PrecariousWorlds–DanishColonialismandWorldLiterature
Abstract:
TheroleplayedbyDenmarkinthetriangularslavetradeandcolonialchattelslaveryisrarely
partofthetaletoldaboutDanishliterature.Thisarticleinvestigatesthereflectionsofthis
historyinDenmarkanddiscusseshowthisparticularcolonialhistoryanditsrelationshipto
literaturecanbeunderstoodonthebasisofreadingsofthreetextsfromDenmarkandits
formercolonySt.Thomas.Thecentralthesisisthatexactlybecauseoftheperipheraland
precariousnatureoftheDanishcolonialendeavourinrelationtolargercolonialsystems,it
mayactuallybepossibletoreflectonsidesofthecolonialhistorythatisoftenleftoutofsight.
Keywords:Colonialliterature,slavery,Danishliterature,worldliterature
ByMadsAndersBaggesgaard,AarhusUniversity
Danishcolonialhistoryandourroleinthetransatlanticslavetradearerarelypartofthestory
toldaboutDanishliterature.Foreigncommentatorsmaybeexcusedforthisneglect.Afterall,
theDanishroleintheslavetradeisdwarfedbytheroleofthemajorempires.Itistruethat
DenmarkhadtradingstationsinGhanaandcolonisedthethreeCaribbeanislandsofSt.
Thomas,St.CroixandSt.John.Butevenso,thepartplayedbyDenmarkasacolonialpower
hardlycomparestothelargecolonialsystemsorganisedbyFrance,Britain,Spain,Portugal
andtheNetherlands.
InaDanishcontextthissilenceis,however,moreproblematic.Denmarkmay
haveplayedasmallerpartthanothercountries,butDanishcolonialhistoryisinnoway
anecdotal.Denmarkmaynotcomparetothemajorcolonialpowers,butitwastheseventhlargestslave-tradingnationandmorethan100,000slavescrossedtheAtlanticonships
outfittedinCopenhagen.St.Thomas’maincityandport,CharlotteAmalie,wasthesecondlargestcityintheDanishkingdominthe19thcentury,andasignificantpartoftheDanish
wealthaccruedduringthistheperiodwasgeneratedthroughcolonialtradedependentupon
slavelabour.
Nextyear,however,theendofthispartofcolonialhistoryhasitscentennial.
WhatoncewastheDanishcolonyDanskVestindien(TheDanishWestIndies)hasnowbeen
theUSVirginIslandsfor100years,afterhavingbeensoldfor$25millionandtransferredto
theUSAonMarch31,1917.Asaresultthecommonhistorybetweenthetwoplaceshastoa
certainextentbeenwipedout,writtenoutofthenationalhistoryorperhapssimplyforgotten.
Noformalrelationexistsbetweenthetwoplacesandanimportantquestiononthisoccasion
isofcoursehowweshouldunderstandthisneglectedrelationship,andhowandtowhat
extentthecolonialpastinfluencestheunderstandingofthepositionofDanishliteraturein
relationtoalargerworld.FewwouldquestionthatthecolonialtrajectoriesoftheBritish,
FrenchandSpanishempireshavearealandstillexistingimpactonthepositionofliterature
writtenintheselanguagesonaglobalscene.Thisimpactisofcoursethegeneralquestion
addressedbypostcolonialliteraturestudies.Butthesamelinkisalotmoredifficultto
establishwhentalkingabouttheimpactofcolonialhistoryontheliteraturesofsmaller
colonialpowersliketheDenmark,GermanyandSweden.Thisdoesnotmeanthatthese
storiesarenotsignificant.Onthecontrary,thisarticleclaimsthatthestudyofsmallercolonial
powersandtheirliteraturesdoesinfactaddimportantaspectstoourunderstandingofthe
1
colonialsystemandtheroleofliteratureandtextforthisunderstanding.Theprecarious
natureoftheDanishcolonialsystem,andofthegoverningoftheislandofSt.Thomasin
particular,makesitaveryinterestingcaseforunderstandingthelogicsofthecolonialworld
andtheroleplayedbytheworldsofliteraturewithinit.InthefollowingIwillsketchoutthree
linkedargumentsthatwillservetodiscussthisunderlyingquestion.FirstIwilllookbrieflyat
thetrajectoryoftheDanishrelationshiptoitscoloniesinordertoargueforthis
precariousness.SecondlyIwilllookattwoliteraryreflectionsoftherelationshipbetween
colonyandhomeland,arguingthattheprecariousnessoftherelationshipchallengestheideas
weholdofthepositionofliteratureintheimperialordersomeofwhichwetermWorld
Literature.AndfinallyIwilltouchuponthepositionofslaveryinrelationtothesefirsttwo
points.
Denmarkandthecolonialpast
ItisclearthatthecolonialpasthasbeendebatedfarlessinDenmarkthaninothercountries
withasimilarhistory,andanthropologistKarenFogOlwigevensuggeststhat“inthemental
enclaveofDanishWestIndianhistory,ideologiesthatarenolongeracceptablecanstill
flourishfreely”(Olwig218,seealsoA.Andersen).Buteventhoughitisoftenstatedthat
Denmarkhasforgottenitscolonialhistory,thisisnotentirelyaccurate.Throughoutthe20th
centurythestoryoftheDanishpartincolonialslaveryhasbeentoldbyanumberofwriters,
mostnotablyThorkildHanseninhisambitioustrilogySlaverneskyst,Slavernesskibeand
Slavernesøer(1967-70,translatedbyKariDakoasCoastofSlaves,ShipsofSlavesandIslands
ofSlaves,2002-5),whereonthebasisofdocumentaryevidencehereconstructsthethree
partsofwhathedescribesas“thedramaofslavery”inGhana,ontheshipsandinthe
Caribbean.Inthelastfewyearsthediscussionseemstohaveheatedupwithartists,
filmmakersandwritersengagingwiththematerial,mostrecentlyinworkssuchasJeanette
Ehlers’WhipitGoodandSayitloud!,DanielDencik’srecentfilmGuldkysten(TheGoldCoast)
andMichVraa’shistoricalnovelHaabet(TheHope),whichalldrawattentiontothis
particularpartofDanishhistorynotonlybydemandingarecognitionofguiltintheformofan
officialexcuse,butalsobyreflectingonthewaysinwhichtracesofcolonialismandcolonial
racismpersistinDanishsocietytoday.
Buteventhoughthesediscussionsareonthetabletoday,theyhaveappeared
muchlaterthaninothercountries,andthereisstillasenseofreluctancewithregardto
takingresponsibility.InfacttheunwillingnesstoacknowledgeDanishguiltisinitselfa
centralpartofthehistoryofDenmarkasacolonialpower.In1792Denmarkbecamethefirst
nationtobanthetransatlanticslavetrade,andaKing’sresolutionresultedintheperformance
ofanumberofplaysinthefollowingyears,withslavesappearingonstageinordertolaudthe
benevolenceandhumanityoftheKing(i.e.Pram,Thaarup,Høegh-Guldberg).However,the
truthbehindthedecisionwasalotlesshumanitarian,asthebanwasinfactonlytotakeeffect
from1803andplanswereinplacetobothintensifytheimportofslavesintheintervening
ten-yearperiodandtointensifythe“breeding”ofslavesinthecoloniesinordertoobtaina
sustainablepopulation(seee.g.Oxholm27-36).Inthefirsthalfofthe19thcentury,when
abolitionwasthetalkofthetowninLondon,ParisandWashington,slaveryandabolition
werehardlydebatedinCopenhagen,andtheabolitionofslaveryintheDanishcoloniesin
1848wasmoreofareactiontotheFrenchabolitionthatsameyearthantheresultofahomegrownidea.Infact,themuchpraisedliberationoftheslavesbyGovernorPetervonScholten
isseenbyhistorianstodayasamerestrategytoquellaslaverebellionoccasionedbythe
abolitionintheFrenchcolonies.IfwelooktotheDanishliterarytradition,slaveryandthe
2
coloniesarerarelymentionedbefore1900.Twotextsstandout:HenrikHertz’snovellaDen
Frifarvede(TheFree-Coloured)from1833,andHansChristianAndersen’splayMulatten(The
Mulatto)from1840,anadaptationoftheFrench1838novellaLesÉpavesbyMadameCharles
Reybaud(seealsoSollors173-87).Inbothcases,thetextsdealwiththerepercussionsofthe
Haitianrevolutionof1791-1804aspartofanowwell-describedcanonofEuropeantexts
tryingtointegratethescenarioofslavesfreeingthemselvesintodiscussionsaboutlibertyand
freedomwithinEurope(Daut,Onana).TheperiodafterthesaleoftheDanishWestIndian
islandssawtheonlyrealefforttowriteliteratureaboutthecoloniesintheformofthree
rathersentimentalnovelswrittenbythereturnedexpatLucieHørlyk(Riis).Tracesofcolonial
historyarethuslateandscarceinDanishliterature,especiallywhencomparedtothevivid
interpretationsknownfromFrench,EnglishandevenGermanliterature.
ThereareofcourseanumberofreasonsforthisrelativeindifferencetoDanishcolonial
history.TheDanishislandsweresoldacenturyago,soDenmarkhasnotseenthewavesof
immigrationfromformercoloniesexperiencedbyothercolonialpowersthroughthe
twentiethcentury.Thereisthusnosignificantgroupofdescendantsofslavestoinsistonthe
retentionofthememoryofslaveryandtheimportanceofthecultureoftheenslaved.
However,thissilenceisnotonlytheresultofhistoricaldistance.Evenduringthecolonial
period,theDanishcolonieswerenotplacedcentrallyinthenationalDanishconsciousness,
butwerebyandlargeconsideredforeign.Atellingexampleistheshortchildren’sbookGlade
BarndomsdageiVestindien(HappyChildhoodDaysintheWestIndies)from1903.Here
IngeborgVollquartz,whohadjustreturnedfromfouryearsinthecolonies,introducesthe
exoticwonderthatwastheDanishWestIndiestoDanishchildren,describingtheexotic
landscapes,plants,turtlesetc.andthestrangeexperienceofChristmasinatropicalclimate.
However,onecentralconcernwashowtorelatetothetwoprotagonistsasDanish:
ButeventhoughtheboyswereDanish–yes,theyoungestwasintruthbornoverthere–
buthewasofcourseDanishanyway–andbothhadgoodDanishnames–theolderone
wascalledJørgen,theyoungerAage–theydidnotspeakDanish–notheyspokeEnglish,
theylearneditfromtheirblacknanny,forshedidnotknowasingleDanishword.
(Vollquartz6)1
[FigureI(Vollquartz)]
ThegoodDanishnamesguaranteethesenseofnationalbelongingeventhoughthesettingis
clearlynotliketheonerecognisedasDanishbythereader.Theforeignnessofthecoloniesis
acommontropeincolonialliterature,butitbecomesevenmorecentralheresimplybecause
theDanishcolonieswereneververyDanish.VeryfewoftheplantersintheDanishcolonies
werefromDenmark:inSt.ThomastheywerepredominantlyDutch,andinSt.Croix
predominantlyEnglish,despiteacampaigntoenlistDanestothenewcolonyafterthe
purchaseoftheislandfromtheFrenchin1733.Danishwasthusneverthemainlanguageon
theislands,butmerelyanadministrativeone.Andeverydaycommerceandtalkwas
conductedfirstinaDutchcreole(knowntodayasVirginIslandCreole),andlateronin
1“MenuagtetDrengenevardanske–ja,denyngstevarrigtignokfødtderovre-menderfor
varhanjoalligeveldansk-ogbeggehavdedegodedanskeNavne–denældstehedJørgen,
denyngsteAage–saavardetalligevelikkedanskdetalte–nej,detalteengelsk,detlærtede
afderessorteBarnepige,forhunkundeikkeetenestedanskOrd.”
3
English,whichbecametheprimarylanguageofthemultitudeofdifferentlanguagespresent
intheso-calledDanishcolonies.
ColonialimagesofDenmark
ThedistancebetweenDenmarkanditscolonialpossessionswasalsofeltinthecolonies.In
theutopiannovelTimeandI,orLookingForward,publishedin1902,AdolphSixto–ablack
businessmanandacentralfigureintheculturalandpoliticallifeoftheislandinthefirst
decadesofthenewcentury–lamentstheviewoftheislandsheldbytheDanes:
“Itwasbelieved,”saidI,“thattheMotherCountryentertainedbutlittlehopeforher
Colonies,astheywereveryexpensivetoher,andthattheycouldnotbeselfsupporting;
thattherewasanopinionamongtheDanesrelativetotheseIslandsandtheir
inhabitants,whichwasnotverygratifying.AlthoughSt.Thomascouldboastofahigh
classofcivilizationandculture,withinstitutionsworthyofanyEuropeancity,itwas
consideredbymanyinDenmarktobeanAfricantown,stillinaprimitivestateof
civilization.(Sixto24)
Despitethisdevastatingcritique,thebookisessentiallyapleatoremainunderDanishruleat
ahistoricalmomentwhenbothindependenceandatransfertoAmericanrulewerebeing
debated.Inthebookthesediscussionsarereflectedthroughtheestablishmentofapeculiar
narrativearrangement.TimeandIisstructuredasadialoguebetweentwomen.The
protagonist“I”,aninhabitantoftheislandintheyear1899,goesforawalkinthecountryside
onlytofallasleep.Ashedoesso,however,thingsstartchanging:“IdreamtthatIfoundmyself
transportedtothehillsofanenchantedplacewherenature’sgreatnesswasrevealedonevery
hand.”Thisgreatnessofnatureappearsintheformof“luxuriantfieldsofcane”,“smoking
chimneys”and“cartsloadedwithproduce”(Sixto5).Ashewakesupherealizesthatthisisin
factnodreamasheisgreetedby“Time”aninhabitantofSt.Thomasintheyear1999,ayear
towhichIhasbeentransportedinhissleep.ThroughtherestofthebookTimeescortsIon
walksaroundtheislandinordertomakehimrealisethepotentialoftheisland,whichisstill
underDanishrule100yearsintothefuture.
[FigureII(Sixto)]
TakingitscuefromEdwardBellamy’s LookingBackwardfrom1888,whichinspiredawaveof
hundredsofutopiannovelsoverthenextdecades(Roemer,1-15),Sixto’sbookisanattempt
toformulateapoliticalvisionfortheislandthroughtheliteraryimagination.Thebookisin
constantdiscussionwithcolonialdescriptionsofSt.Thomasasabarrenisland,unfitfor
productionandaburdentotheDanishstate.St.Thomaswasthefirstcrownjewelamongst
Danishcolonies,colonisedin1666;butalreadyinthemiddleofthe18thcenturyagriculture
startedtobecomeunsustainablehereduetoerosionandpoormanagement,andin1733St.
CroixwaspurchasedfromtheFrenchinordertoprovidefarmland.St.Croixwaslarger,
flatterandmuchmoreamenable,andsoonbecamethemainfocusfortheDanish
administrators.ThetwofortsFrederikstedandChristianstedonSt.Croixbecametheportsof
choiceforcommandeeredDanishshipsandthemaintradingplaceforincomingslavesand
outgoingsugar(Dookhan126-8;BrøndstedIII63-64).
Ontheotherhand,intheopinionoflocalplantersandtradersSt.Thomaswas
lefttoitselfandneglectedbythecolonialpowersinCopenhagen.Asaresult,in1764theKing
4
hadnochoicebuttoopenuptheisland’smainportinCharlotteAmalieasafreeportfortrade
amongsttheCaribbeanislands.Thiswasasuccess.HelpedalongbyDanishneutralityinthe
SevenYears’WarandtheAmericanRevolutionaryWar,freetrademadeSt.Thomasoneofthe
busiestportsoftheCaribbean(BrøndstedII302-12).Inthecourseofthefirsthalfofthe19th
centurythetowndevelopedintoasmall,cosmopolitancommunityoftraders,enslaved
people,free-colouredstorekeepers(Hall144),Moravianmissionaries,SephardicJews
(Cohen),exilesfromthepoliticalupheavalsinHaiti,Mexicoandelsewhere(e.g.Firmin),and
writersandartistsfromallovertheCaribbeansuchasthepainterÈmilePissarroandFrits
Melbye,andthenovelistÉmericBergeaud,whowrotehisfamousnovelStellalivinginthe
HaitianexilecommunityinthepartofCharlotteAmalietothisdayknownasFrenchtown.In
1859theBritishnovelistAnthonyTrollopedescribestheplacewithoutanyenthusiasminhis
firsttravelnarrative,TheWestIndiesandtheSpanishMain:“Itisadepôtforcigars,light
dresses,brandy,boots,andEaudeCologne.Manymenthereforeofmanynationsgothitherto
makemoneyandtheydomakeit.”Trollopedislikestheisland’s“Hispano-Dano-NiggeryYankee-doodlepopulation”andthelinguisticdiversitythatcomeswithit:“OnehearsEnglish,
French,German,andSpanishspokenallaroundone,andapparentlyitisindifferentwhich.”
However,becauseoftheimportantroleSt.Thomasplaysasan“emporium”fortravel
betweendifferentcoloniesandcolonialsystems,itisbothinreallifeandinTrollope’saccount
unavoidable:“AsSt.Thomasatpresentexistsitisofconsiderableimportance”(Trollope23539).ThisisthecentralparadoxofSt.Thomas.Thatitwasundoubtedlyaninternationalplace,
ahubinthisearlyphaseofglobalisation,playingacrucialroleinthedevelopmentfromthe
colonialsystemtowardscontemporaryformsofcapital,towhichweshallreturnlater.Butit
wasalso,asdemonstratedbyTrollopeanddespiteitsmodernnature,seenasbackwardsand
uninteresting,dangerouseven.Itisthisdualityofaplace,whichmakesitprecariousexisting
suspendedbetweenthecertaintyofamercantilistcolonialschemeandaburgeoning
capitalistorderofunknownpotential.
ThisisevenmoreapparentifwelookatthepositionoftheislandinaDanish
context.InthisperiodCharlotteAmaliebecamethesecond-largestcityintheDanishempire;
butbecausethemainpartoftradeheredidnotbenefittheDanishcrowndirectly,theisland
wasincreasinglyseenasaliabilityduetothelackofincomegeneratedhere(Dookhan24347).Asaleoftheislandswasattemptedin1865-68,butwasultimatelyrejectedbythe
Americansafteralongprocessduringwhichtheinhabitantsoftheislandsvoted
overwhelminglyinfavourofjoiningrankswiththeAmericans(BrøndstedIII67-93,Tansill
78-153).In1901thetableswereturnedandaproposedsalewasrejectedbytheupperhouse
oftheDanishparliament,inpartbecauseofaperceivedresistancetothesalefrom
inhabitantsoftheislands(BrøndstedIV69-79,Tansill355-58).BothTimeandIandGlade
BarndomsdageiVestindienwerepublishedintheaftermathofthisattempt,contributingtoa
vibrantdebateaboutthepossiblefuturesforDanishcolonialismthatreachedacrossthe
Atlantic.InfactthecopyofTimeandIthatIhaveconsultedisheldbytheStateandUniversity
LibraryinAarhus,andbearsadedicationdatedMarch6,1903totheDanishpoliticianJacob
FrederikScavenius,whomusthavereceivedthebookasapresentwhenmeetingSixtoona
triptoSt.Thomasinthespringofthesameyearaspartofacommissionchargedwithfinding
aprofitablewayofkeepingtheislandsinDanishhands(BrøndstedIV76).
InhisbookSixto,asdescribed,accusestheDanishpeopleofnotvaluingtheircolonial
possessions,buttheblamedoesnotexclusivelyfallonthesideoftheDanes.Rather,Time
argues,thetroublesarecausedbytheinabilityoftheislanderstotakeresponsibilityforthe
situation.Andinthislineofthinking,takingresponsibilityinvolvestakingadvantageofthe
5
colonialrelationshipbytrustingtheDanishwilltogovern.Thefaultliesinnottrustingthe
benevolenceoftheDanesandnottakingDenmarkandtheDanishlanguageseriouslyasa
basisforlearningandidentityformation:“Evenasthelanguageandliteratureofother
nationsformedthechiefstudyoftheirscholars,soshouldDenmark’shavehadyour
considerations”(Sixto29-30).TheshortcomingsofSt.Thomasarethusfundamentallyrooted
intheinabilitytoparticipateinthedevelopmentofnationalculture,exemplifiedthrough
literatureandcultureinabroadersense.BenedictAndersoniswellknownforhisanalysisof
theroleplayedby“print-capitalism”intheestablishmentofnationalidentityasimagined
communities(Anderson45).AndthisisexactlywhatSixtowishestoachievewithhisbook:to
providetheSt.Thomianswithacollectivesenseofpurposeinordertocreateaprosperous
society“underthebenignruleofDenmarkorotherwise”(Sixtov).Hefinisheshis
introductionwithapassagethatemphasizesthelinkbetweenliteraryexpression,theability
todream,intellectualismandindustriousness:
ThedreamofthePoet,theArtistandtheScientisthavebornefruitofpricelessvalue
tothehumanrace.Therefore,mybook,areyoulessjustifiedinrelatingindreamwhat
youwoulddesireinreality?
Todenyyouthatprivilegewouldbetorobyouofyoursacredobject,whichis,that
mycountrymenmayarise,and,byuniversalandindustrialco-operation,createforSt.
Thomasaneverlastingrestingplaceamongtheindustrialandintellectualcountriesofthe
world.Iwishyoulife.(Sixtovi)
Thisisastrongstatement,anditwouldbetemptingtoactuallyproclaimTimeandItobeaSt.
Thomianlittératuremineure,acollectiveenunciationstandingintheprecariousspace
betweenDanishandAmericanliterature,betweentheoldcolonialsystemandaburgeoning
globalcapitalism(Deleuze&Guattari,48-49).Andthismayverywellbethecase,butthefact
remainsthatthetextdidnotmakemuchofadifference.Theattemptstoreinvigoratethe
agricultureandindustryontheislandfailed,partlybecauseoftheFirstWorldWar,andin
1917thesaleoftheislandswasfinalised.Sixto’snoveldidnothavealargeimpacteither:it
waslargelyneglectedbothathomeandinaglobalworldofliterature,wherebooksprinted
bythenewspaperonthenextislandrarelymakeadent.Bearingthishistoryinmind,Time
andIratherrefutesthepoliticalreading,emphasisinginsteadtheunevennessoftheliterary
playingfield,followingPascaleCasanova’scritiqueofDeleuzeandGuattari(Casanova28081).
Literaryworlds
Eitherway,Sixto’sliteraryattemptmeetsformidableopponentsinthedynamicsof
colonialism,andmaybetheveryideaofliteraturebothinitselfandasapoliticaltoolispartof
theproblem.Theroleofliteratureasaneducationaltoolusedtospreadaninherently
Westernconceptionofcultureasmodernisationaspartofthecolonialprojectisalsowell
described,forexamplebyGayatriChakravortySpivak,whoanalyseshowthe“liberal
education”,askedforbySixto,servesasacrucialproofofaccesstothewhiteadministrative
classforpeopledeemedtobeofcolour(Spivak164-69).Thisreadinghasrecentlybeen
developedinrelationtothequestionsposedbytheemergingdiscipline,ortherevampof
comparativeliterature,knownasworldliteraturebyMichaelAllaninhisIntheShadowof
WorldLiterature:SitesofReadinginColonialEgypt.TakingthestudyofEgyptianliteratureas
hisvantagepoint,Allanarguesthatliterature,orthemodernwesternconceptionofliterature
6
thatunderliesconceptsofworldliterature,worksthroughtheexclusionofother,traditional
textualorliterarypractices,whicharelabelledarchaicand/orprimitive:
Thereisintheend,nopositionfromwhichtothinkoutsidethemoraluniverseof
modernization.Tobeperceivedastiedtoan“oldsystem”istobepositionedoutsidethe
termsofbeingrecognizablyeducated–andultimatelyoutsidethetermsofbeing
recognizablycritical.(Allan73)
Allan’scaseinvolvesthedelinkingoftheArabwordforliterature(adab)fromtraditional
narrativeformsandatraditionalformofcultivationtosomethingalignedwithtransnational
novelisticproseintheprocessofmodernisationinEgyptinthefirsthalfofthetwentieth
century.Hisexamplemakesthecontextualnatureoftheconceptofliteratureveryapparent,
withconsiderablemethodologicalconsequences.Beforereadingthetextasarepresentation,
directorindirect,ofapoliticalorculturalreality,wemustconfrontandinfactread“the
readingpraxisnecessaryforatexttoberecognizedasanobjectofliteraryanalysis”(Allan7).
TheEgyptiancaseishardlycomparabletoaplacelikeSt.Thomas,whichhasnotraditional
formsofnarrativetodelink.Ratherthepointisthatthesamedynamicscomeintoplayin
relationtoaplacethatisinitselfunquestionablymodern.InEgyptasinSt.Thomas,literature
ispartoftheprocessesthatgovernsubjectification,andreadingtheplacethusbecome
readingthewayinwhichliteraturefunctionsinthatconcretesetting,asliteratureorworld
literatureconstitutesasetofreadingpracticesthatimposethemselveslocallyininteraction
orevenstrugglewithotherformsoftext.
TheconceptionofworldliteraturesuggestedbyAllanbuildsonknownmodelsin
thatitnotonlydesignatesthestudyofhowliteraturetravelstheworld,butalsoexamines
“thecontoursofaworldwithinwhichatextcomestobereadasliterature”(Allan18).The
worldofworldliteratureisnotoriouslyhardtopindown.Sometimesitseemstobeasmooth
globalisedspacewithalmostnoresistance.Atothertimestheworldandtheconstructionof
worldsbecomesataskperformedbyliteratureonitsownfromsingularperspectives.In
betweentheseextremesstandstheworldasitis:astriatedspaceofunevendevelopment
whereliteratureiswritten,circulatedandread.
TheWarwickResearchCollective(WReC)haspointedtothisveryschismasthe
centralchallengeforanewworldliterature,seekingatheoreticalfoundationunderstanding
“World-literatureastheliteraryregistrationofmodernityunderthesignofcombinedand
unevendevelopment”(WReC17).AndintheinauguralnumberofthisjournalKaren
Thornbermakesasimilarclaim,albeitusingadifferentvocabulary:“Withseveralnotable
exceptions,worldliteraturescholarshiphasnotfullyaddressedtherelationshipbetween
worldliteratureandsuchglobalproblemsashumanrightsabuses,trauma,poverty,slavery,
environmentaldegradation,andhealthanddisease”(Thornber115).Inbothcasesthe
authorsargueforanengagementwithcommonproblems,ormorepreciselythatliterature
offersanengagementwiththeseproblemsandthatthedisciplineofworldliteraturecanpick
upontheseengagementsasexpressionsofcommunality.IntheWarwickversionthiscanbe
donethroughreadingforanirrealismthatappearsgloballyinverydifferentformsbutas
responsestoashared,yetunevenlydistributed“singularmodernity”,touseFrederic
Jameson’sterm.InThornber’sreflectionsthroughthedirectengagementwith‘global
problems’,thatisproblemsthatconcernusallandcan,hopefully,be,asshetermsit,
‘ameliorated’whenseenthroughtheglobalprismofworldliterature.
7
Bothapproachesarelaudableandimportant,buttheyalsobothtendtosee
literatureassomethingthathasareflectiveroleinrelationtoasetofglobal,historical
problems.InanarticlepublishedinthejournalAlif,theAmericancomparatistJoseph
Slaughterquestionsthebasicassumptionthatliteratureisaninnocentbystanderto
globalisationandtotheconstructionoftheglobalproblemspresentedbyWReCand
Thornber.Heclaimsthattheoppositeisthecase,thatliteratureactsasanimportantagentof
colonialandpostcolonialpower,establishingandmaintaininghierarchiesofintellectualand
culturalcapital,manifestedininternationaltradeagreementsandcopyrightrules.Hislineof
thoughtisclosetothatofAllan,whohighlightsthenecessityofstudyingchangesinthestatus
oftheconceptofliteratureitself,especiallywithinthefieldofworldliterature.Slaughter
quotestheintroductiontotheLongmanAnthologyofWorldLiteratureasfollows:“Worksof
worldliteratureengageinadoubleconversation[…]withtheircultureoforiginandwiththe
variedcontextsintowhichtheytravelawayfromhome”(Slaughter56-57).Intheadjoining
footnoteSlaughtermakesanstrongclaim:“Ifthe‘doubleconversation’isadefiningqualityof
WorldLiterature,thenthefoundationaltextswouldseemnecessarilytobethoseproduced
underconditionsofimperialism,diaspora,exile,slavery,andotherformsofdomination.That
is,thesubordinated,subalternvoicewouldseemtobetheprimaryvoiceofWorldLiterature”
(Slaughter69,n.13).Ifworldliteratureisaboutthecirculationofpeopleandtextsandthe
meetingsthatthiscirculationmakespossible,thensurelythecentraltaskofthisdiscipline
shouldbetoinvestigatenotonlythetextsthattraveleasily,asitismostoftendone,in
Slaughtersview,butthetextsthatexpresstheflipsideoftheprocessbyhighlightingnotonly
howliteraturerelatestoa‘singularmodernity’or‘globalproblems’butalsohowitrelatesto
localproblemsbroughtonbyimperialforces.
Literaryslavery
HoweverSlaughtersfootnoteseemsslightlyatoddswithhisoverallobjectives.Ifthestudyof
worldliteratureshouldalsoreflectthewaysinwhichitaffirmscolonialpowerstructures,
thensurelyitisnotonlyaquestionofhearingthevoicesofthesubaltern,butalsotoreflecton
thewaysinwhichthesevoicesareusedtoconfirmorchallengethecolonialorderthrough
literature.Slaveryisnotonlyanexperience,butalsoanintegralpartoftheeconomicsystem
underlyingthegrowthofworldliteratureaspartofthecolonialorder.Boththetextsanalysed
inthisarticlewereproducedunderconditionsofimperialism,butneithercanbeseento
expresssubalternvoices.Infacttheywerewrittenmorethanhalfacenturyaftertheabolition
ofslavery.However,onedoesnothavetolookfarforthetopictocomeup,aswhenthe
protagonistsinGladeBarndomsdageiVestindienarepreparingtoreturntoDenmark:“At
homeyoudidnotneednearlyasmanyservants,becausethereyoucouldexertyourself.It
wasonlyinthishotcountrythateveryonewasalwaysonsummervacation–inDenmark
everyonehadtowork”(Vollquartz27).2Thispassageclearlydisplaysnotonlythehypocrisy
butalsothenaturalisationofaraciallyfoundedunevennessoftheplayingfieldthatgoesway
beyondmarketsharestothequestionofwhoareallowedtowrite,readandsellliterary
products.
“DerhjemmebehøvedemanikkenærsaamangeTjenestefolk,forderkundemangodtselv
bestillenoget.DetvarkunheridettevarmeLand,atmanallesammenaltidholdt
Sommerferie–iDanmarkmaattealleMenneskerarbejde.”2
8
Slaveryis,ashighlightedbybothThornberandSlaughter,oneofthe
touchstonesforthesediscussions.Aglobalproblem,todayandhistorically,thatrelatesto
universalquestionsoffreedom,humanityandproperty.Butalso,intheformoftransatlantic
chattelslavery,ahistoricalphenomenonthatservedasanimportantbasisforthe
developmentoftheglobalcapitalistworldorderwithwhichworldliteratureisundoubtedly
andinextricablylinked.Slaveryisthuskeytothequestionofworldliteraturenotonly
becauseitunderscoresfundamentalinequalities,butpreciselybecauseitlinksthese
inequalitiestothequestionsofvoiceandagencyandthematerialroleofliteratureandtextin
aglobalisedworld.Toputitbluntly,slavesembodythesubalternbecausetheyhavenovoice.
TestimoniessuchasOlaudahEquiano’sareinthisrespectmereexceptionsthathighlightthe
millionsofuntoldstoriesbehindthem;andliteratureisoverwhelminglyonthewrongsideof
history,servingasatoolfortheestablishmentandmaintenanceoftheslaverysystemboth
throughtheestablishmentofslavesastheOtherandaspartofthesystemofglobal
documentationsetupbytheimperialpowers(Baucom225-26).
Thisisclearlytosimplifythings.Ononehandliteratureplayedanimportant
partinthedevelopmentoftheveryidealsofhumanitarianismintheabolitionmovements,as
shownbyLynnHuntandothers.Andontheotherhandnarrative,literatureandtextual
documentationingeneralhaveservedaspowerfultoolsinthehandsoftheenslavedandthe
formerlyenslaved,asshownbyRebeccaScottandJeanM.Hébrardandasisapparentinthe
richliterarytraditionsoftheCaribbeanandtheAfricandiasporamorebroadly.Asrevealedin
ourshortquotefromVollquartz,slaveryisalsoarepressedundersidetothecolonial
narrativeassuch,somethingthatalsobecomesapparentifwelookatthetitlepageofanother
important,earlierSt.Thomasianpublication,JohnP.Knox’sAHistoricalAccountofSt.Thomas,
W.I.,publishedin1852.FormorethanacenturyKnox’shistorybookwastheprimary
authorityonthehistoryoftheisland.KnoxwasanAmericanpastorattheSt.Thomas
ReformedChurch,andapartfromhishistoricalworkheisalsoknownforhisencouragement
oftheyoungEdwardM.BlydentopursueeducationintheU.S.andhisfruitlesseffortstohelp
himgainacceptanceatanAmericanuniversity(King61-62).Thisis,however,besidethe
pointhere.Onhistitlepage,Knoxliststheelementsofthebook.
[FigureIII]
TheemphasisisonSt.Thomas,withchaptersonitsprogress,commerce,churchesandfacts
suchasclimateandnaturalhistory.However,thebookalsoincludeswhatheterms
“incidentalnotices”ofeventsfromtheothertwoislandsconcerning“slaveinsurrectionsin
theseislands,emancipationandpresentconditionoflaboringclasses.”Theinterestingthingis
thecontrastbetweenthesedescriptions:St.Thomasistradeandchurches,whileSt.Croixis
theseatofproductionandslavery.St.Thomasismodern,regulated,anddescribable,whereas
theothertwoislandsarethehomeofthedangerousforcesoftheenslaved,duetoeruptat
anytimeinhistory.TheoppositionbetweenSt.CroixandSt.Thomashasalsobeenremarked
uponbyvisualscholarNicholasMirzoeff:“CapitalizedtradingStThomas,withitsnewurban
lumpenproletariat,confrontedandinterfacedwiththehighlypolicedcultivationofStCroix”
(Mirzoeff161).Mirzoeffseesthisdivisionnotsomuchasadivisionbetweentwosidesof
colonialismasasignofatransformationfromanearlytoalaterformofcolonialism,inthe
formofmodernityas“theproductoftherealinterpenetrationofcolonyandcapital”(Mirzoeff
165).However,whatbecomesapparentinKnoxisthatdespitetheabolitionofslavery,the
9
‘old’orderofslaveryisstillverymuchaliveintheformofafearofinsurrection,afearthat
wastocometolifeintheformofthestrikesandrebellionsthathitSt.Croixin1878.
Whatisinterestinginthiscontextisthatthisfearpresentsitselfnotonlyon
thetitlepage,butalsointheformofamarkedshiftinnarrativemodes.ThechaptersonSt.
Thomasarefactual,boringeven,butthedescriptionoftheinsurrectionsarenarratives,
conjuringupvividimages:“Theserjeanthadsprungthroughawindowwithoutthewallsof
thefort,butinjuringhimselfsoseverelyastobeunabletoescape,wasalsomurdered.[…]
AftermurderingJudgeScotman,andplacinghisheaduponapole,theyheldacouncilaround
hismutilatedremains,whethertheyshouldkillhisdaughter,abeautifulchildtwelveyears
old”(Knox72-73).InthiswayKnox’sdescriptionspresentthemselvesasaneeriecounterpart
tothedreamspresentedbySixto.Theliterarymodesofdescriptionareusednottopresent
newvisionsofthefuture,buttoconjuretheghostsofpastcrimesintheformoftheenslaved.
Apastthatisofcoursestillverymuchpresentintheirtimeastheproductiveandlabouring
basisforthenascentmodernismofSt.Thomas.Sixtoofcoursehighlightsthenecessityfor
educationandcultureforthetransformationoftheformerlyenslaved,describedasunableto
acknowledgethevalueofwork:
Consequentlyhefledfromthecaneintotheworld,adisgustedfieldlabourerand,being
incompetenttoearnhisbread,hedraggedhimselfintoahospitaloranasylum,a
pauper,andtherehedied;thusincurringtheextraexpenseforcharitywhichcould
havebeenspentforeducatinghim.(Sixto66)
BothSixtoandKnox,thusemphasiseSt.Thomasasaplaceinwhichtherelationshipbetween
corporealrealitiesandliteraryimaginationisputtothetest.Theuncertainstatusofthe
Danishcoloniesisnotonlyaboutflagsandsymbols,butaquestionofhowlivesarelivedand
spentinproductionbeforeandafterabolition.TogetherthestoriesofSixto,Vollquartzand
KnoxemphasisethatthecolonialspaceoftheDanishWestIndieswasprecarious,aplacein
whichDanes,plantersfromotherpartsoftheworldandfreemenlikeSixtotriedtonegotiate
theirpositionthroughliterature.Itishardifnotimpossibletopinpointaparticularuseof
literatureinrelationtoquestionsofempireandslavery,butthroughthecasespresentedhere
itisclearthatliteratureservestoinvestigatepossibleworldswithinthecolonialwhole.
St.Thomasisundoubtedlyplacedontheperiphery,notsomuchoftheDanish
kingdomasontheperipheryoftheoldcolonialworldassuch.Howeverthisperipheryisalso
acentralandparadigmaticpositioninanewemergingworldorderofglobalcapitalism,
howevertransiently.Aperfectplace,asMichaelAllantermsit“toquestionthebordersof
worldliterature”(140).
Acknowledgements
Theresearchleadingtothisarticlehasbeenmadepossiblebythegeneroussupportofthe
VeluxFoundationtotheresearchprojectReadingSlavery– ComparativeStudiesofthe
LiteratureoftheTransatlanticSlaveTrade(seereadingslavery.au.dk).Iwouldalsoliketo
thankmyco-membersinthisprojectFritsAndersen,JakobLadegaard,JonasRossKjærgård,
Karen-MargretheLindskovSimonsenandSineJensenSmedforlivelydiscussionsandMads
RosendahlThomsenforyearsofdebatesonthepastsandfuturesofworldliterature.
Workscited
10
Allan,Michael.IntheShadowofWorldLiterature:SitesofReadinginColonialEgypt.Princeton:
PrincetonUniversityPress,2016.
Andersen,AstridNonbo.“’WeHaveReconqueredtheIslands’:FigurationsinPublicMemories
ofSlaveryandColonialisminDenmark1948–2012.”InternationalJournalofPolitics,Culture,
andSociety26(2013),57–76.DOI10.1007/s10767-013-9133-z
Andersen,HansChristian.MulatteninSkuespilII–1836-1842.Copenhagen:DetDanske
Sprog-ogLitteraturselskab&Gyldendal,2005,275-372.
Baucom,Ian.SpectersoftheAtlantic:FinanceCapital,Slavery,andthePhilosophyofHistory.
Durham:DukeUniversityPress,2005.
Bergaud,Émeric:Stella. Genève:ÉditionsZoé:2009.
Brøndsted,Johannes(ed.).Voregamletropekolonier,2nded.8vol.Copenhagen:Fremad,1966.
Casanova,Pascale.LaRépubliquemondialedesLettres.Paris:Seuil,1999.
Cohen,JudahM.ThroughtheSandsofTime:AHistoryoftheJewishCommunityofSt.Thomas,
U.S.VirginIslands.Waltham:BrandeisUniversityPress,2004.
Daut,MarleneL.TropicsofHaiti:RaceandtheLiteraryHistoryoftheHaitianRevolutioninthe
AtlanticWorld,1789-1865.Liverpool:LiverpoolUniversityPress,2015.
Deleuze,Gilles&FélixGuattari.Kafka.Pourunelittératuremineure.Paris:Minuit,1975.
Dencik,Daniel(dir.)Guldkysten(film),prod.MichaelHaslund-Christensen.
Denmark/Ghana/Sweden:Haslund/DencikEntertainmentAps,2015.
Dookhan,Isaac.AHistoryoftheVirginIslandsoftheUnitedStates.Epping:Caribbean
UniversitiesPress&BowkerPublishing,1974.
Ehlers,Jeannette.SayitLoud!Copenhagen:ForlagetNemo,2016.
Firmin,Anténor.LettresdeSaint-Thomas:Ètudessociologiques,historiquesetlittéraires.Paris:
V.Giard&E.Brière,1910.
Green-Pedersen,Svend-Erik.”ThescopeandstructureoftheDanishnegroslavetrade.”
ScandinavianEconomicHistoryReview19:2(1971),149-197
Hall,NevilleA.T.SlaveSocietyintheDanishWestIndies:St.Thomas,St.JohnandSt.Croix.
Jamaica:TheUniversityoftheWestIndiesPress,1992.
Hansen,Thorkild.CoastofSlaves,tr.KariDako.Accra:Sub-SaharanPublishers,2002.
Hansen,Thorkild.IslandsofSlaves,tr.KariDako.Accra:Sub-SaharanPublishers,2005.
Hansen,Thorkild.ShipsofSlaves,tr.KariDako.Accra:Sub-SaharanPublishers,2003.
Hansen,Thorkild.Slaverneskyst.Copenhagen:Gyldendal,1967.
Hansen,Thorkild.Slavernesskibe.Copenhagen:Gyldendal,1968.
Hansen,Thorkild.Slavernesøer.Copenhagen:Gyldendal,1970.
Hertz,Henrik:DeFrifarvede, FraKjærlighedsVeieNytaarsgave1836,Copenhagen:Dansk
VestindiskSelskab&PoulKristensensForlag,1998.
Høegh-Guldberg,Frederik:LiseogPeter.Copenhagen,1793.
Hørlyk,Lucie.DengamlePlantage.Copenhagen:DetSchönbergskeForlag,1909.
Hørlyk,Lucie.FraGeneralguvernørensDage.Copenhagen:DetSchönbergskeForlag,1908.
Hørlyk,Lucie.UnderTropesol.Copenhagen:DetSchönbergskeForlag,1907.
King,BettyL.“HistoricalOverviewoftheSt.ThomasReformedChurch.”In.JamesHart
Brumm(ed.).EquippingtheSaints:TheSynodofNewYork1800-2000,GrandRapids:Wm.B.
Eerdman,2000,54-69.
Knox,JohnP.AHistoricalAccountofSt.Thomas,W.I.NewYork:CharlesScribner,1852.
Mirzoeff,Nicholas.TheRighttoLook:ACounterhistoryofVisuality.Durham:DukeUniversity
Press,2011.
11
Olwig,KarenFog.“Narratingdeglobalization:Danishperceptionsofalostempire.”Global
Networks3(2003),207–222.
Onana,MarieBiloa.DerSklavenaufstandvonHaiti:EthnischeDifferenzundGeschlechtinder
Literaturdes19.Jahrhunderts.Köln:BöhlauVerlagKöln,2010.
Pram,Chresten:Negeren.Copenhagen,1791.
Riis,Thomas.“LucieHørlyk,endanskvestindiskforfatter.”MagasinfraDetkongeligeBibliotek
27:2(2014),23-30
Roemer,KennethM.TheObsoleteNecessity.AmericainUtopianWritings,1888-1900.Kent:
KentStateUniversityPress,1976.
Scott,RebeccaJ.&JeanM.Hébrard.FreedomPapers:AnAtlanticOdysseyintheAgeof
Emancipation.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,2014.
Sixto,Adolph.TimeandI,orLookingForward.SanJuan:SanJuanNews&PowerPrint,1902
(ca.).
Slaughter,JosephR.“WorldLiteratureasProperty.”Alif:JournalofComparativePoetics34,
2014,39-73.
Sollors,Werner.NeitherBlackNorWhiteYetBoth:ThematicExplorationsofInterracial
Literature.Oxford:OxfordScholarshipOnline,2011.DOI:10.1093.
Spivak,GayatriChakravorty.ACritiqueofPostcolonialReason.Cambridge:HarvardUniversity
Press,1999.
Tansill,CharlesC.ThePurchaseoftheDanishWestIndies.Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversity
Press,1932.
Thaarup,Thomas:PetersBryllup.Copenhagen:JohanFrederikSchultz,1793.
Thornber,Karen.“Why(Not)WorldLiterature:ChallengesandOpportunitiesfortheTwentyFirstCentury.”JournalofWorldLiterature1:1(2016),107-18.DOI:10.1163/2405648000101011
Trollope,Anthony.TheWestIndiesandtheSpanishMain.London:ChapmanandHall,1859.
Vollquartz,Ingeborg.GladeBarndomsdageiVestindien.Helsingør:JensMøllersForlag,1903.
Vraa,Mich.Haabet,Copenhagen:Lindhardt&Ringhof,2016.
WReC–WarvickResearchCollective.CombinedandUnevenDevelopment:TowardsaNew
TheoryofWorld-Literature,Liverpool:LiverpoolUniversityPress,2015.
12