erfassen. Durch Diskriminierung im Wohnungsmarkt hatten es Einwanderer schwer, gute Unterkünfte zu finden, so dass eine „Bedrohung“ für Einheimische im Wohnungsmarkt nur gering war . Dennoch ist eine breite Basis vorhanden, die sich gegen derartige Vorstellungen zur Wehr setzt und mit Mitteln des demokratisch-institutionellen Raumes gegen Stereotypisierungen und Diskriminierung vorgeht.

4. Schlussfolgerung

In der Einleitung wird erwähnt, dass es zwei Lager gab, die sich hinter Powell stellten oder gegen Powell argumentierten. Auf der einen Seite wurde Powell dafür gehasst, dass er eine emotionale Sprache verwendete und damit Übergriffe auf farbige Bürger mit verantwortete. Auf der anderen Seite wurde er dafür bewundert, dass er seine Meinung über parteipolitische Linien hinweg äußerte.

Gerade letzterer Punkt muss nach den vorliegenden Erkenntnissen revidiert werden. Es steht außer Frage, dass das Recht auf Meinungsfreiheit ein hohes Gut ist, das es zu verteidigen gilt. Genauso steht es aber außer Frage, dass eine Partei es nicht dulden kann, wenn es eine Person in ihren Reihen gibt, die rassistische Diskurse nutzt, um auf eigentlich soziale und ökonomische Probleme aufmerksam zu machen.

Auf die Parteien und deren Wahlprogramme von 1970 hat er, wenn dies ihm überhaupt anrechenbar sein kann, einen Einfluss ausgeübt, der diese mehr auf sozio-ökonomische Faktoren hat aufmerksam werden lassen. Ein Einfluss der genauso gut den PEP-Berichten gutgeschrieben werden kann. Auch wenn die Times feststellt, dass ein Diskurswechsel von Integration zu repatriation stattgefunden hat , so konnte herausgestellt werden, dass diese Gedanken auch schon vor Powell geäußert wurden.

Dennoch werfen die Einwanderungsgesetze ein ambivalentes Licht auf diese Tatsachen. Das Einwanderungsgesetz steht in einer Linie mit restriktiven Regulierungen und Einschränkungen. Diese richten sich aber überwiegend gegen nicht-weiße Personen und klammern weiße Bürger aus. Eine Parallele zu Powells Befürchtungen vor Kommunalisierung und der Wichtigkeit einer homogenen britischen Gesellschaft kann hier nicht abgesprochen werden.

Auf diese Gesellschaft hat Powell ohne jeglichen Zweifel gewirkt. Die hohe Bekanntheit und mediale Auseinandersetzung mit seiner Rede waren enorm. Nichtsdestotrotz war das (unterschwellig) wichtigere Thema Wirtschaft und die Lösung der Unterkunftsfrage. Powells Einfluss war dementsprechend nur kurzweilig und bekräftigt die Rolle der Medien als Diskursgestalter .

Bibliographie

Anwar, Muhammad. ,New Commonwealth‘ Migration to the UK. In: Cohen, Robin, The Cambridge Survey of World Migration. S. 274-278. 1995: CUP.

Brooke, Peter. India, Post-Imperialism and the Origins of Enoch Powell‘s ‘Rivers of Blood‘ Speech. In: The Historical Journal, 50, 3 (2007), S. 669-687. 2007: CUP.

Butler, David and Stokes, Donald. Political Change in Britain. 1970: Macmillan.

Cesarani, David. The Changing Character of Citizenship and Nationality in Britain. In: Cesarani, David and Fulbrook, Mary. Citizenship, Nationality and Migration in Europe. 1996: Routledge.

Cohen, Robin. Shaping the Nation, Excluding the Other: The Deportation of Migrants from Britain. In: Lucassen, Jan und Lucassen, Leo, Migration, Migration History, History. S. 351-373. 1997: Lang.

Dale, Iain, Conservative Party General Election Manifestos 1900-1997. 2000: Routledge.

Dale, Iain, Labour Party General Election Manifestos 1900-1997. 2000: Routledge.

Daniel, W.W. Racial Discrimination in England. 1968: Penguin.

Gallup Political Index, nos 97-9, May 1968, 52: Research Publ.

Hall, Stuart. A torpedo aimed at the boiler-room of consensus. In: New Statesman, Vol. 127, 17 April 1998.

Hillman, Nicholas. A ‘chorus of execration‘? Enoch Powell‘s ‘rivers of blood‘ forty years on. In: Patterns of Prejudice, Vol. 42, Nr. 1, 2008. 83-104.

Holmes, Colin. Hostile Images of Immigrants and Refugees in Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Britain. In: Lucassen, Jan und Lucassen, Leo, Migration, Migration History, History. S. 317-334. 1997: Lang.

Holmes, Colin. Violence and Race Relations in Britain, 1953-1968. In: Phylon (1960-), Vol. 36, No. 2 (2nd Qtr. 1975) S. 113-124.

Lindop, Fred. Racism and the working class: strikes in support of Enoch Powell in 1968. In: Labour History Review, Vol. 66, No. 1, Spring 2001, S. 79-100.

Lucassen, Jan, Lucassen, Leo. Migration, Migration History, History – Old Paradigms and New Perspectives. In: Lucassen, Jan und Lucassen, Leo, Migration, Migration History, History. S. 9-38. 1997: Lang.

Lunn, Kenneth. Immigration and Reaction in Britain, 1880-1950: Rethinking the „Legacy of Empire“. In: Lucassen, Jan und Lucassen, Leo, Migration, Migration History, History. S. 335-350. 1997: Lang.

Moch, Leslie Page. Dividing Time: An Analytical Framework for Migration History Periodization. In: Lucassen, Jan und Lucassen, Leo, Migration, Migration History, History. S. 41-56. 1997: Lang.

Pearce, Robert. BAD BLOOD Powell, Heath and the Tory party. In: History Today, Apr2008, Vol. 58 Issue 4, S. 33-39.

Rich, Paul B. Race and empire in British politics. 1988: CUP.

Stapleton, Julia. Citizenship versus Patriotism in twentieth-century England. In: The Historical Journal, 48, 1 (2005), S. 151-178. 2005: CUP.

Studlar, Donley T. British Public Opinion, Colour Issues, and Enoch Powell: A Longitudinal Analysis. In: British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 4, No. 3 (Jul., 1974), S. 371-381.

Studlar, Donley T. Policy Voting in Britain: The Coloured Immigration Issue in the 1964, 1966, and 1970 General Elections. In: The American Political Science Review, Vol. 72, No.1 (Mar., 1978), S. 46-64.

Sadism and masochism in The Passion of New Eve

November 19, 2013 0 Comment Englisch

Beziehungen zwischen den Geschlechtern sind schlussendlich auch Machtkonstruktionen. Sadismus und Masochismus sind dabei die deutlichsten Zeichen von Machtbeziehungen. Der Roman „The Passion of New Eve“ von Angela Carter spielt hervorragend mit Geschlechterrollen und -bezeichnungen und dekonstruiert klassische Erwartungen einer allzu geschlechtsfokussierten Gesellschaft.

1. Introduction

This term paper is to show the links between gender and acts of violence such as abuse, rape etc. Masochistic and sadistic actions evoke a deep impact on the recipient as well as on the actor of the deed him-/herself. These deeds are presented within The Passion of New Eve and deal with feminist topics and questions about gender and sex: the question of a female sadism as a natural given fact; male definitions of women and their influence on women; prototypical features of men and women and the contribution of culture and society to these stereotypes. All these aspects are presented within the novel with the help of violence and rape towards both sexes in order to direct the reader’s view to power relations between man and woman. Hence, feminism and emancipation generally denounce the gender imbalance and therefore claim gender equality.

2. Definitions of Gender and Sex

“Gender” and “sex” have been used as two terms that distinguish each other from the socially and culturally determined “gender” and the biologically given fact of “sex”. This usage presents “gender” referring to personality and behaviour in distinction to the body. However, the increased usage of “gender” led to the opinion that it refers “to any social construction having to do with the male/female distinction” (Signs p. 79) because of the notion that society not only prescribes personality and behaviour but also the appearance of the body. If the body itself is a social construction, then “sex” is a part of “gender”, too, or at least they have a certain connection and something in common.
Judith Butler elaborates this thought in her book Gender Trouble. As Butler states, women become women because of cultural pressure and expectance. Therefore, the philosophical question of having a free choice is doubted. The predefined cultural identities exclude certain identities themselves. Those who do not conform to gender in combination with sex are not tolerated. These developmental disorders do not follow the rules of culture, but offer the possibility to gain access to new areas within these barriers of society. The category of “woman” exists as a default term that is put on women by phallogocentric power structures. These patriarchal societies exploit women in order to establish their aims and wishes. Butler claims that the biological given sexual organs are just culturally produced, as well as the notion of gender. Her argument is that the origin of oppression is an imposed mark of the oppression itself, i.e. the compulsory heterosexuality of culture. Finally, Butler’s conception of gender or sexual orientation is that of doing or acting out one’s desires, not that of being something gendered.
This argumentation of a phallogocentric power structure is partially supported by Angela Carter. The encounter between Evelyn and Leilah, for example, shows an ambiguous depiction of the impact of both on each other. At the beginning, Leilah clearly determines, which direction they take, and leads him to her home. There they start their sexual adventure, which is dominated by Evelyn. Although Leilah throws herself upon Evelyn, she does not enjoy the sexual intercourses and even is tied to the bed and paradoxically punished for befouling the bed sheet.

3. Definitions of Sadism and Masochism

The Passion of New Eve is full of elements of sadism and masochism and both terms are connected to violence and sexuality. However, they have different recipients of violence and pleasure deriving from pain. In order to get a clear-cut analysis and interpretation it is useful and necessary to explain both sadism and masochism.
Masochism describes the fulfilment of sexual pleasure by physical or mental cruelty or abasement. These cruelties or abasements arouse satisfaction through pain and sufferings that are inflicted him/herself or by another person. Especially, the desire of these tortures is regarded as being masochistic (Frauen sind keine Masochisten, p. 9). A common explanation of society about the apparently masochistic nature of women was, for example, that the pain at birth is a signal of being used to it (Frauen sind keine Masochisten, p. 57). Therefore the objectification of women to sexual figures was justified and not questioned by men as well as by women (Frauen sind keine Masochisten, p. 21).
Sadism, on the other hand, is a form of sexual perversion marked by a love of cruelty. Now understood as cruelty that evidences a subconscious craving and is apparently satisfied, sexually or otherwise, by the infliction of pain on another by means of aggressive or destructive behaviour or the assertion of power over that person.
Both terms are connected to power as well as terror, because the possibility to inflict pain on somebody means also to decide when punishment ends. As Eve states: “[…] terror is the most seductive of all drugs” (The Passion of New Eve, p. 15). In conclusion, rape is a sexual act that overrides the choice of the raped person, no matter male or female. In contrast to societies where virginity is important and the rapist would be killed, “rape arises under particular cultural contexts, involving male domination, interpersonal violence, and separation of the sexes” (Sex and Gender, p. 127). Furthermore, a raped person but also the rapist him/herself is alienated to his or her own identity:

“[…] just as [the woman] is disposed of in a rape, which is a kind of physical
graffiti, the most extreme reduction of love, in which all humanity departs
from the sexed beings. So that, somewhere in the fear of rape, is a more than
merely physical terror of hurt and humiliation – a fear of psychic disintegration,
of an essential dismemberment, a fear of a loss or disruption of the self which
is not confined to the victim alone.” (The Sadeian Woman, p. 4)

4. The depiction of men on the example of Evelyn and Zero

Evelyn is in some aspects an archetype of a male person in respect of sexual desire and dominant behaviour. However, there are also moments when Evelyn’s behaviour is not brave and superior, but much more submissive and whiny.
First of all, the archetypical man has to be sketched and defined. According to Sex and Gender there are a lot of attributes that are clearly assigned to stereotypical male or female behaviour. For example, a typical man is much more aggressive, cruel, dominant and unemotional than a typical woman. On the other side, a woman is affectionate, dependent, submissive and meek (Sex and Gender, p. 21). All these aspects are cultural constructs that are imposed on men and women by culture and society. Comparing to the terms of “sex” and “gender”, they are not natural given, innate sets. Interestingly, both male attributes and female ones are not regarded as being negative. In conclusion, it is considered being normal and all right that a man is aggressive and sometimes cruel in order to rule and make the decisions, whereas a woman normally is the one who is ruled and obeys the decisions made by men.
This has been analysed within an experiment, which observed the aggression of boys and girls. When both sexes did not know that they were watched the amount of aggressive behaviour was he same. Whereas, when they noticed that somebody was observing them, girls reacted shyly and boys almost boasted themselves with their aggressive behaviour (Frauen sind keine Masochisten, p. 174). It shows that aggressive is a part of male behaviour because society and culture define it that way. If women behave aggressively, they are regarded as being unnatural and not feminine. Hence, transgressive women wield power by actively having sex and thereby overturning the “normal” dynamic of sexual relations because women are passive during the sexual intercourse, they receive.
The active-passive distinction is also important for the interpretation of the novel and the distinction between sadism and masochism. The combination of male dominated world and typical aggressive behaviour of men goes hand in hand with the notion of a patriarchal governed system. Therefore, in a male-dominated world an active and aggressive sexual behaviour of women does not last long which can be seen that Evelyn tortures Leilah in a sadomasochistic play of (sexual) power. This feeling of being superior to women has become manifested in Evelyn’s youth. He has dreamed of Tristessa as a naked and died woman.
Tristessa is famous for his masochistic depictions, a mythically suffering blonde. For Evelyn, Tristessa is the object of his sadistic sexual fantasies (The Passion of New Eve, p. 7) and that is why he thinks that it is not something abnormal and unfair that he can control a woman according to his wishes. The fact that Evelyn, already as a young boy, dreams of Tristessa as a tied and tortured woman, supports the view that this image is constructed through the regulations of society. In order to confirm this typical development of a man he plays rugby football and takes up fornication. Both activities are mentioned almost casually, as if these acts are necessary to become a proper man. However, Eve, as the narrating I, mentions puberty and the impetus of hormones, too. The question then is if men can direct their actions or are they controlled by their libido what would indicate an inevitability of male acts.
Nevertheless, when Evelyn is in America he gets in contact with rape on his own. He is sexually harassed or abused by a woman dressed like a dominatrix. She takes the penis of Evelyn and makes fun out of it. Her hand is not that of a typical woman but strong and gnarled. She disrespects Evelyn’s free will of his sexual organ and although Evelyn does not feel pleasure his penis is helplessly erected. This reversed master-slave relationship between man and woman is also underlined by the appearance of the woman because of her booted heels. Like Leilah according to her psychic trauma, Evelyn feels like being in a reverie and represses his memories. However, he remembers his years of teaching in which he was not regarded as a masculine, strong and male person. He rather received pity than respect.
Furthermore, it is not absolutely clear if Evelyn is the active part within the sexual intercourses with Leilah including the pursuit scene. Actually, Evelyn has the passive and reacting part, whereas Leilah determines the direction which way they are going. Also their sexual intercourses are sometimes shaped by Leilah’s not ending desire of sex “as if forced to the act again and again by, perhaps, an exacerbated, never-to-be-satisfied curiosity” (The Passion of New Eve, p. 18). Although Leilah is said to feel a curiosity of never-ending sexual adventures, she also feels vindictiveness towards herself and despises the craving. This displays Leilah as a figure that has accepted the male view of pornographic women but tries to get rid of these repulsive illustrations. She supports this because she sees sex as a ritual and exorcism.
When they start having sex his penis is described as a “voracious break [tearing] open the poisoned wound of love between her thighs” (The Passion of New Eve, p. 25). Their affair is not romantic, but connected to pain and an one-sided experience or request. So, Leilah is made a “domestic brothel” (The Passion of New Eve, p. 29) and therefore is the object of Evelyn’s reification.
Although Leilah does not want to have sexual intercourse with Evelyn, he takes her and he does not care about it. After Evelyn is satisfied he gets bored of Leilah, but he has impregnated her. In spite of that he does not care about her and their baby and forces her to abort the pregnancy, which results in the loss of Leilah’s womb because she cannot afford a proper abortion.
Despite of these violent and brutal sex acts, Evelyn shows everything but no brave and male behaviour when the women of Mother who transforms Evelyn into Eve capture him. When Evelyn is captured by the Women of Mother he is as helpless and at their mercy as Leilah was. They are the complete opposite of the prototypical woman because they act intimidating, menacing, dominating, independently, and aggressively (The Passion of New Eve, p. 45). Moreover, Mother calls herself “Great Parricide” and “Grand Emasculator” (The Passion of New Eve, p. 49) which indicates violence towards men. Eve, as the narrating I, calls the metamorphosis to Eve a vengeance because of what her former male identity has done to Leilah (The Passion of New Eve, p. 50). He is shaped in a figure that is preferred by a woman, just like Evelyn has shaped women on his own will. When Evelyn reacts fearfully and cries, the inhabitants of Beulah who observe him laugh at him and carry out psychic humiliation on Evelyn. So, Evelyn is as week and helpless as Leilah has been. Moreover, she is forced to have sex with Mother who is described as a creation of her own that looks frightening and monstrous. Evelyn cannot escape, because Mother is twice as big as he is. She can handle Evelyn the way she wants and clearly is the dominant person. Normally, the man proposes and woman is disposed of (The Sadeian Woman, p. 6) just like the uterus is a whole that has to be filled and the penis has the function to do so. However, the intercourse between Mother and Evelyn reveals these roles to be changed. The intercourse itself therefore is humiliating and disgusting like a rape is for a woman, too. His semen then is used to impregnate Eve herself, so that she will give birth to a baby due to his own sperm. Also here is a parallel to female repression because abused women lose the control of their own reproduction. The reason why Eve is impregnated is “to produce the ‘Messiah’ of a new matriarchal world order to overthrow the old patriarchal one” (Women’s Studies, p. 727).
In contrast to Evelyn, Zero is the archetypical man according to a disgusting and brutal rapist. He is a scarred and disabled man who actually is not very tall. However, he has established a little patriarchal world on his own. Zero’s language to his women is animal-like and therefore he does not allow them to communicate to each other eloquently. Zero calls himself a poet, but his lyrical results are not really a peace of art, if Eve can be trusted. Hence, the degradation of his women not to speak can be interpreted as an inferiority complex that is to be concealed through his own pretended poetical talent. This complex is underlined through the fact of his impotence. Zero tenaciously believes that Tristessa is the reason for his impotence, so he thinks all the day about finding her hiding place and about killing her in order to repair his virility. Female emancipation causes male impotence (Frauen sind keine Masochisten, p. 20), but actually Tristessa played mainly roles in which he displayed female victims. So, normally Tristessa should have supported his masculinity and should not be the reason for his impotence.
Nevertheless, his semen is introduced to his harem as an essential fluid for life. For his sexual pleasure, beside his indoctrination of his way of thinking, he also shapes his harem physically. The front teeth of Zero’s women are knocked out in order prevent injuries to his penis while performing oral sex.
Zero also fulfils the typical role of a pimp and a resolute objector towards lesbians. He sends his women to Los Angeles, where they earn money as dancers and spent it for meat when they are in Zero’s little town again, so in the end Zero earns the money. His attitude towards lesbians is not tolerant what is also indicated by the term he uses for lesbians, i.e. dyke. Zero establishes not only a cruel but also superstitious and religious system. Violence, as a convulsive form of the active, male principle, is an option for men to inflict pain as a sign of mastery. The masters have the right to wound one another because that only makes women fear men. They almost fear them like ancient people feared the arbitrariness of their gods (The Sadeian Woman, p. 22).
Finally, both figures, Zero and Evelyn, present at least some aspects of typical male behaviour whereas Zero’s is apparently dominant and more evident. Angela Carter herself also gives this indication by naming the characters. Evelyn can be transformed to Eve by removing the last letters, just as removing the penis. Though, for example the streets in New York are labelled in numbers and not names in order to point at their function. In comparison to Zero, his function of reproduction is decreased to nothing. Zero already is nothing, like the number, so nothing can be removed and Angela Carter gives a clear evaluation on her own which male character she likes more,

5. The depiction of women on the example of Eve, Tristessa and Zero’s harem

The most important categories that are attributed to women are emotional and submissive actions. Furthermore, according to Luce Irigaray there are three central female archetypes: mother, virgin, prostitute. Such archetypes are cultural constructs that prescribe and reinforce stereotypical gender roles and behaviour rather than “innate” categories. Interestingly, Eve serves two of these stereotypes by giving birth as a virgin (Women’s Studies, p. 720).
In addition, men mainly create these social prescriptions and women carry out their instructions by disguising themselves as their sexual fantasy. Another fundamental male fantasy, as it is written above, is the wish to torture and tie women. When Eve is captured the second time, Zero greets Eve by raping her without any embarrassment and integrates her into his harem. Eve experiences Zero’s violent abuses, just as Evelyn acted upon Leilah. Zero’s brutal rapes turn Eve into a savage woman and depict women as the objects of male sexual violence. But, when Zero for the second time rapes Eve, she feels a sense of grateful detachment (Passion of New Eve, p. 91). She seems to be accustomed to rape and she has learnt to repress the psychic violence. Nonetheless, Eve recognizes that rapes do not only cause physical but also mental and psychic pain and injuries (Passion of New Eve, p. 101/2).
Another widely spread characteristic of raped women therefore is that they do not see the situation of rape exactly as a rape due to suppress their psychic pain. Generally, a lot of women that had unwanted intercourse do not say that they have been raped (Sex and Gender, p. 128). Eve claims that she screams and cries during a rape of Zero, because she does not want Zero to hear the groans of pleasure of the other women. However, shortly after that reasoning she denies it and admits that her cries were caused by pain.
The typical masochistic desire of women that is projected by men upon them is also visible within Eve. When she is lost with Tristessa in the desert and there is only little hope to survive she feels an erotic shudder within her.
Eve has an instantly pleasured clitoris without an assuaged desire for unity within the self and for unification with another. This installation is also a little revenge, because Evelyn has sought for his perfect image of an ideal, sexual woman, and now is turned into the perfection of his own fantasies.
To sum it up Eve develops and becomes a prototypical woman that even gets maternal emotions when she sees the militia of children.
Zero’s women, on the other side, obviously depict the opposite of emancipated and independent women. They have no individuality because they wear uniform-like dungarees, look identical and instead of individual names they are called after their appearance. The only function they have is to serve Zero’s desire and will. Moreover, they are masochistic, because they behave like sex objects on their own who seem to want and need Zero’s affection in respect of his semen. Hence, his “community is essentially an androcentric pornotopia” (Women’s Studies, pp. 728/29). When the women hear Zero’s grunts and moans because of sexual pleasure they are excited and impassioned so that they start masturbating themselves and each other. It seems that they have been conditioned to a behaviour and mental attitude that sex is one of their central aims and thoughts.
A crucial and difficult thing is the sub-culture created by Zero’s women. Within this society the women speak and communicate like human beings without any notion of animal-like demeanour. Moreover, they masturbate and even practice lesbian sexual intercourse, although Zero does not tolerate it, but detests it and punishes every woman who is detected of lesbian activities. In spite of that it cannot be said that Zero’s women form a sub-culture that undermines Zero’s authority. The harem is and stays throughout the plot a bunch of animal-like beings that only want to satisfy their most natural needs. Just like Zero their “[c]haracterization is necessarily limited by the formal necessity for the actors to fuck as frequently and ingeniously as possible” (The Sadeian Woman, p. 13). These characters that are limited to this behaviour cannot develop and stick within this affects like animals that have not developed over the last centuries.
Tristessa, finally, is the perfect woman, at least for male fantasies, because a man has created the figure of Tristessa. Anyway, Tristessa did not stay a man but hid her penis completely towards her appearance to the environment as well as towards herself, so that he is shocked and dismayed when he sees his penis. Both Tristessa and Eve represent the ideal woman although Tristessa is the ideal pornographic and sexual ideal expressed by men and Eve is constructed violently to the utmost perfect woman, at least Mother says so. Furthermore, Tristessa biologically is still male, however disguises himself like a woman. Therefore, it is said that he is able to create the perfect woman – albeit he does not embody a male sex maniac. So, Tristessa really is a case in between the sexes. For example, at the beginning of his revelation of his actual sex he reacts like a woman and cries. But by and by Tristessa becomes braver and more masculine till the encounter with the militia of children. He resists all humiliations acted upon him and even states that his looks are not important and decisive to him (The Passion of New Eve, p. 155).

7. Eve and Tristessa: the perfect couple

Although all sexual and emotional relations throughout the story seem to lack of something or have some notion of violence and rape, at least Eve and Tristessa show another picture.
David Punter explains that the relationship stands for a “symbolic parallelism between Eve and Tristessa” (Critique: Studies in Contemporary Fiction, p. 216). Though, he says, that it also presents the boundary between the genders and the incompatibility of desires due to the short sexual interlude between Tristessa and Eve (Critique: Studies in Contemporary Fiction, p. 221). Nevertheless, there is also evidence for a different interpretation. As noticed before, there is the discussion about the importance and interaction between body and soul. Throughout the plot the opinion seems to be confirmed and strengthened that looks and desire due to sexual craving is to be despised. So, consequently, the sexual intercourse between Tristessa and Eve does not have to last long. Of course, Zero and his harem just as their marriage itself force the first sexual intercourse between Eve and Tristessa after their marriage. All the time Eve, as the woman, has to play the passive part and receives Tristessa, who is not turned on. Hence, one of Zero’s women has to stimulate Tristessa who sees his penis only as an useless appendix. Although he does not feel any pleasure and cries out, surprisingly he gets an erection. This is a sign of the ambiguous contradictory connection of body and soul. While Tristessa does not enjoy the sexual encounter, his penis is purely a symbol of function and the dominance and pre-eminence of the whole body as a doer of the hormones. Eve herself throughout the novel that “[f]lesh is a function of enchantment. It uncreates the world” (The Passion of New Eve, p. 148).
However, Tristessa on later sexual intercourses approaches Eve warily and not as forcing and brutally as Zero did. After their intercourse they do not separate but lie together side by side and hug each other. Even after the murder of Tristessa Eve thinks a lot about him and yet wants to escape from the militia of children to run to Tristessa’s grave so that she can die beside her for the reason of love.
One of the most obvious but also most important elements of the close relationship between Eve and Tristessa is that the whole plot is told as if Eve is talking to Tristessa, as if Eve stands in front of Tristessa grave. When Evelyn still existed there was only superficial craving because of Tristessa’s looks. Now Eve feels close to Tristessa because of her story, Eve is able to show sympathy what she could not do when she was a man.

8. Conclusion

All in all, Angela Carter’s novel not only presents a differentiated view of violence between the sexes, but also leaves a lot of space for individual interpretations. One of the most interesting points remains the importance of one’s sex in combination with his or her identity. The notion, experience and identification with masculinity or feminity determine the rest of the life of every person. The fact that both sexes are connected to a lot of cultural attributes has been discussed and doubted due to fairness and morality. Nevertheless, these culturally constructed stereotypes are as flat, unable to develop and not representing reality as Zero and the created pornographic and suffering ideal of Tristessa. Therefore, feminist opinions have formulated the claim that patriarchal systems have to be abolished.
Bibliography

Primary literature

Carter, Angela. 2006. The Passion of New Eve, London: Virago Press

Secondary literature

Archer, John and Lloyd, Barbara. 2002. Sex and Gender, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Caplan, Paula J.. 1986. Frauen sind keine Masochisten , Zürich, Köln: Benzinger Verlag

Carter, Angela. 1979. The Sadeian Woman, London: Virago Press

Nicholson, Linda J.. 1994. “Interpreting ‘gender’” Signs, Fall; 20 (1): 79-105

Punter, David. 1984. “Angela Carter: Supersessions (Abschaffung) of the Masculine”, Critique: Studies in Contemporary Fiction, Summer, 25 (4): pp. 209-222

Rubinson, Gregory J.. 2000. “’On the Beach of Elsewhere’: Angela Carter’s Moral Pornography and the Critique of Gender Archetypes”, Women’s Studies, Vol. 29, pp. 717-740

Representation and Silence in Post-Colonial Australian Fiction

November 19, 2013 6 Comments Englisch

In der Regel werden Machtbeziehungen auf geschriebenen Wörtern oder gesagten Äußerungen aufgebaut. Ob dies auch ohne geht und Rituale, Gesten oder unbeantwortete Fragen eine Form von Selbst-Repräsentation und Macht sein können, untersucht diese Arbeit.

1. Introduction to Post-Colonial Australian Literature

The notion of silence as a way to find and gather representation is a fairly new idea and has been overshadowed by the thought of oppression for a long time. The idea of it comes along with post-colonial studies and their recognition of ambivalent structures which can be subsumed under the ubiquitous ”holy trinity” of race, class and gender. Along post-colonial and other studies new findings have shown that, for example, it was not always only the indigenous population which suffered under colonialism but also white women were subjected under their patriarchal societies.

Important scholars like Edward Said proved that colonialist endeavours were never aimed at a single or limited stay. The aim of most of the colonialists was to take their white European civilisation and inflict it on the indigenous population. On the other side, discourses also present observations that reveal a fear or rebuke of ”going native” and developing back to the indigenous population. Whether the colonisers were afraid of a mute indigenous culture which was able to exercise power or the colonisers just wanted to depict the indigenous peoples as counter-examples cannot be discussed here. Nevertheless, this example can be taken as a hint to a more ambivalent and less clear cut image of the relationship between ruling and subjected groups and their reciprocal representation.

The underlying urge of representation usually is the intention to have an own identity. On the one hand, Australians were still dependent on their descending Empire, but on the other, they claimed Australia as being their country and they did not want to give it away (although the indigenous population lived their long before). They justified their view with their western civilisation and modern culture. The colonisers saw themselves as the parents and the Aborigines as their children who they had to help. However, they degraded them quickly and their representation on the governmental level was the Department of Fisheries, Forests, Wildlife and Aborigines. Australia has been mainly formed by the exclusion of Aboriginals because white settlers marked them as ‘the other’. This fact has not changed and that‘s why Australian culture can still be described as colonial (Sheridan 1995: 121).

These and other examples of representation are the underlying structure of theories on representation and silence. Most of them are based on thoughts of the founding fathers of post-colonial theory, e.g. Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffiths, Helen Tiffin and Edward Said among many others. However, as this paper is about silence and representation, it is helpful to consider The Power of Silence by Adam Jaworski. It revises the advantages and disadvantages of muteness in private and public conversations and will be dealt with later on.

The aim of this paper is to combine theories on representation and silence with four works of authors and directors from Australia and New Zealand: Katherine Susannah Prichard‘s Coonardoo, Warwick Thornton‘s Samson and Delilah, Jane Campion‘s The Piano and Romaine Moreton‘s ”Blak Beauty”. The keystone is that silence is not only regarded to be a sign of weakness and humiliation, but it can also be seen as a lack of understanding or choice of non-communication. When groups are underrepresented by the ruling classes it does not necessarily mean that they are weak. There is and never was a power that was that strong to control even the boundaries of society. Therefore, it can be claimed that silence is a way of representation and a careful view at the periphery might reveal means of power and an-other perspective. The aspects which are the main focus of this paper concern 1) the authorship of the mentioned artists, 2) issues along gender, race and class, 3) notions of perspective, power and truth as well as 4) instances of language and naming. The question which this essay tries to answer is whether underrepresented – indigenous as well as female – groups are represented in the works mentioned as gaining power through silence, whether silence can be used as a powerful device, and whether there are boundaries which cannot be overtaken with the help of silence.

1.1. Introduction to Representation and Silence

Why representation is an important tool in societies, can be shown by a look at various underrepresented minorities. Most of them are not considered in administrative discourses because they do or can not take part in decisions. Therefore, representation – as a picture of a significant object – can also be seen as language because language promotes ideologies of leading classes.

If we look at linguistics, we get to know that most words receive their meaning and concept arbitrarily because most of the time there is no direct correlation between signifier and signified. Moreover, historical linguistics proved that meanings can change and those who changed it were groups of the majority. In consequence, representation led to power and silence to subjugation.

The most important theory of what a discourse is has been formulated by Michel Foucault. Roughly, he defines it as any form of conversation within certain limits. He tried to set out the parameters within an utterance was possible and tried to enlarge the field of discourse. The pivotal part of this is that an enlargement of this field might result in changed power structures and unveil weaknesses in ideologies of the ruling classes. For the case of the Aborigines, however, it should not be taken as a form of rebellion due to the fact that upheavals in large did not take place. Furthermore, it has to be kept in mind that the ruling discourses used representation as a mean to represent the ”other” and as a counter-example for the representation of the ideal colonialist. Like that, colonialist formed both the stereotypical colonialist as well as the stereotypical colonised. These discourses formed identities and it might be said that these ideologies built up realities, too. However, these notions always underlie shifting powers and their perspectives. Thus, Marx‘s theory of the ”false consciousness” and misrepresentation is right because it underlines that the ruling class determines the view of societies on themselves and cannot uphold ultimate truths or realities permanently. Nevertheless, there is also a positive aspect which has been announced by Louis Althusser. He pointed out that subjects might be born into certain expectations, but it also gives them a secure guideline, social codes and conventions. It offers them a framework to orientate themselves and build up an identity. But by offering this scheme, it clearly aims at a prototypical ideal and promotes an underlying ideology and the differentiation between those who follow or inherit it and the ”others” who do not.

The most obvious and direct way to promote and determine ideologies is through language – either written or spoken. Major ideologies could never have had such a huge impact on their subjects without the power of propaganda. Nevertheless, there are ways of communication which do not lie their basis on different forms of exchanging information. Sign language, for example, is equally representative and even consists of different local or regional dialects. Therefore, it cannot be far-fetched if we say that silence can be a way of communication and representation as well. To come back to ideologies, though, it seems hard to establish silence next to propaganda because propaganda in its most negative connotation evokes images of party gatherings where speeches are held and everybody screams in unity; anything but silent.

Silence seen by Adam Jaworski, however, is a powerful mean due to its ambivalence. If somebody wants to be indirect or polite it leaves options. Moreover, it can be used to avoid an open conflict. Although it is more difficult to undo words, a person might interpret dumbness when a certain answer is expected. Jaworski emphasises that these interpretations become especially important in cross-cultural communications. He concludes with the ambivalence of speech and silence and underlines the helpfulness of speech and gestures as well as facial expressions (Jaworski 1993: 24-25).

If we look at the past, it can be concluded that silence cannot be pinpointed as an effective and essential tool for representation. Theories and historical discourses have shown that representation was mainly focused on majorities. However, since voices from the former colonies and colonised get louder, they receive more attention and gain representation.

2. Representation and Silence

2.1. Authorship

On a meta-level we can observe that similar happenings and circumstances occur for the authors and directors themselves. Narrations which were not accepted had to find alternative ways of being published. The possibilities either consisted of pseudonyms, minor publishers or publishers from different countries. Romaine Moreton is the only indigenous representative in this paper and therefore technically underrepresented. Nevertheless, along with other Aboriginal poets like Lionel Fogarty and Jack Davis she is one who reached certain fame and apart from this is a female indigenous poet. On the opposite there is Jane Campion, who had an international success with The Piano. She does represent the Maori culture in the film, but does not make it her central priority. She focuses much more on the ambivalent situation of white female colonisers and their submission to patriarchal colonialism which will be dealt with later on.

The following two artists, Katherine Susannah Prichard and Warwick Thornton, shall stand as examples of issues of authorship at the beginning of the 20th and 21st century. Both are white colonisers or respectively descendants of them. Prichard had to struggle to publish Coonardoo, thus she submitted her story under a male pseudonym in the Bulletin literary competition in 1928 and published it in England before finding an Australian publisher with Angus & Robertson. When Prichard wrote Coonardoo her readers were not prepared to open their minds for a love-story between an Aboriginal woman and a white man. It is not only a love-story, but also opens up a space between outback and white civilisation – a third space that was not thought about before (Prichard 1994: viii). One of the reasons which she exclaimed was that ”Life in the north-west of Western Australia is almost as little known in Australia as in England or America” (Prichard 1994: v). This underrepresentation led to a general misunderstanding and misrepresentation of Aboriginal culture. Prichard foresaw that there will be an outrage because of the love between a white man and an aboriginal woman. Love was not accepted while a pure sexual relationship was not a problem. These findings do not only put questions under a morally justified protest against Prichard‘s novel, but at least underline the preeminence of an Australian patriarchal society (Prichard 1994: v-vi).

The circumstances of being a female author writing about Aboriginal society under the influence of patriarchy offer an interesting situation. The fact that women were inferior in the Australian patriarchal society renders an interesting question on Australian female authors and their depiction of Aboriginal women: how does the other, i.e. Australian woman, write about the other Others, i.e. Aboriginal women (Sheridan 1995: 122)? Of course, it is always hard and dangerous to draw parallels between the narrator and the author, but in Prichard‘s case there are certain areas which can be linked. Prichard was a convinced socialist/communist and wanted to put attention on the situation of the Aborigines. Many modern, post-colonial critics praise her for her unique and exceptional writing of her time. They say that she was the first to have an open mind for procedures in the aboriginal society and to express them with words and silences, too (Prichard 1994: vi). But, although it was the first novel with an aboriginal woman in the centre of interest, there are limits for Prichard to dig into aboriginal culture. For example, there are no conversations among aboriginal people that have been part of the novel. Prichard herself is not able to discard her white view (Prichard 1994: x; Sheridan 1995: 143-44). Furthermore, she names her novel after an aboriginal woman, but describes Coonardoo stereotypically according to the white view: sexual, mad and suffering (Prichard 1994: xii).

Although Warwick Thornton himself is a white Australian, he did not have the same problems to publish his work like Prichard 80 years later. He even got awarded, among others at the Cannes Film Festival and won the Caméra d‘Or. Moreover, he even got nominated as the best foreign film at the Academy Awards.

The biggest advantage of Thornton‘s film is that he chose first-time actors with Rowan McNamara and Marissa Gibson as protagonists of the film. In interviews about the film, it is obvious that both are much closer to the characters, because their capability to speak English and communicate is fairly limited. Like this Thornton does not only give voice to a subject which is underrepresented in the predominantly white media, but also gives voice to actors/persons who are able to identify with a few events that happened in the film. The doubts which might come up according to Prichard‘s piece do not occur due to Thornton‘s authentic and passive shooting.

As Jaworski pointed out, cross-cultural communication is complicated when issues are raised which have not been addressed before or in other words have been silenced. This counts for Prichard, who had to struggle to get her story published. Warwick Thornton did not have these problems in the 21st century because he tried to establish a mutual cross-cultural level of communication. Although the topic of petrol-sniffing and tedious way of life in the Aboriginal community is not present in white Australian‘s everyday culture, it received many awards. Due to the equally successful Jane Campion, it is not a decisive factor that Warwick Thornton is male and Katherine Prichard female. It is rather a change in society and perspective upon cultural differences which underlines the argument that silence and underrepresented groups gained a more powerful position than it had during Prichard‘s times and the centuries before.

2.2. Gender, Race, Class

Gender, race and class are the most dominating topics in post-colonial studies. Their origin, of course, can be traced further back into the past, but their interrelationship and impact cannot be underestimated anyway. British, for instance, noticed that Aboriginal men were not at all the one and only breadwinner, but Aboriginal women were at least equally important and men in fact also participated in nurturing children. This, of course, challenged European ideals of social order and led to discussions about gender roles and society (McCrath 1995: 36). Generally, the most important aspects concern contrasts and interrelations between men and women, indigeneity and colonialist people, lower and higher class. By saying that, it means in consequence that gender, race and class can be found in many sequences and passages, too. However, this paper is not supposed to be an analysis on these terms only and that is why only a few scenes are chosen which stand prototypically for silence as a mean of (mis)representation in terms of gender, race and class.

In Coonardoo, we find out that Hugh does not want to marry an aboriginal woman. He wants to ”marry white and stick white” (Prichard 1994: 51). However, Hugh desires Coonardoo and thus, the question arises whether he does not want to or cannot marry an Aboriginal woman. Obviously, he feels obliged to keep his white race white. The

expectations force him to say what he is not convinced of. The preeminent discourse of the ruling Australian class makes it impossible for him to utter an impossible urge to start a serious relationship with Coonardoo. Unfortunately, there is no third space for Hugh as he feels obliged to fulfil the expectations of the white Australian community.

On the other side, there is the ambivalent character of Sam Geary and his ambivalent treatment of Aboriginal women. He is mean and personifies the stereotypical cruel, violent and consuming coloniser. On the other side, he lives in intercultural relationships, although these are far away from any notion of emancipation and equality. Coonardoo becomes one of Geary‘s gins in the end when they commit sexual intercourse. There is an ambivalence in the scene which swings between the images of a predator consuming its prey and the dependence of its prey on the predator (Prichard 1994: 203). However, it can be claimed that she does not depend on Geary in person, but in general on somebody who fulfils her needs. This picture, nonetheless, strongly evokes the colonial view of the wild and sequacious Aboriginal woman who has to be saved by a white heroic coloniser who fulfils her lust, eventually. He is a prototypical coloniser and subjects Aboriginal women, but it is known throughout the society that he treats them well, too. This might be the result of pretended values and discourses of the ruling classes.

On the opposite, Hugh clearly loves Coonardoo, but does not allow himself to perform his feelings which makes him mad at the end and results in both the death of the station and Coonardoo herself. Hugh‘s relationship with Mollie is clearly aimed at the production of a male heir. Mollie does not give birth to a boy and is at the end of her physical power, finally. When Phyllis comes and visits the station years later, she is not recognised by Hugh at first. While Coonardoo embraces her, Hugh‘s daughter is not represented in his memory. Nevertheless, Phyllis is a very talkative and self-confident young woman and does not listen to her father when he tells her to leave. Phyllis – as well as Bessie – is a woman who wants to be her own boss and decide for herself.

A look at Samson and Delilah presents similar incidents as there are no signs of miscegenation and traditional allocations of roles are not challenged neither. At the beginning, Delilah does not want to share her home with Samson, but they end up in a very mature love relationship for teenagers. It is stereotypically male that Samson has to court for Delilah and her grandmother understands immediately by calling Samson ”her husband”.

Another sign for a conventional display of role behaviour is the scene where

Samson listens to music in the middle of the night. Body language and music is taken up as a mean to communicate and express oneself. Samson emancipates through his rock music and Delilah sees him with different eyes. She sits in her car and listens to her Spanish love music while he dances toplessly. Delilah‘s taste in music mirrors the stereotypical romantic fantasy of girls to be saved by a heroic boy. While Delilah sits in the car in a reddish light adoring Samson, he shows his bare upper body, moves around, almost personifying an ape illuminated in a blueish shine. In spite of this traditional display of roles, Delilah stays an independent figure and emerges as the most important person in the end. She is the one who cares for Samson when he is a victim of his addiction. Thus, the conservative role of the woman is challenged for both white Australians, but also Aborigines.

Concerning race and class, it can be said that they belong to the lowest class possible because they are Aboriginal. When they go into a supermarket they are immediately followed by a security person. Even when they are severely injured, the cashier wishes them a nice day. If she meant it like she said it, she would have realised their bruises and might have tried to find them a doctor. The boundaries of silence become blatant as they do not have access to education and health. Even the homeless Gonzo has better chances to find people who care for him when he leaves Samson and Delilah for a rehab. In contrast to silence, words become more powerful because they stand for help. The fact that Samson and Delilah do not speak also means that they do not belong to a class where social security, education and health is offered. Thus, silence is both an exclusion of power structures and frameworks which exclude them from promoted identities and put them among the not represented group of others.

Most importantly in The Piano, is Ada‘s ambivalent situation as a female, upper class, white person who on top of that is mute. She stands for the ambivalent situation for white female colonisers in a patriarchal society who are affected by the same injustices as indigenous people. In spite of their ”higher” race and class, these women suffer under misrepresentation and tutelage, too. Ada‘s father, for example, marries her to a man, Alistair Stewart, she has not met yet. Later we get to know that her daughter, Flora, has been born out of a relationship, but not a marriage. Back then this was a hard situation because it was not accepted and she had to struggle to finance her and her daughter‘s life. In consequence, her father decided to send her far away, in fact as far away as possible. Apparently, Ada‘s muteness is not quiet enough as she is still (re-)present(-ed) in Scotland, so he sends her away.

On the opposite side are the Maori. They are a remarkable group in The Piano, because they are not suppressed and they are anything but voiceless. Many times they comment on things and foresee the events which are still to come. In comparison to fairy tales or Shakespearean terms, they rather take up the role of the fool, who has the lowest rank in society but is the wittiest one of all. Accordingly, they make fun of Alistair and do not treat him like a master or typical coloniser.

In general, Alistair does not convey the typical image of a male, white coloniser; especially, when he is compared to Sam Geary in Coonardoo. When he and Ada have their first encounter at the beach, he is nervous and tries to be an empathetic husband. However, later he forces her to accept that George Baines will get the piano and does not negotiate with her at all. Parallel to Hugh who also lacks of a (third) space; both hang between expectations of their peer groups and their inner emotions. These thoughts, however, cannot be uttered in public and end up in physical harm against women. Again in comparison to Coonardoo, the best solution is an intermarriage between the group of representative power (Baines) and the group of silence (Ada). The Piano on this account does not have to address miscegenation because of the Maori‘s independence.

This type of independence is also mirrored in ”Blak Beauty” by Romaine Moreton who sets up an interesting connection between the Aborigines and their connection to the country. To put it in a nutshell, Aboriginal belief says that many mythological animals formed Australia and thus they feel a very close alignment to the Australian countryside and nature as a whole. There is no hierarchy among Aborigines and their surrounding because ”clay is [their] words, the stone [their] friend, the sea [their] market, and tress [their] weapon”. Classes and hierarchies do not exist, so there is no upper or lower between Aborigines and nature, too.

While Moreton tells the reader about the meaning of ”blakness”, she also mentions the stereotypical depictions and prejudices which have been spread around by the white society. Their prototypical blackness encompasses images of black witchcraft, black comedy, black unlucky Friday, black eye, even blackmail, black market and black throat. Although Moreton highlights the power to form new words and fill them with individual, indigenous meaning, these new concepts are not represented in white (Australian) societies.

In conclusion, it can be said that silence in connection with gender, race and class offers an ambiguous picture. On the one hand, there is a fear of miscegenation that goes

hand in hand with the earlier mentioned fear of ”going native”. This aspect can be detected in Coonardoo as well as in The Piano. It stands for a silence of an intercultural relationship and accepts identity constructions only which orientate on guidelines. These guidelines, however, develop as threats and leave no third space for Hugh and Alistair. While certain men fail to find a way to an alternative role model, women stay sexually dependent on men in the cases of Coonardoo and Ada. They cannot pass the patriarchal system and in the case of Coonardoo die, or in the case of Ada nearly die before they learn how to speak and represent themselves with words. The representation of white and aboriginal women is juxtaposed to each other with the result that their situations are often the same: they are sold, have to serve and give birth (Sheridan 1995: 127). For Samson and Delilah, however, this possibility is out of question. They are not only excluded from any institution, but also move further apart into the outback and start a life on their own. Also Romaine Moreton analyses speech critically as she juxtaposes the concept of ”bla(c)kness” and comes up with superficial judgements mainly presented by mass media.

2.3. Perspective, power and truth

Talking about it, mass media can be an useful source to investigate power structures and their ideologies. Mass media is usually seen as the mouthpiece of the ruling classes and consumed both by the represented and by the underrepresented. Thus, power and truth go together and can be recognised along the discourses of the dominant classes. However, as mentioned earlier, post-colonial studies have uttered the thought that even the most powerful classes have never been able to control states, groups or cultures completely. Therefore, perspective of ”others”, mostly minor and underrepresented societies can be investigated in order to find out whether there are certain areas where overt or covert discourses of silenced groups take up their voice and offer their perspective.

Interestingly, in Coonardoo, white civilisation can be put on a level with silence. Every time somebody goes to the cities along the coastline in order to get healthy again (Hugh) or even to leave forever (Mollie) the reader does not hear anything about what happens in greater detail. Thus, white civilisation is put in an unknown, even mythical corner if the perspective is taken over by Aborigines. They do not know much about the white people‘s society and their technological developments, because they know their own

ways to deal with diseases with the help of the surrounding nature. On the other hand, it can also be said that it is not worth mentioning for a white reader. Therefore, this silence can also be seen as a device to keep those who do not have the knowledge away from power.

This ambivalence is held up if we look at Bessie and other white settlers. Bessie only has little knowledge of the customs of Aborigines, apparently due to a lack of communication or indifference (Prichard 1994: 25). There is no exchange on cultural grounds and a cross-cultural communication à la Jaworski is avoided. The whites are not interested in the Aboriginal culture because they see theirs as superior. But the influence of the white coloniser‘s culture is limited. Bessie, for example, is frustrated when she realises that Coonardoo cannot be taught to be a civilised white person because she gets too much influence from her aboriginal culture. The question remains unanswered whether Bessie is discontent because she sees Coonardoo as one of her children or only as one of her subjects. Anyway, it can be stated that the influence of white people‘s society and especially their language is not ubiquitous. Thus, the power of silence exists due to Coonardoo‘s inclination towards Aboriginal culture. One reason might be that Coonardoo is not allowed to talk about aboriginal rituals. Here silence is a mean to keep secrets, to share knowledge only among fellow Aborigines and keep whites out of Aboriginal culture. Thus, Aborigines depict white colonisers as the ‘others’ (Prichard 1994: 26) and turn the ”game” upside down.

Nevertheless, there are limits where silence does not have influence anymore. When Hugh comes home from his boarding school, Bessie hands over the country to him. The question might be asked whether she actually owns it and therefore has the justification to give it to her son (Prichard 1994: 33-34). The results and repercussions of the ownership of Australia are without a doubt negative for the Aborigines. One reason for these issues might be the fact that Aboriginal language (an oversimplification because there were 300-700 in the 18th century, whereas today‘s number might be around 150) does not know words or concepts like ”ownership” as well as ”master” or ”boss”. As linguists claim that languages and their concepts influence their speakers on a wide range, it sheds a negative light on the English, colonising language and a very cooperative one on the aboriginal tongue. As a result, however, Aborigines lose their country and foundation to live and become servants of the white settlers.

In Samson and Delilah Thornton tried to put petrol sniffing in a different light. This addiction, unfortunately, is fairly common in the Aboriginal community, but little is reported about it. Normally, petrol sniffers are represented as homeless, uneducated, dirty, benumbed, but Thornton tried to humanise their fate and give them also a caring and tender image.

On the other hand, the white Australians who are able to help are depicted negatively. Especially the role of Christianity and the church as a whole are represented as a hollow and hypocritical institution. Although Christian churches are even built up in the outback, they do not care for their believers. Christianity is just another device to exploit Aborigines and extract their original identity. When Delilah is in a church in Alice Springs – beaten, wounded in her face, dirty clothes on – she sees the hollowness of Christianity. The church promotes charity, but Delilah does not profit from it. There is even a painting of a coloured mother with a little child and a halo behind them. It looks like Maria and her baby Jesus who might promote the idea of a multicultural Christian society, but a priest turns up and even he does not talk to Delilah and offers her help. In spite of these happenings, she places a cross on a wall at the end when she is with Samson at her new house. This action either represents that the values of Christianity are higher and go beyond buildings and people or from a colonial viewpoint that representations of white identity still influence Aborigines even after all what they have gone through.

In addition, the film withholds a few scenes and leaves it to the audience to fill them with content. When Delilah is kidnapped by white men she comes back beaten up. The audience does not have to guess, but for sure the white men abused and raped. On the other side, when Delilah has the car accident, white Australians come rushing to her and bring her to a hospital obviously. These interpretations are not hard to grasp, but if we try to reach a communicative level with Samson, it gets harder and more broadly based. For instance, the interpretation of ”S4D onely ones” which Samson writes on the wall of the shop. One could come up with four different results at least: 1) Samson for Delilah – only ones; 2) Samson for Delilah – lonely ones; 3) sad only ones; 4) sad lonely ones.

However, Samson and Delilah are not able to develop a power or concurrence within Australian society. They go back to their station and leave for a remote place. In juxtaposition to Coonardoo, the message is not cooperation, but distinction. Thornton presents their destiny and wants to make the white Australian society aware of it. There are Aborigines in their country who share the similar occurrences and feelings with Samson and Delilah.

An important aspect of The Piano is the mystery around Ada and Flora‘s identity: does Flora tell the truth when she says that her father was a famous German composer and Ada an opera singer? Ada silences her. Is Flora right when she claims that her mother became mute after an accident? The whole scene can be compared to a fireside story and therefore gets closer to rumours than truth. However, the women who Flora tells the story to are of a simple kind and believe her. Similar rumours are put in Alistair‘s mind by them and put most of the pressure on him. They are not able to change perspectives and get access to anything but their own perception. When Flora comes up with one of her mother‘s sayings which is that most people only talk rubbish and it is not worth listening, they are startled and do not review it critically. The perspectives of both Flora and the women exercise influence upon others and especially in Alistair‘s case lead to the exertion of his power over Ada when he chops off one of her fingers.

By cutting off Ada‘s finger, Alistair deprives her off a crucial device for playing the piano and to communicate in Ada‘s case as well. But, when he actually uses his axe and does so, she does not make a single sound. Therefore, it is questionable whether he was able to punish her at all, because eventually all this pain leads to a liberation. Although she is in pain she is not uttering a single sound and represents herself first, as a brave person and secondly, as unwilling to communicate.

Romaine Moreton‘s poem deals with nature and gives it as well as Aborigines a voice. Although Aborigines do make sounds like nature, for example the bark of certain animals, the sound of a cyclone, the shattering of an earthquake, Aborigines are not represented or falsely seen by white Australians. They share features of animals, e.g. the plume of the emu, the tooth of the shark and movements of the spear and boomerang. They even move like unseen, but also unrepresented shadows. White Australian society has discarded itself from nature and rather tries to master nature than being a part of it.

Aboriginal beliefs, nonetheless, have been defined in large by white settlers as being wrong. Their culture has been transferred to ill-beliefs and superstition due to their ”bla(c)kness”. The ”bla(c)k beauty” had to be silenced and they could not worship nature any longer.

As ambivalent as before are the results for this chapter. Voiceless figures are able to reach powerful positions and oppose against stereotypical representations. For instance, indigenous and white people in Coonardoo reveal that white civilisation and

black culture oppose each other. White civilisation is an unknown land for the Aborigines, but there is no notion of a myth-building around it. In contrast to that, black culture is a quiet, unknown place to the white settlers, but in contrast they do come up with myths and rumours. Out of these stories the white settlers use their powerful position and create ”truths” for them. They also have the means to take the country and make their ownership a fact, another ”truth” for them. Samson and Delilah juxtaposes these thoughts most significantly with the help of the Christian Church. It stands for a powerful institution which promotes the words of The Holy Bible and western civilisation. On the other hand, when Flora talks about her fabulous story of ancestry, she also makes believe that it is true. She spreads a fairy tale which you might believe in. What might be most powerful of her story and the word of God are the underlying values. Especially in Samson and Delilah, Christian faith retains its position even after Delilah has been ignored by the priest in the Church in Alice Springs. But when she is back in her home country and puts a cross at the wall of her shed, it is clear that silence does not only mean ignorance and indifference, but also the belief in a better future, salvation and faith in a just deity.

Nevertheless, the silence of Aboriginal culture in Samson and Delilah evokes a loss of identity, too. The power of western civilisation brought Christianity to the Aborigines and resulted in a decay of their belief. In juxtaposition, Romaine Moreton puts up the debate of culture versus nature. The modern western civilisation might have brought many developments and improvements to us, but also a distance to nature. While indigenous people are able to survive in a remote place, civilised people are not anymore, although we are still part of nature – a thought which is also indicated with reference to Friday from Robinson Crusoe by Daniel Defoe in Moreton‘s poem.

2.4. Language and Naming

Language and naming itself is the underlying structure of this paper and therefore it should mark the end point of the aspects under investigation. Being the opposite of silence it is important to analyse Language and Naming, too, because first, it presents those who bear a powerful position and secondly, it sheds light to those who are about to gain representation by finding a way of communication, too. Already a look at the titles Coonardoo, Samson and Delilah, The Piano and ”Blak Beauty” show a rich fundament of interpretation. Coonardoo and Samson and Delilah allude to muteness and subjugation under western naming. Coonardoo, i.e. the well in the shadows, is as controlled as

Samson and Delilah, i.e. two figures of the Old Testament. In contrast, The Piano and ”Blak Beauty” can be seen as speaking up against violence and degradation. Both works suffer under preeminent discourses and struggle to be represented in their community. However, in the end Ada learns how to speak and the poem by Moreton ends with the description of blakness which is peace and harmony with nature.

This kind of peace and nature is also described in Coonardoo a couple of times, but especially Aboriginal language is branded as a bad tongue. Throughout the story of Coonardoo there is a scene where Saul – normally a fairly liberal mind about Aborigines – says that Aborigines forget their mother tongue and will not use aboriginal swear words anymore. First, it is apparent how language and its usage or not-usage performs domination and, secondly, Saul does not think positively about the aboriginal language (Prichard 1994: 128). This might be due to the fact that he does not understand them and feels uncomfortable with this. Anyway, it points out the strategy that has been practised with many languages on the borderline (e.g. Welsh, Breton and many others). Speakers of underrepresented or forbidden languages have to find alternative ways to keep their language and distinctive feature of their identity alive.

On the other side, but equally negative is the power of the white settlers to name items. Sam Geary, for example, names his Aboriginal women after Greek goddesses, but do not speak one word. They are subjugated to the will of Geary and are removed of any kind of identity. Furthermore, all the horses that have been domesticated are called after Greek and Roman gods and goddesses, too. This points out once again the power of white European civilisation and their power to name things and therefore exercise power upon the country (Prichard 1994: 45). Their influence is even so deep that Warieda uses the aboriginal language to help domesticating the wild horses. It might be true to say that the Aboriginal tongue is a special one because it has the power to communicate to the horses but this service helps the white colonisers to domesticate and geld them (Prichard 1994: 53).

Another almost mythological and prophetical naming can be interpreted if we consider that one of Geary‘s Aboriginal women is called Sheba. A glance at the meaning of the Old Testament‘s Sheba uncovers that she united southern Arabia to one single country after many battles. Although Sheba is underrepresented and given identity through Geary‘s power of naming her as he wishes, it promotes the assessment that there is only a future for Australia if Aborigines and white Australians can be united.

Aboriginal power of naming things is reduced to the station and their own limited circle. The Aborigines call Hugh either You (a reference and allusion to the reader?!) or Youie whereas Mollie is named Mulli. The Aborigines have to laugh when they say it, but we do not get to know why (Prichard 1994: 93). This passage is not only another example of the boundaries of communication, but also the power of naming things for Aborigines. They make Mollie feel uncomfortable and turn her into a foreign figure, an outsider who leaves the homestead eventually. A special significance, however, has to be paid to Coonardoo and her representation. Not only because the novel is called Coonardoo but also because of her meaning: the well in the shadows. It fosters images of deepness, fertility, but also of ownership and usage by the white Australians. There is an interrelation between nature and people (including indigenous and settlers) which explains why she and the homestead die eventually. By representing Aboriginal Australia and White Australia with Coonardoo and Hugh, Prichard parallels their fate with Australia‘s as a whole; if these two are not able to love each other, the country will decay and dissolve in nature (Prichard 1994: ix).

An example of white silence in connection with power of communication can be seen in the scene where Mollie asks Hugh whether Winni is his son. Hugh does not respond and leaves it up to Mollie whether she thinks so. However, this silence does not leave room for interpretation; the answer is clear. The Aborigines, on the other side, possess a whole system to communicate without using words. They sense each others thinking, they have an ”aboriginal intuition, instinctive wisdom” (Prichard 1994: 150).

As I mentioned before, it is quite hard to reach a mutual communicative level with Samson and Delilah. According to Therese Davis, the audience has to go beyond spoken language in order to understand Samson. The fact that there are not many dialogues, camera techniques and music get more important. There is Charley Pride, for example, who turns up with two songs: ”All I Have To Offer You Is Me” and ”Sunshiny Day”. Both symbolise the ambivalence for indigenous people and especially, at the very beginning, they convey a deeply sarcastic message. Charley Pride himself offers an ambivalent story as he was one of the few who had success as a black country singer. A representation is mainly possible through western music and other ways of representations which are highly influenced by western prejudices though.

Furthermore, Samson utters only a very limited amount of spoken language. It becomes clear throughout the film that he is not able to speak neither English nor

Aboriginal. Thus, the few expressions he makes are of a higher importance, then. At the beginning, when he plays the guitar, he says ”yeah”. Apparently, he enjoys playing the guitar because it is an opportunity to convey messages for him. But he can play the guitar only on very basic term and it rather sounds like noise. His brother who plays the guitar always takes away the instrument and does not leave him a chance to learn how to play a few chords which makes Samson sad and angry. Thus, his way of communication is limited to actions, gestures and facial expressions because he is not taught differently.

On the other side, Delilah speaks Aboriginal with her grandmother, although the English subtitles reveal that their language is also based only on a fundamental level and consists of fairly no elaborated constructions. It cannot be judged whether she understands English or not. The few encounters with white Australians are based on a few words only. Their communicative foundation could be grounded on gestures and facial expressions, too. In her case it might be quite likely that she chose not to speak English which would put her silence in a more powerful position. First, it would mean that she chose it actively and still has the power to decide. Secondly, the white Australian society might have influenced her (e.g. on religious terms), but the influence stopped at her language.

Right at the beginning of The Piano, Ada indicates that there is a difference between speaking and mind voice. She makes clear that she does not see herself as silent because of her piano. However, others do not treat her as a single, distinctive character. Her daughter Flora is her speaking voice, nobody else understands sign language, so Flora has to act as an interpreter. Thus, most of the others do not look at or address Ada when they want to communicate with her.

Baines, as indicated before, is a person who inherits both a white coloniser, but also features of the indigenous Maori. He speaks Maori and has a few tattoos who link him to the Maori culture. Furthermore, he is also linked to Ada through a lack of representation. Ada is not capable of speaking and Baines cannot read. Normally, there is no way of communication left because Baines does not play the piano either. Anyhow, they are able to communicate and even fall in love. In parallel, when Ada tells Flora the story of her father she points out that she did not need to speak to him and they could communicate without words, too. The Piano underlines the impossibility of expressing certain feelings, most of all love. Eventually, it even finishes with Ada getting her speaking voice again.

However, when they leave New Zealand she has to decide whether to keep the piano or push it overboard due to its weight. She decides to push it into the sea, but to go with it and drown as well. But she realises that she wants to stay alive, which is a surprise to hear as the mind voice admits. She decides against a silent grave and ultimate silence meaning death. On the contrary, she experiences a rebirth and starts a new life.

The most apparent feature of gaining voice, the power of representation in ”Blak Beauty” is the ”misspelling” of the word ”bla(c)k” itself. It does not only point out the contradiction that blackness has been defined by whites over centuries, but also the new strength of indigenous people to fill languages of the old colonisers with new meanings. There is a discussion in post-colonial studies whether a tongue of former colonisers can lead to more independence and self-determination in the first place, and whether it rather should be their native language which should be used. Nonetheless, it can be claimed at least that methods like ”misspellings” are indicators of distinction and thus, can be regarded as non-western. Thereby, Moreton gains possession of the word ”blak” and is able to give it a distinctive concept which is different to the ”original”. However, Moreton also regrets that the need for ”black” art demanded by the white society originated from the discovery of ”blak” art in the first place. By declaring indigenous beliefs as ”evil” and ”outlaw” ”the like of black art” was born. In consequence, many superficial judgements have been formulated and extended through western community.

3. Conclusion

The result of this paper shows that the works of Katherine Susannah Prichard, Warwick Thornton, Jane Campion and Romaine Moreton present advantages as well as disadvantages of silence as a way of representation. Examples from our everyday life reveal that communication does not only take place through words, but to a large amount also through silence supported by gestures and facial expressions. Especially, both films Samson and Delilah and The Piano make great use of silence and music as alternative forms of representation. In contrast, the perspectives of Prichard as an outsider and Moreton as an insider of Aboriginal community highlight that certain prejudices and stereotypes are still up to date. While Moreton‘s poem favours a harmonious and equal relationship with nature, Coonardoo, Samson and Delilah and The Piano finish with either death, segregation and love-unison. All of the artists describe the bond between colonisers, Aborigines and the land, but there are limits which seem to be impossible to

overcome with words (Sheridan 1995: 135). Thus, some questions remain unanswered if we combine all of them: does representation without silence mean that indigenous and/or white settlers lose their identity? Are indigenous people able to get representation and also participation in governmental institutions, eventually?

Silence, however, does not stop at indigeneity, but is equally performed on women in Australian patriarchal society. Thus, it is only men who perform acts of physical brutality upon silent women. Ada loses one of her fingers, Delilah is abused as well as raped, and Coonardoo is maltreated, burnt and dies, finally. Instead of Coonardoo, there are Bessie and Phyllis who function as women with a powerful voice. They are able to stand up for themselves and do not have to overcome a silence in the first place. Nevertheless, there is no sign that Aboriginal women are able follow them on equal terms. The same can be said of Delilah and the Maori women in The Piano. They care for their relatives and share many common interests, but they cannot or do not want to speak up against white women and white civilisation as a whole. Male white civilisation is not as much influenced by the female indigenous population as the other way around.

Bibliography

Campion, Jane. 2006 [1992]. The Piano. Ciby 2000.

Jaworski, Adam. 1993. The Power of Silence – Social and Pragmatic Perspectives. Newbury Park: SAGE Publications.

McCrath, Ann. 1995. ”‘Modern Stone-Age Slavery’: Images of Aboriginal Labour and Sexuality”. Labour History, No. 69: 30-51.

Moreton, Romaine. 2004. ”Blak Beauty.” 2004. Moreton, Romaine. Post me to The Prime Minister. Alice Springs: IAD Press.

Prichard, Katherine Susannah. 1994 [1925]. Coonardoo. Sydney: Angus & Robertson.

Sheridan, Susan. 1995. Along the Faultlines – Sex, Race and Nation in Australian Women‘s Writing 1880s-1930s. St. Leonards: Allen & Unwin.

Thornton, Warwick. 2010 [2009]. Samson and Delilah. Victoria: Madman Entertainment.

A comparison of French loanwords in 19th-century English Dictionaries

Oktober 21, 2013 Comments Off Englisch

Wörterbücher sind eine Institution in unserem heutigen Umgang. Egal, ob off- oder online. Im 19. Jahrhundert war dies allerdings noch nicht so und das Konzept eines Wörterbuches vermischte sich gerne noch mit Lexika. Außerdem fügten die sogenannten Lexikographen gerne noch Tipps, Ratschläge oder sogar Vorschriften hinzu, welche Wörter, wann, wie und überhaupt zu benutzen seien. Bei französischen Lehnwörtern war dies auch so. Diese Arbeit untersucht empirisch die Auswirkungen auf ausgesuchte Wörterbücher.

Introduction

The English language has been influenced by different cultures and their tongues permanently. Most of the impact came from Latin, Greek, French or Germanic people throughout the centuries and is still visible today. The French language on its side was most prominent because of the reign of King Louis XIV of France who was able to set his dominion as a role model. Nevertheless, the Norman conquest of 1066 brought more severe changes to the English vocabulary as well as grammar. In consequence, French was the leading language at all the courts in Europe. During the 19th century, however, England got into a more powerful position and was not only the founder of industrialisation, but also the most successful coloniser. Therefore, the 19th century can also be described as ”an era of new English“ (Bailey 1996, 139). These changes in the English tongue have been observed by the contemporaries, too, and evoked discussions about its purity as well as openness. Although the Norman conquest of 1066 brought more crucial changes to the English vocabulary as well as grammar, many contemporaries did not consider this. In fact, prescriptive lexicographers were in favour of a purer English language, which should try to defend its status and character against foreign effects. These people, most importantly Samuel Johnson, upheld their position up to the middle of the 19th century. In 1828, however, the American lexicographer Noah Webster published his American Dictionary of the English Language and its impact reached the English island soon after. It was the first dictionary to give a comprehensive coverage of the American usage of the(ir) English language. Thus, the second half of the 19th century is marked by people who intended to accomplish the same for the British English language. At the end of this development stands the Oxford English Dictionary, whose first volume was published in 1888.
According to this historical framework, this paper is aimed at an analysis of French loanwords based on Manfred Görlach‘s list of 383 French loanwords in Aspects of the History of English. Görlach ascribes to these gallicisms their first time of appearance and combines it with their intended meaning though does not clarify the concepts behind them. Due to the publication of the new, third Oxford English Dictionary, Görlach‘s list and their dates have been compared to the OED 3. It turned out that a few words could be dated at an earlier as well as later point of time. This is fairly important because in a second step these 383 words were looked up in four English dictionaries of the 19th century: 1) Samuel Johnson‘s Dictionary of the English Language with a revision by John Walker published in 1813, 2) Charles Richardson‘s New Dictionary of the English Language from 1838, 3) John Ogilvie‘s Imperial Dictionary taken from 1855 and, 4) Charles Annandale‘s Concise English Dictionary from 1886. The hypothesis is that the entries of French loanwords do not only unveil the different approach of prescriptive and descriptive lexicographers, but also an answer to the question whether 19th-century borrowings from French are not integrated, i.e. remain ‘aliens’.
The theoretical part of this paper relies its content mainly on publications by Richard Baily and Hans Aarsleff. Both accomplished important insights into society and culture of the Victorian Era. The second part of this paper which presents the findings of the empirical work looks back at results of Mary S. Serjeantson and Thomas Finkenstaedt as well as Manfred Görlach who bases his findings on both authors.

French Influence on 19th-Century English

The first third of the 19th century is a continuation of the 18th century despite of the Industrial Revolution. Social, cultural and last but not least economical changes did not result in a different attitude towards French. The English society of the 18th and 19th century was torn between the high prestige of French in educated circles and the allergic reaction that the impact of French produced in Johnson and others. Although the influence of French loanwords has been noticeable long before the start of the 19th century, the Victorian Age paid special attention to foreign interferences as well as a distinction of lower an upper classes. The self-understanding of the upper classes, for example, included that they talked about serious and important matters, whereas the others did not, but they only talked about people and other irrelevant things. Concerning French loanwords, these were less accepted, but moreover ridiculed when there were plain and ordinary English equivalents. Nonetheless, this disapproval is comparable to Greek and Latin words which were not accepted in the higher ranks, too (Görlach 1999b, 165-67). Interestingly, a tendency can be observed that plain English words are more frequently in use in the higher ranks than cultivated ones. One reason might be that middle classes were able to gather more money than certain aristocratic groups and replaced them. However, there was still a high degree of restricted usage of established coinages which were rather applied by the higher ranks. Also prudery played a huge role in this spheres where inappropriate words could not be used. This procedure of allowing and forbidding unacceptable words shares many characteristics with purist and descriptive grammarians and lexicographers who will be dealt with later on (Phillipps 1984, 51-57).
On the other side, French was fairly useless for the lower ranks. Not until 1870 board schools were introduced and extended public education also on the rural working classes (Phillipps 1984, 85-93). French was the most important second language and it kept this position throughout the 19th century, even though German was catching up. However, there are also accounts of how poorly French was taught in schools. One recorded example are the Brontë sisters who only had rudimentary knowledge of French . Before board schools could reach the rural working classes, the public examination by universities affected the teaching of French. From 1857/58 onwards the Oxford and Cambridge Local Examinations took over the teaching of French and it managed to establish (also overseas) English on a position next to Latin and Greek. Thus, French lost influence and was degraded as a ”soft option“ (Görlach 1999a, 182).
As addressed earlier on, there were many critics which were not in favour of the French impact on the English language. They denounced it to be unpatriotic, betraying, a polluter and many more. Not surprisingly, gallicisms, especially those which have been adopted by speakers of another language, were used in literature and journalism to ridicule persons, e.g. to make fun out of an overtly refined education. But the criticism also turned towards the fellow Englishmen and their attitude to include many languages to the English. Those who thought French influence would not endanger the English language regarded French mainly as an elegant tongue and welcomed its opportunity to enrich English. This was not only because of the fact that French was the language of the European aristocracy, but also because it delivered special vocabulary, e.g. weapons clothes, occupations, cookery and fashion (Görlach 1999a, 195).
In conclusion, it can be observed that the upper classes, on the one hand, preserve conventions and formalities. On the other, they oppose against innovations and so-called informalities. The newly rich who entered better society from lower classes with its peak around 1830 to 1865 might have brought in new names and
times for meals (Phillipps 1984, 168-173). This restriction to cookery, clothes and fashion as well as the declining influence of French as a whole leaves the criticisms against the French influence in a controversial position. If the impact is limited to a very special and distinctive area, many reactions by objectors of gallicisms are rather exaggerated than reasonable.

19th-Century Dictionaries

Dictionaries are a fairly new invention and received more attention with the publication of Samuel Johnson‘s Dictionary of the English Language. Before its printing, dictionaries did not orientate on a common structure and were not highly regarded by the academic world. Up to the middle of the 15th century 75% of the 20,000 most frequent words were already in use and new printing methods allowed mass production of pamphlets and small volume books, but dictionaries did not profit from it.
Foremost, the 19th century marks the century of change in the English language. Compared to the 18th century, the 19th century was very creative: from 1730 to 1739, 577 new words are listed; from 1830 to 1839, 2,521 new words are recorded (Finkenstaedt & Leisi 1970, xiii). Most of these new words go back to new developments in sciences, arts and similar branches. For instance, many new coinages of medicine are based on Latin and Grecian words. For those who did not know any Greek and/or Latin these new words were seen with bewilderment. This group of people often stated that many interfering languages make a chaos out of the English tongue. Especially French words were presented in a negative way because it was feared that they would ruin English by intruding it. Famous figures like Daniel Defoe claimed that the French influence was bad and John Dryden declared that it would turn English into French. It would not refine English but turn English into French and lose its characteristic identity. On the other side, there was a group which thought that the introduction of foreign words was a proof of the anglophone cosmopolitan superiority. Nowadays, however, these dictionaries have to be judged with care because many of them were taken without a lot of review as a proof of the vitality of the English language. A couple of their entries contain questionable entries and define them with disputable concepts (Bailey 1996, 161-168).

Johnson and his fellow Lexicographers

The beginning of 19th-century lexicography was still characterised by Samuel Johnson. His dictionary was the first to set up a structured framework on gathering and listing words in a volume. However, he is also well-known as the leader of prescriptive attitudes towards the usage of the English tongue. He made two major decisions: 1) he limited of what is included and what is not; 2) he set the authority of which words can be included. The latter decision is mainly based on the principle that proper English focused on definitions of proper people: he quotes from important literary figures and makes them his authorities. Throughout his academic life ideas of inaccuracy and impropriety are visible as well as among his fellow scholars. For instance, they refused to combine Greek and Latin to form new words, which means that a combination of a Latin root and a Greek suffix was not accepted. The critics held the opinion that word combinations should be of the same origin. Thus, they denied the creative aspect of morphology and constrained the English language to its current position. In fact, they believed that the root of a word can be traced back to its true, original meaning, which is known as the etymological fallacy. Nevertheless, many terms in sciences have been formed without paying too much attention to original spelling and therefore weakened arguments of people who sticked to etymology and its ”truth”. For example, gramophone, which should have been spelled grammophone to match to the Greek spelling. Concerning pronunciation, however, purists supported the original, native pronunciations in order to sustain its character. Johnson himself did not deny foreign words in general, but they had to be useful for common life and his view of that was distinct. In the end, Johnson and his colleagues disputed that these new terms could enrich English because these new words did not get into the sphere of literature but only represented things or inventions. Eventually, Johnson‘s saying that ”our language is our own“ evokes the impression that he regarded language too synchronically and not diachronically (Crowley 1991, 42-62).
There are a couple of lexicographers who followed in Johnson‘s shadow. One of them was Horne Tooke whose influence was strong and lasting. It took a long time until new thoughts on philology were established although Tooke is famous for being the father of the etymological fallacy. Tooke‘s intention was to combine philology with philosophy. With the rise of sciences, philology adopted several terminological definitions, e.g. from chemistry, and benefitted from their success. Due to the support of the utilitarians and their powerful position at that time Tooke‘s position was strengthened, too. His a priori method included mental categories and their exemplification in language, such as universal grammar. He based etymology on conjectures about the origin of language and his results are sometimes amusing, but at the end simply wrong. Thus, most criticism was uttered against the arbitrary exchange of letters to show kinship between words, languages and nations. In opposition to his a priori method, is the posteriori one which is still the fundament of etymological research today. It tries to detect facts, evidences and wants to demonstrate etymological relations upon their interpretations. Furthermore, there are no intended relations between language and philosophy but a distinctions between both of them.
A new approach towards a new lexicography could not have been accomplished without the appropriation of continental European scholarship and the rejection of Tooke‘s ideas. In spite of that, the next important lexicographer is Charles Richardson, a disciple of Tooke. Richardson studied Tooke and contributed a lot to his fame. He underlined the view on etymology that it is not derived from the usage as the most decisive feature. He kept up that this perspective is too narrow and bound to the context where it is found. Richardson‘s dictionary is remembered because he put a lot of emphasis on definition and quotation. He commented on each entry with a short notice and followed the example of Tooke and his claim that each word has one original meaning. Apart from that, he also went back in history and used authorities like Chaucer, Gower and others to underline the meaning of the entry. In his opinion, quotations are more important than a mere explanation of the meaning. Thus, after a short notice of each words‘ concept follows a long and extensive list of various authors. The reader should be able to elicit the meaning(s) of each entry with the help of these authors independently. But due to incorrect etymological distinctions entries were depicted in a wrong light. Furthermore, an immense listing of quotations sometimes tends to blur a clear-cut definition of the entries. On the opposite, there are entries whose meaning is to manifold because they do not include sufficient quotations and thus, do not deliver a complete picture. Richardson‘s etymological foundation turns out to inherit another difficulty as well. Several entries are summed up among derivative reasons into a single entry. However, this means that they are also abridged under inadequate quotations (Hausmann 1990, 1957). Nevertheless, Richardson‘s work was an improvement,
although he did not plan to publish a history of English but a history of thought and mind. It was one step forward because it supported the view that the historical method gained more insight and indirectly proved that Tooke‘s arbitrariness led into a dead end. He could show how words developed new meanings over the centuries and promoted the view that it is the use of words which determines their meaning (Aarsleff 1967, 73-252).

Webster‘s Influence and the new Lexicographers

When Noah Webster published his dictionary for American English, it turned out quickly that it would change British English lexicography, too. In comparison to Webster‘s achievement, Johnson‘s and Richardson‘s dictionaries are quite incomplete. In contrast to the purist‘s claim, many creative scientists and authors used the new wave of terminologies to play with it, such as George Bernard Shaw, who described a fondness of the music of Richard Wagner as ”Wagneritis”. Such coinages, of course, were an affront or insult for the purists, also because traditional labels were pushed back and words from France and Germany gained more influence. Fears of ruining the English language were not shared by the descriptive lexicographers most of the time because they insisted on the permanent and historical changes which English and every other language underwent. For instance, ”to sail“ originally meant the action of moving a ship with the help of wind; later and still today, however, also steam ships sail across the oceans without using a sail at all (Bailey 1996, 139-76).
In 1850, John Ogilvie‘s Imperial Dictionary was one of the first publications which was based on the authority of Webster. It is multi-volumed and encyclopaedic, but recognises that Webster leaves out words which are not yet common and familiar to British English. Furthermore, he bears in mind that Webster is less concerned with the sciences which is of higher importance for Ogilvie. Concerning sciences, the encyclopaedic method of his dictionary is most apparent. He supports his definitions with illustrations and underlines the growing relevance of encyclopaedias during that time. His high reputation was also maintained by his etymological work. On the contrary to Richardson, he summarised each word and granted them main-entry status. In his succession followed Charles Annandale who kept features of Ogilvie‘s work, e.g. original etymology, illustrations and references to sciences. One of his new additions to Ogilvie‘s outline was the use of bold typed entries, also among main entries, which was copied by coming lexicographers later on. Furthermore, he attached compounds, phrases and illustrative examples, but limited outdated words to those from the Bible, Shakespeare, Milton and other famous authors. Annandale‘s achievement, nevertheless, was not restricted to contemporary lexicography, but can be regarded as the best and closest framework for the first and following publication of the Oxford English Dictionary as well as similarly popular dictionaries (Hausmann 1990, 1960).

Comparison of French Loanwords in selected Dictionaries

The changes during Middle English, which have been brought to the the British Isles, brought a lot new features such as phonological and morphological ones. But also on a lexical basis English received many new coinages after the Norman conquest and their substitution of the English aristocracy with the Norman French-speaking nobility. Mary S. Serjeantson remarks that the lexical field, however, is difficult. There might be instances of borrowings, losses, re-borrowings or (re-)borrowings with a different form or different meaning. This code-switching and extension of meaning also referred to as generalisation, narrowing of meaning also known as degeneration and regeneration will be of crucial importance in the analysis later on. Nevertheless, it is well known that more French words have been introduced during the 19th century than in any other era since the period of Middle English from 1100 to 1450. Most prominent groups are art and literature, dress and textiles including furniture. Similarly important are groups which contain food and cooking as well as general political terms. The peak can be spotted around the years from 1830 to 1860 (Serjeantson 1968 [1935], 156-69). This assessment is shared by Thomas Finkenstaedt who fathoms that there is a steady growth from the beginning of the 19th century up to the middle of the century and a sharp decrease until the end of the century tending almost to zero (Finkenstaedt 1973, 29). A look at the foreign loanwords presents an ambivalent image, however. On the one hand, there are alien words which are gradually anglicised and integrated into the common language. But there are also examples which do not show that process or even the complete opposite. Finkenstaedt claims that extrinsic parameters are decisive, first of all cultural characteristics:

”The probability of a word‘s survival depends on the cultural significance of the denotatum (signifié, significate), not on the linguistic structure of the word, nor on the structure of the lexicon at the moment of introducing the word. Words of this type are usually ‘isolated‘ words in the receiving language; they are neither members of a semantic field, nor are they self-explanatory from the etymological point of view: they are neither ‘consociated’ nor ‘dissociated’ etymologically“ (Finkenstaedt 1973, 58).

Thus, speed and extent of adaption to the phonology and morphology depends on the corresponding relevance for the receiving language. The SOED includes following foreign entries: Latin (Neolatin coinings included) 28.24%; French (Old French, Anglo-French) 28.30%, Germanic (Old English, ME, Old Norse, Dutch) 25.00% (Finkenstaedt 1973, 125-6) . Only after a long period a word can be claimed to be a must for the lexicon of an educated speaker.

Problems and Results

When a word is seen as a must of an educated speaker, however, is not easily established. Therefore, this paper concentrates on tendencies among the dictionaries under analysis. As a result, it can establish trends among the listed gallicisms and present increasing, decreasing, vanishing and again appearing gallicisms as well as loanwords which were not integrated at all. However, there is also a group of words which either was traced back further back or forward concerning their first appearance in Görlach‘s list. The whole list with new first time appearances is presented chronologically after the new OED 3 (cf. appendix, Revised List in Chronological Order of the OED 3). The new findings are highlighted in orange and Görlach‘s first time appearances are presented for the purpose of comparison. The difference varies from a single year up to several centuries. Alongside this difficulty exists the determination of their meaning. Already the OED 2 is not clear enough concerning words with a ”French provenance”. For instance, words which have been coined in a certain speech community like telephone in American English, morphology in German and eucalyptus in French can be ascribed to neo-Greek all together. In general, French gave a lot of neo-classical words to the European languages from the 18th century onwards. Therefore, distinctions have to be made between neo-classical words and gallicisms because the reactions differed apparently. Nonetheless, a comparison of the first time appearance of Görlach‘s list and the date of the OED 3 reveals similar results. Although 47 gallicisms have been antedated before 1800 and one gallicism after 1899 the course of the graphs are similar and still indicate the same peaks and lows over the decades (cf. appendix, First time appearance of Görlach‘s list compared to OED 3).
If these questions are put aside, the following results can be noted. All of the dictionaries have examples which refer to English words and do not integrate the French equivalent. For example, the French noun ”abandon” is not mentioned in any dictionary and instead remains with the English ”abandon” or ”abandonment”. However, there are also examples of a final inclusion in Annandale‘s dictionary, such as ”gigantesque” and ”physique”. Both of them are listed in Johnson‘s, Richardson‘s as well as Ogilvie‘s dictionary with an equivalent English word, e.g. ”gigantic” or ”physick”. Only Annandale‘s dictionary records both as French and with the identical description. In juxtaposition to different English words, there are different French words listed which might also differ in another concept. ”Coiffeur” for head-dresser, for example, is not registered in any dictionary, whereas ”coiffure” for head-dress is noted in all of them. Another difference to the original list can be seen in divergences concerning grammar, as in the French verb ”arcade”. It is documented as French throughout all of the dictionaries but as the long existing noun. Most importantly, however, are the numbers of correctly written and defined gallicisms. The amount increases from six in Johnson‘s, eight in Richardson‘s, 49 in Ogilvie‘s and finally 175 in Annandale‘s. In order to give a fair report, however, it has to be kept in mind that most of the gallicisms are dated after the publication of the dictionaries by Johnson and Richardson. So, all gallicisms were recorded up to the dictionaries publication date and the amounting percentage resembles the frequency of gallicisms in the dictionary. It turned out that Johnson‘s and Richardson‘s dictionaries have a fairly low percentage of 3.81% and 1.96%. Ogilvie‘s and Annandale‘s dictionaries, on the other
side, show an increase of gallicisms from 16.25% up to 48.08%. There are also certain gallicisms which are written down in the dictionaries, although the date of publication is before the date of the gallicism‘s first arrival. (Fig. 1).

Interpretations of the Results

The selection of the four dictionaries was mainly chosen because they can be divided into two groups of prescriptive and descriptive volumes. Although Johnson‘s dictionary was originally published in the middle of the 18th century, it still had so much influence upon 19th-century lexicographers. Moreover, a look at the entries which are listed in Johnson‘s dictionary reveal that they are dated after 1755. In conclusion, they must have been added to the original volume. This might have happened due to a free concept in the lexicon whereas a gradual acceptance and integration to it seems less probable because most of the gallicisms are fairly close to the publication date. On the other side, most of the gallicisms are not represented in Johnson‘s dictionary, but have similar English or French entries. This supports the assumption that new loanwords have to undergo a certain time of acceptance. In addition, they have to inherit a new concept which is not existent in the English lexicon yet (cf. appendix, Gallicisms in selected Dictionaries of the 19th century).
Gallicisms which are included in Johnson‘s, Richardson‘s and Ogilvie‘s dictionaries but are dated after their publishing date (Fig. 1) have to be dated at an earlier time of arrival. Three entries in Johnson‘s and Richardson‘s dictionaries are hard to establish due to various possibilities in the meaning of the entries. Nonetheless, Johnson offers a close definition of ”négligé” with ”a sort of gown once in fashion for a female dress“, although it is dated both by Görlach and OED 3 at 1835 while Johnson‘s dictionary was published in 1813. Concerning Richardson, ”fiancé“ is dated to 1853 also in both lists, although his dictionary was brought out in
1838 and sums it up under the noun the French verb ”Fiancer“ as ”to affiance […] to betroth“. In Ogilvie‘s list are also four words whose arrival is dated after the dictionaries publication. For instance, ”lamasery” is defined as a ”Buddhist religious society“ and dated at 1867 and ”ampère” as an electrodynamic theory established by the French scientist André-Amrie Ampère.
According to Johnson, Richardson follows his example and includes equally less gallicisms, which leads to the conclusion that both have a similar anti-French attitude and are less likely to accept them in their dictionary. On the contrary are Ogilvie‘s and Annandale‘s dictionaries concerning Görlach‘s French loanwords. While Ogilvie lists already 49 gallicisms, Annandale is at the peak with 175 (cf. appendix, Gallicisms in selected Dictionaries of the 19th century).
If single entries are compared among the dictionaries, it can be discovered that certain entries are not integrated at all and remain ‘aliens’. The French word ”comédienne” refers to a female comedian and is not introduced to Annandale, for instance. The word is dated at 1860 and dictionaries which have been introduced before speaking of ”comedian”. Annandale still remains with the same entries and does not offer an addition for a female counterpart. The French word ”employé“, however, is mentioned in Annandale‘s volume, but does not receive main entry status. It is subsumed under the English entry ”employee” and defines it as somebody ”who works for an employer”. Johnson, on the contrary, does not offer such a concept and only lists ”employer” as ”one who sets others to work”. Richardson joins the French verb ”employer” to the English equivalent ”employ” and defines it as ”to occupy”. Thus, a complete integration of ”employé” is not fulfilled, but rather results in a distinct English word. The gallicism ”ridicule”, on the other side, stands as an example of a difficult determination of its concept in Görlach‘s list. The definition of ”a women‘s small handbag […]“ in the OED 3 comes closest to Görlach‘s date of arrival, but is not included in any of the concepts which are found in the dictionaries. Johnson determines it from a Latin root with the meaning ”to expose to laughter“. Richardson, then, describes that it stems from a French word, but still keeps Johnson‘s meaning. Ogilvie‘s entry offers the English noun ”ridiculousness”, whereas Annandale looks back to Richardson again and refers to the French word ”ridicule” and defines it as ”mockery [or] excite laughter”. These examples underline that the concept of a small handbag is not established in the dictionaries because another concept has been constituted lang before.

Nevertheless, there are also incidents of gallicisms which are integrated in the end. ”Reconnaissance” is predated to 1779, but not listed in Johnson‘s and Richardson‘s dictionaries. Instead both note the French verb ”reconnaitre” with the definition ”to take a review of” or ”to take notice of”. Ogilvie is the first one to mention it but without an explanation. Annandale in the end says that it has a French provenance and presents the same definition like the OED 3 with the ”preliminary examination or survey of a territory or of an enemy‘s position”. A similar case, but with an English word can be seen in the French word ”gigantesque“. Johnson, Richardson and also Ogilvie do not mention the French word, but an equivalent English one, e.g. ”gigantick”, ”gigantical” and ”gigantic“. Again Annandale is the one who covers both the French spelling and its meaning. Nevertheless, the fact that all entries differ in suffixes, might signify that the French word is not finally integrated but that the concept of ”having the characteristics of a giant“ is settled and only the spelling is still a matter of discussion.
On the opposite, there are also French coinages which disappear and do not show up in Annandale‘s dictionary anymore. ”Confiture“, for instance, is mentioned in Johnson‘s as well as Richardson‘s work as a ”sweetmeat“ or ”confection”, but is gone in both Ogilvie‘s and Annandale‘s. The OED 3 offers a possible explanation for this decrease and says that it is an obsolete form for ”comfiture”. This, however, appears for the first time a lot before, namely either in the 14th or 16th century, and is defined as ”a preparation for drugs” or ”a preparation of preserved fruits”. Although according to the OED 3 ”confiture” was introduced in 1802 for the first time, it has been adopted quickly by opponents of gallicisms, but neglected by descriptive lexicographers.
In between decreasing and increasing gallicisms is a group which show s features of both disappearance and re-appearance. Both Görlach‘s list and the OED 3 select the first time arrival of ”gelatin” at 1800. Although Johnson mentions it and simply refers to ”gelatine”, Richardson and Ogilvie do not. Annandale again gives it an entry as ”a substance obtained from various animal tissues […]“, though he states that it comes from the French ”gélatine”.
Eventually, there is a longer list of words which are not included in Johnson‘s and Richardson‘s dictionaries, but later on in Ogilvie‘s and Annandale‘s records. It might be said that this is due to the different dates of publication but already up to 1813 there are fourteen entries which are not accounted by the two prescriptive writers, whereas both descriptive authors do take account of them. Till the end of the
year 1838, when Richardson published his dictionary, the number rises to 27. According to the total possible gallicisms both numbers result in a percentage of 13%. Though the number is not high, it shows a distinction between prescriptive and descriptive approaches towards lexicography. Moreover, the curve from Ogilvie to Annandale (cf. appendix, Gallicisms in selected Dictionaries of the 19th century) and the percentage of the listed gallicisms (Fig. 1) clearly proof that most French loanwords are found in the dictionaries by Ogilvie and Annandale.

Conclusion

If the few difficulties and uncertainties along this analysis are subsided, many conclusions can be drawn from the results. Earlier mentioned scholars have already established that French was mainly influential on a limited scale. First, the impact did not involve morphology, phonology or any other fields of grammatical rules. The outcome was reduced to lexis and the usage of certain words which existed before. This included mainly specialist fields of cookery, furniture, fashion and lifestyle. Therefore, allergic reactions are hard to justify if the following is considered: words which are both French in form and reasonably common result in a total percentage of 2.02% (Görlacha 1999a, 193). The common fear among purists that the English language would turn into a international and chaotic mixture does not bear a lot of convincing evidence. From the point of view of this paper and other academics English remained dominant; even in these French fields where an impact of gallicisms is visible.
Secondly, Finkenstaedt‘s remark that synchronic observations should also include diachronic considerations can be supported due to the comparison between the selected dictionaries (Finkenstaedt 1973, 55). Serjeantson‘s thought that there are instances of generalisation, degeneration and regeneration could be underlined by several French words which shared features of increase, decrease or both of them. Furthermore, systematic word formations led to other coinages which referred to the original word. However, also the private sector might have given impulses to the upper classes and led to the consequence that words also entered the lexicon of non-specialists. Though Görlach‘s list does not include a lot of technical terms which were founded during the 19th century, it does cover the field of cookery and elegant lifestyle. Probably, these terms have been introduced by social climbers, or parvenus, and entered society until they were accepted and used again.
Thirdly and most importantly, the leading question whether 19th-century borrowings are not integrated and remain aliens can be denied. Annandale‘s Concise English Dictionary includes half of the gallicisms and hereby, gives the fullest record of all the dictionaries in comparison. Although the OED 3 offers a more reliable and actual mirror of the English language, one of my initial ideas to find out whether the French influence was a cultural one or only coincidence is too hard to elaborate. It can be concluded, however, that the purist‘s approach to preserve the English language, failed at its very first moment because changes in languages do occur always and everywhere.

Bibliography

Aarsleff, Hans. 1967. The Study of Language in England, 1780-1860. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Annandale, Charley. 1886. The Large-Type Concise English Dictionary. London: Blackie & Son Limited.

Bailey, Richard W. 1996. Nineteenth-Century English. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.

Baugh, Albert C. & Cable, Thomas. 2009 [1951]. A History of the English Language. Abingdon: Routledge.

Crowley, Tony. 1991. Proper English? Readings in Language, History and Cultural Identity. London: Routledge.

Finkenstaedt, Thomas. 1970. A Chronological English Dictionary. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag.

Finkenstaedt, Thomas, Wolff, Dieter. 1973. Ordered Profusion – Studies in Dictionaries and the English Lexicon. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag.

Görlach, Manfred. 1999a. Aspects of the History of English. Heidelberg: Winter. 179-199.

Görlach, Manfred. 1999b. English in nineteenth-century England. Cambridge: CUP.

Hausmann, Franz Josef. 1990. Dictionaries – An International Encyclopedia of Lexicography. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.

Johnson, Samuel. 1813. A Dictionary of the English Language. Philadelphia: Johnson & Warner.

Ogilvie, John. 1855. The Imperial Dictionary. London: Blackie and Son.

Phillipps, K.C. 1984. Language and Class in Victorian England. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Richardson, Charles. 1838. A New Dictionary of the English Language. London: William Pickering.

Serjeantson, Mary S. 1968 [1935] . A History of Foreign Words in English. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.