CHID 250: Post-Colonial Zimbabwe & African Sexualities
The following is my Critical Thinking & Analytic Paper.
Vlad the Impaler: Hero or Monster?
“Sometimes what the world needs is not a hero, but a monster.” ~Vlad III of Dracula: Untold.[1]
Depending on where his stories are recounted, Vlad the Impaler is a man held in either reverence or disgust. For many, he is remembered for his notorious impaling of over 20,000 Turkish corpses, and the approximate 100,000 people he ruthlessly murdered from Turkey, Germany and Western Europe.These regions are where he is now despised. Interestingly, what is often left out of the stories is that the individuals killed were mostly thieves, militia, criminals, and abusive nobles who terrorized or attempted to conquer the common people of Vlad’s empire. However, he defended countless more lives in Hungary, Transylvania, Romania, Bulgaria and Russia, where he is now revered. Vlad’s fate was beheading at the hands of the Ottoman’s and his own kingdom’s nobles, where his head was trophied and showcased in a display of victory.[5] The question arises, both the Ottomans and Vlad were conquerers and colonialists; yet who are the true heroes? And what separates a hero from a villain? In no way were either of these parties saintly or without “sin”. But is it possible that heroes are also villains, and vice versa?
Throughout the readings, I have been left pondering these questions countless times. And even in our discussions, I have found no answers or solutions. For example, in Le Malentendu Colonial as well as in Nervous Conditions, Lifebouy Men, Lux Women, and excerpts of African Sexualities: A Reader, colonialism and its effects have been highlighted as both detrimental but also beneficial in certain circumstances.
Nyasha of Tsitsi Dangarembga’s Nervous Conditions, was expected to uphold the values of her family, receive an education, and maintain a docile reputation. When she could not thrive in an environment where standards crushed her internal instincts, she rebelled and became emotionally unstable. She was left distraught and frenzied, and had difficulties organizing her experiences as truth or lies. Her behavior was shamed, ridiculed, punished, and deemed unstable. Vlad also shared the same experience of carrying the weight of societal demands on his shoulders. Vlad was sold to Ottoman colonialists as a young boy to become a janissary to learn to fight and die, the truer honor of a noble Ottoman man of that time. Yet his refusal to pillage, ravage and conquear innocents alongside the empire led to his rebellion and future wars with the assistance of the Pope [5].Colonialists have left a lasting impression, impressions which have played a variety of roles upon different individuals. For Nyasha and Vlad, colonialists instilled ideologies that were maintained in her modern society and led to internal identity conformation struggles. The expectations set in a colonial society, be it Ottoman or Rhodesian, defines what it means to be a “hero”, and anyone outside of those norms is a threat to the peace. In African Sexualities: A Reader, the “charmed circle” (Tamale, 26) ideology is discussed. Although it primarily discusses sexuality, the concept of conforming to societal standards is a common pressure in any community. And those that conform receive the benefits, whereas those who rebel, are often excluded from privilege and shamed.
In the documentary Le Malentendu Colonial, or “The Colonial Misunderstanding,” European missionaries attempt to Christian and conquer Africa, not always using the most “saintly” methods. German evangelicals set up camps, to either teach the Word of God or else punish and exterminate the less worthy individuals of Namibia. This does not contrast so differently from the Ottoman empire’s attempts of colonization on Vlad’s homelands, nor any other historical attempts at conquer and conquest. However, the greatest similarity, is the way in which the heroes were portrayed. For many, the missionaries provided food, shelter, and spiritual comfort. For others, missionaries committed mass genocide in the name of God. History is written by the victors. Ottomans and nobles despised Vlad and through the nature of his death, proceeded to vilify and tarnish his legacy.[4] German colonialists may have seen their efforts in Africa in a positive light, an enlightening attempt to bring the Word of God to those deemed ignorant. Some native Africans may have not. Lasting impressions were made, and even remnants of the Germanic and Christian values are still present in the post-colonial societies. Have they hindered, or benefitted the societies? Were some missionaries heroes, and others villains? Some German missionaries helped Africans seeking asylum. Therefore, was German colonization heroic and villainous?
Discussed in Lifebuoy Men, Lux Women, as well as African Sexualities: A Reader, Africans were often perceived as “dirty” (Burke, 26) and “savage” (Burke, 22), due to their social norms being outside the comfort zone of Westerners and Europeans. Their ethics and cultural customs were the “antithesis of European mores of sexy and beauty and were labelled primitive” (Tamale, 15). Yet these ethics and cultural behaviors of African populations were normal and customary in their civilization, and perceived in a positive light by the native individuals. Tensions and problems emerge as soon as external influences try to claim superiority. Intolerant external influences developed social stigmas, stereotypes, and prejudices that “othered” the native African traditions from common European customs. The racial segregation that occurred between European colonialists and native African peoples led to tensions. For many Europeans, so long as the Africans were “kept in their place” and “untouched by [European] ‘civilization” (Burke, 22), African populations were considered tolerable. Vlad the Impaler also faced prejudice and social expectation. He was an esteemed soldier of the Ottoman empire until he rebelled to defend his native people and protect their customs.Vlad was then reviled as barbaric and savage.[5] Vlad was a commodity; a soldier meant to live, breath and die on the battlefield. Opinions and individual thought were discouraged.
Similarly to Ottomans, European African-colonialists commercialized and commodified many of the native “primitive” practices as well as the people themselves. From human work forces and labor, concentration camps, using natives as vessels for spreading the Word of God, and native herbal remedies and treatments, many of the native customs, resources and people were commodified. For example, “ethnopharmacology” was a scientific study used to collect and understand the pharmaceutical abilities of many indigenous herbal remedies. Viagra was “a direct outcome of such exploitative ventures” (18) and is now one of the biggest selling sexual stimulant today. This little blue pill is not the only native resource that was commodified. Palm oil was a common resource and was used in soap and other products. Today you can find palm oil in a variety of products, from your dish soap and shampoo, to even your common household margarine. “Can’t believe it’s not butter?” That is because it is primarily palm oil! The native palm oil soap industry also fueled the European ideology of the “hygienic ideal” (Burk, 169), causing major detriments to African sexuality customs and proposing them as even more “savage” and “primitive”. History, is written and portrayed in leaning bias towards the glorification of the victor. The victors, in their arrogance, claim superiority, and therefore are enabled to commodify anything and anyone. Yet by convoluting history, does this not devalue the victory?
Due to colonial manipulation and influence, it is nearly impossible to say what cultural traditions are inherited or historically valued. For example, in African Sexualities: A Reader, “the dominant reality is that the histories of colonialism involved such extensive movement, warfare, deprivation and loss that it is rarely possible to say with certainty” (Tamale, 80) what values and customs were originally of importance, and what were shamed. “The source of the conviction informing them is dubious” (Tamale, 80) and has left convoluted background that truly no one can say what is a heroic or villainous value, and who were the heroes and villains of history. So much of prior historic culture has been convoluted through oral tradition. Much like playing the game telephone, the original message is misheard and misrepresented and turns into something completely different. For example, the word hero itself began as a term for a common soldier, who defended his country because a hero supported the national values.[2] Is that not what Vlad did? Is that not what Germans did? Furthermore, the original meaning of the word villain, is simply a farmer or a peasant, someone of less than noble status.[3] Is this truly bad? Would that mean the Germans would have considered the “primitive” and less superior Africans to be villains? But were they not just innocents? Humanity is intersectional and diverse and thus one must always ask, “Who is the hero, and who is the villain? Who says? And can I be both?”
External Works Cited
[1] De Luca, M. (Producer), & Shore, G. (Director). (2014, October 10). Dracula: Untold [Motion Picture]. United States: Universal Pictures.
[2] Harper, D. (2014). Hero. Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=hero.
[3] Harper, D. (2014). Villain. Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=villain.
[4] Pallardy, R. (2014). Vlad III. Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/631524/Vlad-III.
[5] Swan, T. (2013, October 30). History of Europe: Vlad Tepes the Impaler. HubPages. Retrieved from http://hubpages.com/hub/25-Facts-about-Vlad-Tepes-the-Impaler.
Marisa Elena Patrick
“Sometimes what the world needs is not a hero, but a monster.” ~Vlad III of Dracula: Untold.[1]
Depending on where his stories are recounted, Vlad the Impaler is a man held in either reverence or disgust. For many, he is remembered for his notorious impaling of over 20,000 Turkish corpses, and the approximate 100,000 people he ruthlessly murdered from Turkey, Germany and Western Europe.These regions are where he is now despised. Interestingly, what is often left out of the stories is that the individuals killed were mostly thieves, militia, criminals, and abusive nobles who terrorized or attempted to conquer the common people of Vlad’s empire. However, he defended countless more lives in Hungary, Transylvania, Romania, Bulgaria and Russia, where he is now revered. Vlad’s fate was beheading at the hands of the Ottoman’s and his own kingdom’s nobles, where his head was trophied and showcased in a display of victory.[5] The question arises, both the Ottomans and Vlad were conquerers and colonialists; yet who are the true heroes? And what separates a hero from a villain? In no way were either of these parties saintly or without “sin”. But is it possible that heroes are also villains, and vice versa?
Throughout the readings, I have been left pondering these questions countless times. And even in our discussions, I have found no answers or solutions. For example, in Le Malentendu Colonial as well as in Nervous Conditions, Lifebouy Men, Lux Women, and excerpts of African Sexualities: A Reader, colonialism and its effects have been highlighted as both detrimental but also beneficial in certain circumstances.
Nyasha of Tsitsi Dangarembga’s Nervous Conditions, was expected to uphold the values of her family, receive an education, and maintain a docile reputation. When she could not thrive in an environment where standards crushed her internal instincts, she rebelled and became emotionally unstable. She was left distraught and frenzied, and had difficulties organizing her experiences as truth or lies. Her behavior was shamed, ridiculed, punished, and deemed unstable. Vlad also shared the same experience of carrying the weight of societal demands on his shoulders. Vlad was sold to Ottoman colonialists as a young boy to become a janissary to learn to fight and die, the truer honor of a noble Ottoman man of that time. Yet his refusal to pillage, ravage and conquear innocents alongside the empire led to his rebellion and future wars with the assistance of the Pope [5].Colonialists have left a lasting impression, impressions which have played a variety of roles upon different individuals. For Nyasha and Vlad, colonialists instilled ideologies that were maintained in her modern society and led to internal identity conformation struggles. The expectations set in a colonial society, be it Ottoman or Rhodesian, defines what it means to be a “hero”, and anyone outside of those norms is a threat to the peace. In African Sexualities: A Reader, the “charmed circle” (Tamale, 26) ideology is discussed. Although it primarily discusses sexuality, the concept of conforming to societal standards is a common pressure in any community. And those that conform receive the benefits, whereas those who rebel, are often excluded from privilege and shamed.
In the documentary Le Malentendu Colonial, or “The Colonial Misunderstanding,” European missionaries attempt to Christian and conquer Africa, not always using the most “saintly” methods. German evangelicals set up camps, to either teach the Word of God or else punish and exterminate the less worthy individuals of Namibia. This does not contrast so differently from the Ottoman empire’s attempts of colonization on Vlad’s homelands, nor any other historical attempts at conquer and conquest. However, the greatest similarity, is the way in which the heroes were portrayed. For many, the missionaries provided food, shelter, and spiritual comfort. For others, missionaries committed mass genocide in the name of God. History is written by the victors. Ottomans and nobles despised Vlad and through the nature of his death, proceeded to vilify and tarnish his legacy.[4] German colonialists may have seen their efforts in Africa in a positive light, an enlightening attempt to bring the Word of God to those deemed ignorant. Some native Africans may have not. Lasting impressions were made, and even remnants of the Germanic and Christian values are still present in the post-colonial societies. Have they hindered, or benefitted the societies? Were some missionaries heroes, and others villains? Some German missionaries helped Africans seeking asylum. Therefore, was German colonization heroic and villainous?
Discussed in Lifebuoy Men, Lux Women, as well as African Sexualities: A Reader, Africans were often perceived as “dirty” (Burke, 26) and “savage” (Burke, 22), due to their social norms being outside the comfort zone of Westerners and Europeans. Their ethics and cultural customs were the “antithesis of European mores of sexy and beauty and were labelled primitive” (Tamale, 15). Yet these ethics and cultural behaviors of African populations were normal and customary in their civilization, and perceived in a positive light by the native individuals. Tensions and problems emerge as soon as external influences try to claim superiority. Intolerant external influences developed social stigmas, stereotypes, and prejudices that “othered” the native African traditions from common European customs. The racial segregation that occurred between European colonialists and native African peoples led to tensions. For many Europeans, so long as the Africans were “kept in their place” and “untouched by [European] ‘civilization” (Burke, 22), African populations were considered tolerable. Vlad the Impaler also faced prejudice and social expectation. He was an esteemed soldier of the Ottoman empire until he rebelled to defend his native people and protect their customs.Vlad was then reviled as barbaric and savage.[5] Vlad was a commodity; a soldier meant to live, breath and die on the battlefield. Opinions and individual thought were discouraged.
Similarly to Ottomans, European African-colonialists commercialized and commodified many of the native “primitive” practices as well as the people themselves. From human work forces and labor, concentration camps, using natives as vessels for spreading the Word of God, and native herbal remedies and treatments, many of the native customs, resources and people were commodified. For example, “ethnopharmacology” was a scientific study used to collect and understand the pharmaceutical abilities of many indigenous herbal remedies. Viagra was “a direct outcome of such exploitative ventures” (18) and is now one of the biggest selling sexual stimulant today. This little blue pill is not the only native resource that was commodified. Palm oil was a common resource and was used in soap and other products. Today you can find palm oil in a variety of products, from your dish soap and shampoo, to even your common household margarine. “Can’t believe it’s not butter?” That is because it is primarily palm oil! The native palm oil soap industry also fueled the European ideology of the “hygienic ideal” (Burk, 169), causing major detriments to African sexuality customs and proposing them as even more “savage” and “primitive”. History, is written and portrayed in leaning bias towards the glorification of the victor. The victors, in their arrogance, claim superiority, and therefore are enabled to commodify anything and anyone. Yet by convoluting history, does this not devalue the victory?
Due to colonial manipulation and influence, it is nearly impossible to say what cultural traditions are inherited or historically valued. For example, in African Sexualities: A Reader, “the dominant reality is that the histories of colonialism involved such extensive movement, warfare, deprivation and loss that it is rarely possible to say with certainty” (Tamale, 80) what values and customs were originally of importance, and what were shamed. “The source of the conviction informing them is dubious” (Tamale, 80) and has left convoluted background that truly no one can say what is a heroic or villainous value, and who were the heroes and villains of history. So much of prior historic culture has been convoluted through oral tradition. Much like playing the game telephone, the original message is misheard and misrepresented and turns into something completely different. For example, the word hero itself began as a term for a common soldier, who defended his country because a hero supported the national values.[2] Is that not what Vlad did? Is that not what Germans did? Furthermore, the original meaning of the word villain, is simply a farmer or a peasant, someone of less than noble status.[3] Is this truly bad? Would that mean the Germans would have considered the “primitive” and less superior Africans to be villains? But were they not just innocents? Humanity is intersectional and diverse and thus one must always ask, “Who is the hero, and who is the villain? Who says? And can I be both?”
External Works Cited
[1] De Luca, M. (Producer), & Shore, G. (Director). (2014, October 10). Dracula: Untold [Motion Picture]. United States: Universal Pictures.
[2] Harper, D. (2014). Hero. Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=hero.
[3] Harper, D. (2014). Villain. Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=villain.
[4] Pallardy, R. (2014). Vlad III. Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/631524/Vlad-III.
[5] Swan, T. (2013, October 30). History of Europe: Vlad Tepes the Impaler. HubPages. Retrieved from http://hubpages.com/hub/25-Facts-about-Vlad-Tepes-the-Impaler.
Marisa Elena Patrick