Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Crystal Bartolovich
We cannot draw closed the net [of capitalism] in which we are caught. Later
on, however, we shall be able to gain an overview of it.
—Walter Benjamin, “Capitalism as Religion”
The World Bank reckons that, if North America, Europe and Japan
were to eliminate all barriers to imports from sub-Saharan Africa, the
region’s exports would rise by 14%, an annual increase worth about $2.5
billion. Another calculation shows that developed countries’ farm sub-
sidies amount to over $360 billion a year, some $30 billion more than
Africa’s entire GDP. And while the prices of rich countries’ exports have
been rising, those of Africa’s primary products have, on average, been
falling (by 25% in 1997–99). Nor has the rich world always been at pains
to promote good government in Africa. During the cold war, it was
happy to Wght its wars through African proxies, to prop up corrupt
regimes and sell them weapons with which to suppress their subjects
and swell their foreign debt. Partly as a result, that debt has been crush-
ing for Africa: several countries have been spending more on service
payments than on education and health. Meanwhile the aid that helped
to assuage western consciences has often been tied to western exports.
(“Africa’s Elusive Dawn,” 17)
that the interruptive aspects of the text on which she focuses are
important, but that they have as their goal the critique of capital that
is rarely broached by critics such as Jacobs.
Peter Osborne has already rightly blasted such “post-structuralist”
readings of Benjamin as problematically reliant on a “providential
historicism” that Benjamin himself persistently decried, but I would
like to further insist (and lament) that they are directed, implicitly or
explicitly, to obscuring his Marxism and, thus, the ways in which
for him, as for Adorno, the fragmentary is privileged only in relation
to a totality hegemonized by capitalism that both critics wished to
see destroyed (300).6 As Susan Buck-Morss explains, for Benjamin
and Adorno “each particular was unique, yet each contained a picture
of the whole, an ‘image of the world,’ which within a Marxist
frame meant an image of the bourgeois social structure” (Origin, 76;
emphasis added). Taking Benjamin’s “dialectical images” seriously
as demanding an anticapitalist reading practice, I want to turn to
one such image that emerges in the Berliner Chronik, as Benjamin
opens a reXection on his venture-capitalist father’s various business
transactions, and indicate its anti-imperialist potential. To be sure,
Benjamin’s work is not an obvious place to seek a critique of imperi-
alism—indeed, a previous critic’s attempt to consider such a possibil-
ity has been met with derision.7 But as Fredric Jameson suggests
in the third of the epigraphs that begin this paper, obvious places are
not the only ones—perhaps not even the most important ones—
to put on the itinerary when pursuing the imbrication of imperial-
ism and European modernism, an insight that owes something to
Adorno’s and Benjamin’s own tendencies to seek out truth in un-
likely, seemingly trivial or marginal objects or locations.8 That I will
be taking up my larger point about how to read a marginal(ized)
aspect of Benjamin’s writing by way of his reference to one such
object—a sculpture of a “Moor” that found its way into the house-
hold of his childhood—should, thus, be considered methodologically
signiWcant. Although it is typical to search out the moments when
“imperialism” Wnds its way into a Euromodernist text in order to
expose complicities, I want instead to propose that in certain circum-
stances critique might also be discovered in such sites and to suggest
that the complicity emerges rather in our failure to detect, amplify,
and continue the critique.
09Bart.qxd 11/4/02 2:57 PM Page 172
Benjamin says nothing further about this “work of art,” but the seem-
ingly incidental mention of the sculpture of the Moor invites many
questions. He emphasizes in this same section that the transactions in
which his father engages Xood the household with a curious assort-
ment of commodities remarkable to the young Benjamin principally
because of their derivation from places and people “never seen”
(niemals in mein Blickfeld traten) by the son (Berliner Chronik, 74). What
does the Moor have to tell us in its context of a generalized invisibil-
ity—a world of capital that the child Benjamin knows only from
indistinct fragments, such as snatches of telephone conversation,
labels on commodities, passing mentions of names at the dinner table,
and fantasy images of his father’s whereabouts when he was away
on business? And, above all, why is the “real token” (eigentliche Wahr-
zeichen) of the relation to the world of a German venture-capitalist in
the early twentieth century a representation of an African holding out
a golden bowl, an African, furthermore, who seems to be “oriented
toward” (angewiesen [auf], dependent on) a (possibly) absent com-
panion? My claim is this: the Mohr should be read as an analogue to
the much-discussed Wgure of the Hure (whore) in this text—both
being deployed in the course of Benjamin’s late work toward “awak-
ening” metropolitan subjects from the capitalist dreamworld, or
phantasmagoria; it is important to pay attention to the former as well
as the latter because the Moor in Berlin reminds us that the dream
of capital is global, not merely local, in its desires and effects, as the
09Bart.qxd 11/4/02 2:57 PM Page 173
Thus, even after Germany’s loss of colonies in 1918, the basic struc-
ture of globally institutionalized inequality could (and did) remain
intact—indeed, intensiWed as German capital slowly worked its way
toward the dominant economic position in Europe, albeit not without
setbacks caused by vicissitudes of economic cycles and the depreda-
tions of the wars.
I have already indicated two mechanisms through which this
globally instituted inequality was sanctioned: the “visibility” of the
colonizer’s agenda at the cost of the (attempted, at least) obliteration
of the colonized, and the assumption that inequalities that result
09Bart.qxd 11/4/02 2:57 PM Page 179
less present. “Die Süße” (“The Sweet One”), for example, features an
anthropological photograph of a large mask from the French Congo—
pasted over with made-up eyes and lips from European fashion
glossies—perched over the elongated torso of a Bushongo idol from
which a shapely pair of very white and high-heeled legs emerge. A
white left hand, much larger than the right hand (intact on the idol’s
torso), Xoats armlessly and eerily over the abdomen of the composite.
Unlike most primitivist arts in Europe that referenced the supposedly
more authentic, mythic, and spontaneous works of non-Europeans
as an attack on the losses that reason, civilization, and commodiWca-
tion had visited on the metropolis, Höch’s montages here as else-
where seem to have the quite different agenda of calling into question
the conventions of representation in mass publications, which
fetishize the female form, the primitive other, and nature alike (see
Makela, 70–72). Her montages show fragments in struggle, rather
than organizing themselves into a tidy gestalt. Illustrating contradic-
tion, they disallow reassurance. At the same time, the very target of
their critique—representations as disseminated via media and muse-
ums—calls to attention the institutions over which some people,
within and outside the metropole, have more control than others:
thus Höch’s images work by fragmenting the all too seamless metro-
politan worldview inculcated by such institutions. As Maud Lavin
and Maria Makela both point out, Höch does this by carefully posi-
tioning many of the composite images on pedestals, emphasizing
their display function, and, of course, by implicating the “museum”
in the title of the series, as well as by selecting, and transporting to
new, disorienting settings, images from wide-distribution publica-
tions that viewers easily could have received at home. In these ways
Höch exposes the mystified efforts of the purveyors of images who,
in early Birmingham School terms, had gained crucial control over
the “deWnition of the situation,” and suggested that to redeWne the
situation, the conditions that give rise to such deWnitions must also
be changed.24
In the places where Benjamin’s approach accomplishes a similar
task of disruption and reorientation of perspective, it attains its great-
est power. For it is only rarely in the texts of European modernism, in
work such as Höch’s, that global relations so emphatically refuse to
settle into a celebratory mélange and thus are able to point us toward
09Bart.qxd 11/4/02 2:57 PM Page 181
inventory but allow in the only way possible, to come into their
own: by making use of them” (460). While in his texts Asian, South
American, and African images can certainly be read as playing the
role of displacing, or standing in for, the actual oppressive material
entanglements of Europe and the “rest of the world,” as in other
primitivist appropriations, we can also see how his reticence might
be directed against obfuscation since the form of Benjamin’s text, and
the reading practice it demands, always points us toward the
unsaid.38 The unsaid in his case differs, then, from the “sanctioned
ignorance” for which Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak rightly took to
task Foucault’s writing, in which the colonial situation seems every-
where evoked but rarely named as such—certainly not as the fact
of European everyday life that it has been from the sixteenth century
to the present (291). The difference in the case of Berliner Chronik is
that Benjamin’s compiling out of the mass of evidence before us the
ordinarily overlooked, misread, and despised was intended to bring
capital’s invisibilities into focus. In this respect, although his texts
don’t announce an anti-imperial agenda as such, they can still be
understood as providing an anti-imperialist reading practice—or at
least demanding such a reading practice from inhabitants of an impe-
rialist world to which his texts are offered as counterpoint.
My claim that Benjamin’s writing can provide a speciWcally anti-
imperial pedagogy depends on our taking seriously the possibility
of the sort of montage or, alternatively, dreamwork reading strate-
gies he advocated, operating in contrast with the sort of atomizing
and decontextualizing reading encouraged by—for example—news-
papers, which he found so suspect.39 The bourgeois newspaper, of
course, purports to leave nothing of signiWcance unsaid (“all the
news that’s Wt to print”), nor to betray any interests. Its tone is
detached, its style straightforward and serious. Tellingly, however,
when Benjamin offers an exemplary symptom of a metropolitan cap-
italist modernity in which people are “increasingly unable to assimi-
late the data of the world around [them] by way of experience,” the
newspaper comes immediately to his mind:
If it were the intention of the press to have the reader assimilate the
information it supplies as part of his own experience, it would not
achieve its purpose. But its intention is just the opposite, and it is
achieved: to isolate what happens from the realm in which it could
09Bart.qxd 11/4/02 2:57 PM Page 192
the parts, but to which any part might nonetheless give us access. The
fragments, after all, always direct us to look further, to the place
beyond our current vision, around the corner (between the lines), and
especially to reassess the certitude that we really see all of what is
there, right before our eyes. Both are crucial tasks for an anti-imperial
reading practice. Each fragment of Berliner Chronik is at once thresh-
old and network of intertwinings, incomplete in itself, but never-
theless evidence of, and the route to, a totality that remains beyond
our full imagining, both because it is a process, not a stable “thing,”
and because of its complexity. As Benjamin put it, “we cannot draw
closed the net [of capitalism] in which we are caught” (“Capitalism,”
288). But he did not think that this was a permanent state: “Later on,
however, we shall be able to gain an overview of it.” The “later on” is
when it is destroyed. In the meantime, we have to remain attentive
to the unsaid and invisible.41 Gaps and elisions in Benjamin’s text
teach the reader to be more attuned to the gaps and elisions in the
world, which may appear all too coherent and seamless. The every-
day experience of imperial relations by African peoples was (is) often
invisible in the metropole as such—either completely so, because
unspoken, or because diverted by fantastical displacements. As we
have seen, however, Benjamin’s Berliner Chronik critiques the metro-
politan bourgeois subject precisely for remaining blind to the class
injustices of capital in the ordinary practices of his everyday life; the
Moor pushes this critique onto a broader scale, where it is thoroughly
relevant today.
Global business as usual still depends on the assumption that it
is natural and just for whole swaths of the planet to be virtually
excluded from the global economy except in the terms dictated by the
metropole, and that the wealth and resources of some nations are
meant to Xow to others who can put them to the “best” uses, the
standard economic justiWcation for the Xow of scarce minerals—and
virtually everything else—to where there is cash, without consid-
eration of disproportion or relative need.42 In the spring of 2000,
the Economist published a cover story it titled “Hopeless Africa.”
Although only a single page long, it ranged over the entire continent,
shaking its editorial head gloomily over the sad state of affairs.
“African societies,” the essay avers, “for reasons buried in their cultures,
seem especially susceptible to . . . brutality, despotism and corruption”
09Bart.qxd 11/4/02 2:57 PM Page 195
[T]hose who know it for a fact credit Africa with an almost inex-
haustible percentage of the whole world’s natural resources. The desire
to loot these riches has led stakeholders to abuse its people verbally,
physically, psychologically and in other unimaginable ways. The cam-
paign to portray Africans and people of African descent everywhere
as next to animals must surely have one objective: to demonstrate
that Africans do not deserve to have Africa—at least, not as much as
others do. (5)
man through whom Benjamin had once imagined “the poor.” Colo-
nialism obliged the native to disappear as a being distinct from the
interests of the colonizer. The absent Moor in Berliner Chronik, I
would suggest, is the placeholder for all that metropolitan elites do
not know—cannot know—about the peoples of the world othered
by them, not because they are mysterious and inscrutable, but
because the vantage point from which they look necessarily leaves so
much out of frame and focus, beyond the ken of people with a deep
investment in not seeing that global inequalities are a result of reme-
diable conditions, not nature, and ongoing imperial oppression, not
the ineptitude of nonmetropolitan peoples. Marxism gives us access
to a reading of Benjamin’s text as a critique of imperialism—capital-
ism’s totality—that still needs to be deployed; poststructuralism
on its own heretofore has often merely encouraged us to admire
Benjamin’s fragments.
Notes
I would like to thank Amata Schneider-Ludorff for help with the German, and the
members of my writing group at Syracuse University for valuable critique of an
early draft of this essay: Dympna Callaghan, Michael Echeruo, Susan Edmunds,
Bob Gates, Priya Jaikumar, Claudia Klaver, Christian Thorne, Silvio Torres-
Saillant, and Monika Wadman. I’d also like to thank the two anonymous readers
for the journal, and especially the special issue editor, Keya Ganguly, for insight-
ful suggestions for clarifying and tightening the argument.
1. For recent commentary on Shonibare, who has been one of the particu-
larly successful (and therefore much written about) black British artists, see,
for example, Enwezor; Hylton; Hynes; Oguibe; and Picton. Some critics, I should
note, emphasize the same global politics that I do here: I am critiquing Shoni-
bare’s own self-analysis speciWcally. Arguing that the sort of political-economic
critique I am foregrounding has already had its day, Shonibare observes: “Up
until the mid-1980s, very serious feminist work and very serious Black art
was being made, looking at issues around slavery and colonization, very well-
meaning work. That was the context in which I was at college. I thought, well,
those issues have been well-raised, and I felt that it had been done. Wouldn’t it be
good to just surprise people: Black people can laugh, too! We’re not serious all the
time! I felt that it was time to loosen up a little. When I make work I draw from
my own experiences. But my experiences are not all gloomy. There are times
when I feel silly. I do recognize that there are issues that are still a problem, but I
just wanted to have a bit of a laugh about it all because it’s so stupid” (Waxman,
09Bart.qxd 11/4/02 2:57 PM Page 197
37). The problem with his own readings of his work, as this passage suggests,
is that they tend to want to privilege the playful “identity” issues over—even
against—all other modes of reading, such that the relation between political econ-
omy and identity seems less likely to be seen or worked out, in spite of the fact
that his art seems to allude to it so manifestly. Given this disavowal, his work
must be read “against the grain” of his intention, so to speak, to bring the politi-
cal economy back into view. Adorno and Benjamin referred to such a process
as the quest for “unintentional truth,” which was crucial to their wrenching of
utopian possibilities out of unlikely sites (see Buck-Morss, Origin, 77–81).
2. This is not to say that poststructuralist critiques are utterly false or use-
less; rather it is to emphasize that they must be deployed in full recognition of the
determinant power relations that do still pertain in the world (which is a state-
ment that certain poststructuralisms would already disallow). As Asha Varad-
harajan reminds us in a critique of tendencies to see “Xuidity” everywhere, such
readings too easily forget “that the circulation of power and of subject positions
must nevertheless foreground who regulates whom” (74). Similarly, Timothy
Brennan has nicely observed in his critique of the overzealous turn in theory
toward identifying hybridities and mixtures that these are “complete as identity
and incomplete as situation”—the situation being one in which relations of iden-
tiWable oppression and resistance are evident (18). I have tried to be attentive to
“situation” here. The crucial point is that what works for a cultural analysis is
often woefully inadequate to a political-economic one (and vice versa), which is
why each approach must confront, and be confronted by, the other, instead of
attempting to ignore or deny the validity of the other.
3. See the “Exposé of 1939,” in The Arcades Project, for an explicit elabora-
tion of this concept.
4. As Fredric Jameson has often observed, the “disappearance of class” is
so axiomatic in contemporary U.S. ideology that it is not surprising that it has
often disappeared from social critique as well. This disappearance, however, is
itself part of capital’s politics of invisibility. See, for example, his “Class and Alle-
gory in Contemporary Mass Culture,” chapter 2 of Signatures of the Visible.
5. I coin “strategic binarization” as the global force against which one must
deploy what Gayatri Spivak has called (good) “strategic essentialism” (for a dis-
cussion of the importance of this term, the limits of deconstruction, and the end-
less pluralization of “difference” as “politics,” see Harasym, ed., 10–11, 104, 109).
This reminder is important not least because capitalism, too, has “difference” in
its arsenal for deployment at the local level while the global divide between
metropole and periphery ever widens, as Stuart Hall has recently been empha-
sizing; see “The Local and the Global,” especially 28–31.
6. The best discussions of totality and Adorno/Benjamin to my mind
remain Buck-Morss and Jameson, especially in Late Marxism. For an inXuential
contrasting view, see Jay.
7. John Kraniauskas has written what may be the only article previous
to this one that takes up at length the implications of the imperial context of
09Bart.qxd 11/4/02 2:57 PM Page 198
book proclaims. He quotes the passage I cite in the course of his discussion
of deplorable German settler attitudes toward “natives,” attributing it to the
Deutsche-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, but does not give full bibliographical infor-
mation, and I have been unable to track the reference down, though there was
deWnitely a newspaper of this name published between 1898 and 1914. Given the
tendency of the colonial powers to toss accusations of bad behavior at each other,
it is possible that the quotation is manipulated. The sentiments expressed are not,
however, out of line with colonial press writing (of any of the colonial powers, in
spite of Lewin’s attempt to render it singularly “German”). And it is certainly not
at odds with the German ofWcial extermination policy in Southwest Africa, on
which see Bley; Drechsler; and Smith. The quotation can be found on page 117 of
Lewin’s book.
18. This examination of “anomalous cases” (as the table of contents in this
edition puts it) is one of the more remarkable passages in the Principles for its
matter-of-factness and astonishing limit to discussion of the anomaly of this case.
Indeed, the West Indies are compared to Manchester if it were moved to “a rock
on the North Sea (its present industry nevertheless continuing)” (685), without
any distinction being made between the relationship of the inhabitants of Man-
chester to England and the inhabitants of the West Indian colonies and England
(685). Mill manages this because he views the relationship between metropole
and colony as that “between town and country” (686)—much as Raymond
Williams (with a quite different agenda) would later do in The Country and the City
(see chapters 24–25)—but without in any way examining the speciWcity of the
colonial situation, ethically or otherwise.
19. See chapter 5 of Mommsen; for a recent discussion of German attempts
to extend its (informal) inXuence in Latin America, in particular, which brought it
into some contention with the United States in this period, see Mitchell. For a gen-
eral overview of economic issues and trends (to which colonies are so insigniW-
cant as not even to Wgure) before World War I, see Berghahn, chapters 1–3.
20. As Smith observes, “German colonialism did not die in 1919, however.
Indeed, the colonial movement became in some ways more popular and better
organized than before” (“Colonialism,” 450). Also see Herman (Lenin-inspired
assessment); and Schmokel.
21. See Gilman; Lloyd; the essays collected in Blackshire-Belay, ed.;
McBride, Hopkins, and Blackshire-Belay, eds.; Friedrichsmeyer, Lennox, and
Zantop, eds.
22. See, for example, Clifford (especially “On Collecting Art and Culture”);
Edwards; Lloyd; Torgovnick.
23. See Lavin, chapter 5; also Makela. Not all critics agree that Höch’s work
is as critical of racism or imperialism as I am suggesting here, but her concern for
gender oppression certainly made her sensitive to issues of representation and
display (on that critics agree). This sensitivity, I am contending, does ultimately
have the effect (given her material in the ethnographic museum series, at any
rate) of calling racial and ethnic, as well as gender, representation into question,
09Bart.qxd 11/4/02 2:57 PM Page 201
whatever her intentions. As Lavin concludes in her chapter on the series, “Hoch
deviated from the nonambiguous, folkloristic representation of African and other
tribal peoples in the Illustrierte and lays the foundation for a critique of racism,
even if she did not pursue it further” (182).
24. See in particular “The Social Production of the News” in Policing the
Crisis, Hall et al. The concerns of Policing intersect with numerous themes in this
essay: the politics of (in)visibility; the irreducibility of the legacy of imperialism
to understanding current global (and local) inequality; and, as I shall take up at
the end of the essay, the role of newspapers in securing the status quo.
25. Jameson continues by suggesting that “obvious” places would be “con-
tent or representation” and argues for the importance of paying attention to form.
I build on his suggestion in this essay by focusing on the reading practice that
Berliner Chronik seems to demand, and also by pointing to the workings of dialec-
tical images that wed form and content. Actually, Jameson’s own reading practice
indicates that he, too, is interested in content—but often not on obvious content
or obvious readings of it. His important point is that even texts that are not explic-
itly about imperialism can nonetheless have quite a lot to say about it.
26. Neither Berliner Chronik nor the similarly structured Berliner Kindheit
(Berlin childhood) were published during Benjamin’s lifetime in their collected
forms (though some of the vignettes were published separately). Furthermore,
the typescript of the Berliner Chronik (unlike that of the Berliner Kindheit) does not
appear to have been fully prepared for publication by Benjamin before his death.
The two texts overlap so little in material, however, that it is doubtful that the
Berliner Kindheit is a displacement of the Berliner Chronik. I have worked with the
Berliner Chronik here, even though it was not the text circulated for publication in
Nazi Germany; of the two Berlin texts, it is by far the most explicit about class
issues. That it was the less explicitly politicized Berliner Kindheit that Benjamin
ultimately chose to attempt to publish in the 1930s is due, I would argue, not to
some distaste for or lack of investment in Berliner Chronik, but to a prudent assess-
ment of the situation in which he was attempting to live and work in the early
Nazi period. Writing to Scholem from Paris at the beginning of his exile there
in 1933, he observes: “under such conditions, the utmost political reserve, such
as I have long and with good reason practiced, may protect the person in ques-
tion from systematic persecution, but not from starvation” (from the increasing
refusals to publish his work) (Correspondence, 405–6).
27. “Reminiscences, even extensive ones, do not always amount to an auto-
biography. And these quite certainly do not, even for the Berlin years that I am
exclusively concerned with here. For autobiography has to do with time, with
sequence and what makes up the continuous Xow of life. Here, I am talking of a
space, of moments and discontinuities” (“Berlin Chronicle,” 28).
28. Susan Buck-Morss has made the perceptive observation that while
Benjamin has been criticized for imposing his biography allegorically on what-
ever text comes to hand and thus reducing it to the personal, his approach is bet-
ter read in exactly the opposite way—that the individual for him is emblematic of
09Bart.qxd 11/4/02 2:57 PM Page 202
the Lectures may have marked a backsliding into the crassest racism on Hegel’s
part, but nonetheless a backward move that had a long impact; see also Miers in
Gifford, ed., on the impact of slavery on German and British colonial policy; the
texts listed in note 21 also have some interest to the question of the association of
“blackness” with slavery.
34. As Sander Gilman notes, the old high German word “môr” was Wrst
used principally to designate North Africans, but slowly expanded to include
Africans more generally, especially in terms of a religious conXict between the
Christian and Muslim worlds: “the term Mohr became a portmanteau concept
for the dark-skinned non-Christian” (xii). By the time Benjamin was writing,
however, “Mohr” was generally replaced by “Neger” to distinguish sub-Saharan
peoples.
35. The Wrst line of Benjamin’s essay on Moscow is “More quickly than
Moscow itself, one gets to know Berlin through Moscow” (“Berlin Chronicle,” 97).
36. See, for example, Williams’s “When Was Modernism?” in Politics of
Modernism.
37. “The Task of the Translator,” for example, is a preface to Benjamin’s
translation into German of a collection of Baudelaire’s poetry.
38. One Way Street is particularly jam-packed with such imagery, some of it
difWcult to reclaim as anti-imperialist. However, a long middle section titled
“Imperial Panorama,” as well as the very last section, a meditation on the ill
effects of the desire of “imperialists” for “mastery of nature” on a “planetary”
scale (104), make clear that Benjamin did not consider imperialism to be a dead
issue for Germany after the loss of colonies. Also in One Way Street we are pre-
sented with a scene involving a target range at the fair in which, when the mark
is hit, a door opens and “before red plush curtains stands Moor who seems
to bow slightly. He holds in front of him a golden bowl” (85). The Moor with the
golden bowl in the later Berliner Chronik, I would suggest, wrenches the target
range sorts of Moors of everyday racist representation into a rather different rela-
tion to viewers than they otherwise might have had.
39. Benjamin, of course, earned a large portion of his own income from jour-
nalism—print and radio—until 1933 when the Nazi takeover pretty much closed
off his avenues for publication in Germany, except for a handful of works under
a pseudonym. This obviously did not temper his critique.
40. There is nothing to suggest that the sculpture was a product of Africa, of
course, nor do I suggest that this was the case; I merely refer to its referential func-
tion as a dialectical image and what it opens up to view, not its provenance.
41. This raises the question of why, if the Moor sculpture is as important as
I am saying it is, it has not received attention hitherto. In response, I would point
to Benjamin’s own frequent allusions to words, images, and experiences that are
encountered in one moment, only to have their meanings emerge much later. In
the Berliner Chronik, he cites not only words (“class,” “love,” “syphilis”) in these
terms, but also the sites and objects of his childhood that he holds up for later
inspection when, situated anew, they take on new meanings. Criticism of the
09Bart.qxd 11/4/02 2:57 PM Page 204
same work at different times can have a similar function of drawing out the
meanings of things that speak urgently to them; I argue that the Moor needs to
speak to our time, urgently.
42. Jennifer Wenzel gave an excellent paper at the 2001 meeting of the
Modern Language Association on this very problem, with the Congo as her case
study.
43. SpeciWcally, the longer Economist article characterizes the two views it
would dismiss as, on the one hand, emanating from those people who would
“blame the way the rest of the world has treated Africa, citing exploitation going
back to the slave trade and European colonial rule. They blame cold-war rivalry
for propping up greedy dictators in the Wrst 30 years of African independence,
and now they trace the continent’s failures to debt, exploitative trading relations
and too-strict demands for economic reform from the IMF and the World Bank”;
and on the other hand, derived from those people who propose that “Africa’s
wars, corruption and tribalism are ‘just the way Africa is,’ and that African soci-
eties are unable to sustain viable states.” The editors conclude, “In the past, out-
siders would have described Africa’s failure in racial terms. Some still do. They
are wrong, but social and cultural factors cannot be discounted” (“Heart,” 22).
44. C. L. R. James’s book-length assessment of Nkrumah shows that one
does not have to defend the brutal, corrupt regimes that have marred postinde-
pendence history in many African states in order to view them in a global context.
That there is stacking of the international economy against nonmetropolitan
nations has been afWrmed not just on the left (which, of course, has been saying
this for a long time), but even from fans of capitalist globalization, such as George
Soros, who has recently argued that “reform” is needed “to correct the built-in
bias in our existing international trade and Wnancial institutions that favors the
developed countries that largely control them” (8).
Works Cited
Abbas, Ackbar. Hong Kong: Culture and the Poltics of Disappearance. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press, 1997.
Abdel-Malek, Anouar. Nation and Revolution. Albany: State University of New
York Press, 1981.
“Africa’s Elusive Dawn.” Economist 358, no. 8210 (2001): 17–18.
Aidoo, Ama Ata. “What Hopeless Continent?” New Internationalist, September
2000, 5.
Beer, George Louis. African Questions at the Paris Peace Conference. New York:
Macmillan, 1923.
Berghahn, Volker R. Imperial Germany, 1871–1914: Economy, Society, Culture, and
Politics. Providence: Berghahn Books, 1994.
Benjamin, Walter. The Arcades Project. Trans. Howard Eiland and Kevin McLaugh-
lin. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, Belknap Press, 1999.
———. “Berlin Chronicle,” In ReXections, trans. Edmund Jephcott. New York:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1978.
09Bart.qxd 11/4/02 2:57 PM Page 205
Enwezor, Okwui. “Yinka Shonibare: The Joke Is on You.” Flash Art 197 (1997): 96–97.
Fanon, Frantz. Wretched of the Earth. Trans. Constance Farington. New York:
Grove Press, 1968.
Feuchtwanger, Edgar. Imperial Germany, 1850–1918. London and New York: Rout-
ledge, 2001.
Förster, Stig, et al., eds. Bismark, Europe, and Africa: The Berlin Africa Conference
1884–1885 and the Onset of Partition. London: Oxford University Press,
German Historical Institute, 1988.
Friedrichsmeyer, Sara, Sara Lennox, and Susanne Zantop, eds. The Imperialist
Imagination: German Colonialism and Its Legacy. Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan Press, 1998.
Frisby, David. Fragments of Modernity. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986.
Gifford, Prosser, and Wm. Roger Louis, eds. Britain and Germany in Africa: Imper-
ial Rivalry and Colonial Rule. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1967.
Gilman, Sander. On Blackness without Blacks: Essays on the Image of the Black in
Germany. Boston: G. K. Hall, 1982.
Gilroy, Paul. The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1993.
Hall, Stuart. “The Local and the Global: Globalization and Ethnicity.” In Culture,
Globalization, and the World-System, ed. Anthony D. King. Minneapolis: Uni-
versity of Minnesota Press, 1997. 19–39.
Hall, Stuart, et al. Policing the Crisis: Mugging, the State, and Law and Order. New
York: Holmes & Meier, 1978.
Hansen, Miriam Bratu. “Benjamin and Cinema: Not a One Way Street.” Critical
Inquiry 25, no. 2 (1999): 306–43.
Harasym, Sarah, ed. The Post-colonial Critic: Interviews, Strategies, Dialogues. New
York and London: Routledge, 1990.
“Heart of the Matter.” Economist 355, no. 8170 (2000): 22–24.
Henderson, W. O. The Rise of German Industrial Power, 1834–1914. Berkeley: Uni-
versity of California Press, 1975.
Herman, Karel. “Constants and Metamorphoses of German Imperialism as They
Were Formed since the Eighteen-seventies to 1945,” Historica 29 (1989): 57–121.
“Hopeless Africa.” Economist 355, no. 8170 (2000): 17.
Hylton, Richard. “Yinka Shonibare: Dressing Down.” Third Text 46 (1999): 101–3.
Hynes, Nancy. “Re-dressing History.” African Arts 34, no. 3 (2001): 60–65.
Jacobs, Carol. In the Language of Walter Benjamin. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1999.
James, C. L. R. Nkrumah and the Ghana Revolution. Westport, Conn.: L. Hill, 1977.
Jameson, Fredric. “Cognitive Mapping.” In Marxism and the Interpretation of Cul-
ture. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1988.
———. Late Marxism: Adorno, or The Persistence of the Dialectic. London and New
York: Verso, 1990.
———. 1990. “Modernism and Imperialism.” In Nationalism, Colonialism, and
09Bart.qxd 11/4/02 2:57 PM Page 207