Review: The Postcolonial Turn in Dutch Literary Criticism

In 2007 and 2008, two studies on Moroccan-Dutch writing saw the light. Both were carried out by young scholars slightly removed from Dutch academia: Henriette Louwerse works at the University of Sheffield, and Liesbeth Minnaard wrote her book during academic stays in Berlin, Frankfurt (Oder), Trier, and at Cornell University. This distance may partly account for the innovative perspective offered by both books. In this review, I will defend the bold statement that they herald an eagerly-awaited turn in Dutch literary criticism. Scholars of Dutch literature have been referring to postcolonial theory for quite a while. Researchers of ‘Indische’ literature especially, but also of the literature of the Dutch Caribbean, who study postcolonial literature in the strict sense of the term, use productive concepts and insights from, say, Edward Said and Homi Bhabha (‘in-betweenness’, ‘orientalism’, ‘hybridity’). Those who study the writings of Dutch authors with a migrant background often adopt the concept of the fluid constructed identity that is also discussed within a postcolonial context. However, such debates about identity may relate less to a postcolonial than to a much broader postmodern concern. Although they have close affinities, postcolonial literature and the literature of migration are not the same thing as postmodern literature, and postcolonial theory differs from its postmodern counterpart. The two studies under scrutiny here offer a clear insight into the subtle but fundamental distinctions between these approaches. As such, they not only build on the work of their predecessors but, by engaging with the far-reaching fundamental debates on the nature of identity, literature and power, they introduce a new perspective in this field. Louwerse and Minnaard are well aware of the innovative power of their work. They confidently offer a well-argued critical evaluation of the dominant ways in which the Dutch literatures of migration are read and propose convincing alternatives. In Homeless Entertainment, Louwerse focuses on the literary work by Hafid Bouazza, a Dutch writer of Moroccan extraction. Her main point is that, while most Dutch critics aim at solving the tensions and paradoxes in a literary text, [115] Bouazza’s work is marked by an intense resistance to closure. It passionately conveys a sense of the world as irretrievably plural, hybrid and always in a state of transformation. The dominant Dutch reading strategy that is intent on closure quite misses his point. Minnaard’s study, New Germans, New Dutch, compares the Dutch literature of migration (by Moroccan authors) to its German counterpart (by Turkish authors). Minnaard’s main point is that there is an intense but complex interaction between migrant writing and its national context, i.e. its legal and discursive construction of national identity. This statement counters the widespread Dutch assumption that the literature of migration would primarily be shaped by its ethnic ‘origins’. Minnaard argues that this

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.