Mary Pratt’s Contact Zones

A critique on Mary Pratt’s “Contact Zone”

Mary Pratt’s definition of the contact zone stems from cultures whose different geographical and historical locations meet. Mary Pratt explains these encounters as when “disparate cultures meet, clash and grapple with each other, often in highly asymmetrical relations” (Mary Pratt, p.7). Pratt also states that within her definition of ‘Contact Zones’ includes the idea of colonial frontiers, these clashes between varying cultures throughout imperial history has largely resulted in native cultures being enslaved or abused, for the use of the colonial empires.

The idea of ‘contact zones’ when regarding to imperialism and colonialism in my opinion, is helpful as it sets a standard regarding what’s occurred throughout colonial history, in varying cultures. Although varying in locations, we can see a very consistent theme of the idea that “In the 18^th century Northern Europe asserted itself as the centre of civilisation” (Mary Pratt, p.12), believing that civilised humanity was Northern Europe alone, in comparison to the “savages” and “barbarians” they’d witnessed through exploration.

Another factor of Pratt’s book is that she also values de-colonisation of knowledge in a state of hegemony, stating that the “predominant theme is how travel books written by Europeans about non-European parts of the world created the imperial order” (Mary Pratt, p.3), this idea of our knowledge being so confined to colonial knowledge created Pratt’s deep belief to undergo transculturation, removing Europe from the centre of civilisation, and to include multi-diversity and understanding.

Historians can utilise some of Pratt’s virtues such as the ideology of de-colonising knowledge and transculturation. We can see these two ideologies being shaped in modern day Australia, as we become more tolerant of different cultures, and move past and reshape our discriminatory past.

Pratt’s book ‘Imperial Eye’s’ explores the ideas of colonialism, imperialism and importantly the monopolisation of knowledge during this period. Pratt herself states that “This book aims to be both a study in Genre and a critique of ideology” (Pratt, M, L, 2007), aiming to decolonise knowledge and share information regarding native individuals. A historian Kohn, M states “Colonialism is a practice of domination, which involves the subjugation of one people to another” (Kohn, M, 2006). Colonisation involves misunderstanding between natives and colonisers and often the superiority complex which developed amongst the Imperial empires.

Mary Pratt’s earlier pages shares the results of colonisation through the town she grew up in. Pratt’s childhood was lived in Linstow, Canada in the 1950’s, much of her town’s street names and even the town name was influenced by colonising frontiers, which Pratt would further dislike. Pratt shares the idea of “de-colonising knowledge” and implementing “transculturation”. These terms refer to the idea of the oppressed natives, sharing their knowledge, rather than the knowledge being monopolised by Northern Europe as it “asserted itself as the centre of civilisation” (Pratt, M, 2007, p.12).

Pratt’s piece Imperial Eyes shares a very important ideology regarding de-colonising knowledge and creating a further understanding of populations which were previously, and in some cases oppressed. It’s only been in the last decade or so that countries have taken global initiative to understand global knowledge and culture. I believe this article critically analysis the truth of monopoly of knowledge, and the subdued nature of indigenous populations In Australia we can see this in very recent times, where the understanding of the indigenous population is surfacing. So therefore, I believe in a critical stance, I don’t disagree with anything Pratt has to say, including her dislike for the influence colonisation has had on her town, and the apparent brainwashing she had to endure whilst schooling, being fed stories from missionaries who were radically religionising local inhabitants, while dominating their land.

Pratt’s colonialism brainwashing related to historian Gouda who states that colonialism is “a perspective that often incorporates an emphasis on the historical evolution of racial hierarchies and gendered identities” Gouda, F. 2008), relating to the term “savage” which was used to describe many indigenous populations. This influences and demonstrates that Northern Europe self-proclaimed that they were the centre of civilisation, and often referred to natives of colonies as “barbarians” or “savages”. Historian Stoler argues “Even when examining the politics of colonial discourse and it’s local lexicon, the texts are often assumed to express a shared European mentality, the sentiments of a unifying, conquering elite” (Stoler, A, 2002, pg.23)

These factors of discrimination of the indigenous populations brings up Pratt’s ideology of decolonising knowledge and transculturation, which is prevalent in recent times as indigenous art and culture is developing in Australia out of respect for the original inhabitants of this land. Due to the factors above, I cannot see many viewpoints I can disagree when it comes to Pratt’s Imperial Eyes and the somewhat aggressive stance on colonisation and how it has completely negatively impacted the world throughout the 16^th-18^th century, and even current times where we are only just starting, and willing to hear about Aboriginal heritage in Australia.

In my opinion, cross-cultural world history is important as it shows our ancestry and especially societies growth during imperial times. It also shares how violent, malevolent, and abusive we are in our conquest of colonialism. Also shares how politically and economically driven Europe was and its colonial empires. A lot of the disparity shown globally is significantly shown through colonialism, this includes African Americans, Aboriginals, and native South Americans, who were all tormented for Europe’s economic wealth. These factors are important in our understanding of our world, both in the past and in the future.

References

Gouda, F. (2008). Colonial Encounters, Body Politics, and Flows of Desire. Journal of Women’s History 20(3), 166-180. https://doi.org/10.1353/jowh.0.0033. – done

Pratt, M. L. (2007). Imperial eyes : Travel writing and transculturation. Taylor & Francis Group. -done

Stoler, A. L. (2002). Carnal knowledge and imperial power : Race and the intimate in colonial rule. University of California Press.

Kohn, M. and Reddy, K. (2006). Colonialism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [online] Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/colonialism/?f. – done