چکیده:
La question de l’hybridité culturelle des auteurs postcoloniaux reste une question difficile
à cerner pour plusieurs raisons, historiques, politiques, personnelles, et culturelles. Homi Bhabha dans son oeuvre genèse Les lieux de la culture avait proposé un espace tiers qui plaise aux deux sphères culturelles qui constituent le total culturel des auteurs en provenance d’une hybridité postcoloniale. Ce qui n’a pas, à notre avis, mis une vraie fin à ce dilemme vu la présence de la francophonie comme structure postcoloniale d’après Louis-Jean Calvet, politique postcoloniale d’appropriation inégale de la
production littéraire des auteurs d’origine. Edward Saïd s’y est attardé par deux fois dans ses deux
oeuvres majeures, l’Orientalisme et Culture et impérialisme. Saïd, en effet, pointe de doigt le désir
continuel de l’empire à maintenir son ascendant sur les indigènes, en élaborant une perspective
comparative qui lui sert d’outil de mesure. La lutte que mènent ces auteurs postcoloniaux face à cette aliénation politique n’aboutit qu’à l’aune de la métropole, nous parlons ici d’une réception conditionnée dans le champ littéraire français. Cette aliénation s’ajoute à l’aliénation de départ de ces auteurs
postcoloniaux en faisant leur choix auctorial de s’exprimer dans la langue des colons.
Dans ce présent article, deux grands noms nous servent d’outil de comparaison, à savoir Franz Kafka et Vladimir Volkoff. La primordialité de l’origine s’avère grave dans le cas de Volkoff, un auteur
français d’origine russe, il est toutefois intégré par naissance comme une figure littéraire de souche, et loin de ses thématiques littéraires ayant toujours un trait fort avec son origine, il est amplement français bien qu’il n’ait souhaité qu’un statut de « apatride ». Ben Jelloun dans la même catégorie, ne dispose que du titre, qu’il le veuille ou pas, d’un français de papier. Cette discrimination littéraire a son histoire à elle seule, c’est celle de la périphérie.
En ce qui de la comparaison avec Franz Kafka, nous avons conclu qu’il existe une similitude entre
Ben Jelloun et Kafka, du fait que les deux ont dû passer par les mêmes trois impossibilités étant deux auteurs qui ont trouvé leur vocation littéraire dans une langue qui n’est pas celle de leurs parents. Nous avions ici recours à l’oeuvre de Deleuze et Guattari ; une similitude avec une réalité postcoloniale qui s’ajoute au statut de Ben Jelloun. Nous avons, pour ce faire, proposé ‘franpéralisme’ comme néologisme
de convenance, et de nécessité, un néologisme qui décrit plus précisément le contenu de l’adjectif
‘francophone’ qui qualifie l’auteur d’expression française anciennement colonisé.
La transidentité des auteurs francophones fait d’eux des multitudes qui franchissent les frontières
canoniques de la production littéraire et qui brisent l’image dogmatique de l’auteur monolingue
d’idéologie figée.
بررسی دوگانگی فرهنگی نویسندگان پسااستعماری به دلایل مختلف تاریخی، سیاسی، شخصی و فرهنگی همچنان دشوار است. هومی بابا فیلسوف و منقد ادبی هندی، در اثر مهم خود مکان فرهنگ فضای سومی را پیشنهاد کرده است که فضای فرهنگی بین دو زبان/ فرهنگ میباشد. این فضا نه هویت نویسنده را نادیده میگیرد و نه ان را کامل میپذیرد. به عبارتی دیگر، در حالی که به بهانه اصالت نویسنده ارزش ادبی و انسانی اثر کنار گذاشته میشود، هومی بابا فضای سوم اضافی را برای جای دادن هویت با تمام خاستگاههای ان در نظر گرفته است؛ فضایی با یک تعریف جهانی. ادوارد سعید در دو اثر مهم خود، شرقشناسی و فرهنگ و امپریالیسم، به موضوع فرانکوفونی و تصاحب ناعادلانه محصولات ادبی نویسندگان توسط سیاست پسااستعماری پرداخته است. مبحثی که توسط لويی ژان کالوه، زبانشناس فرانسوی نیز بررسی شده است. در واقع، ادوارد سعید با ایجاد دیدگاه مقایسهای به تمایل مستمر امپراتوری برای حفظ برتری خود نسبت به بومیان اشاره میکند. برای توضیح بیشتر مبحث دوگانگی فرهنگی، فرانتس کافکا و ولادیمیر ولکوف در این مقاله مورد مقایسه قرار میگیرند.
In this article, we wish to start from the idea that the origin of hybrid culture’s authors is
being a real obstacle to the reception of their French-language literature within the two cultures and identity
spheres shaping their singularity. Writing in the language of the settlers was a choice that many second-generation
Maghrebi writers have made, Tahar Ben Jelloun in this case, what made of their works on one hand is a
deterritorialized literature, and on the other hand, exotic pastiches from the outskirts of the metropolis.
Cultural production is considered a foreign element on a national scale. French is indeed the second language
in Morocco, but it is not the primary literary language, which means that indigenous production in the language
of settlers is not targeting the indigenous community in the first place; it reaches the casual Moroccan reader via
the process of translation. This hybrid cultural status does not solely represent the writer individually, but the
whole community. In other words, this is a collective postcolonial stance.
The reception of this post-colonial production in France is not only conditioned by the origin of an author, but
also by his “genre”: Marvellous Realism, for instance, seems to have access to all French editors. This makes it
even harder to publish a work translated in the Arab world without undergoing severe censorship. This auctorial
choice made by postcolonial authors comes at a high price, going sometimes to jeopardize to author’s image in
the national sphere, the same way he is held for a stranger ‘naturalize’ in the metropolitan sphere.
France still believes in the superiority of European Francophones over other users of French "from outside", an
omnipresent superiority in the awarding system of literary prizes, this disparagement of these works by non-
European authors seems to assume a form of neo-colonialism: the Francophonie defined and encouraged all over
the world is merely a neo-colonialism for which culture is a first political priority. The cultural transfer carried out
by postcolonial authors, either by writing directly in the language of the other, or by self-translating from
the language of the other into their mother tongue, highlights the alternation between deterritorialization and reappropriation
by the means of translation of hybrid content, subject to language and literary adaptation.
The question of the cultural hybridity of post-colonial authors remains a difficult question to define for several
reasons, historical, political, personal and cultural. Homi Bhabha in his Major work the location of culture had
proposed a third space that appeals to the two cultural spheres which constitute the cultural total of authors coming
from a postcolonial hybridity. In our opinion, this has not really ended this dilemma given the presence of the
Francophonie as a postcolonial structure according to Louis-Jean Calvet. This post-colonial policy involves an
unequal appropriation of literary production by authors of different origins. Edward Said wrote about it twice in
his two major works, Orientalism and Culture and Imperialism. Said, in fact, emphasizes the empire's continual
desire to maintain its ascendancy over the natives, developing a comparative perspective that serves as a measuring
tool. The struggle that these postcolonial authors lead in the face of this political alienation only succeeds in
metropolitan terms, we are talking here of a conditioned reception in the French literary field. This alienation
comes above the original alienation of those post-colonial writers by making their auctorial choice to speak in the
language of the settlers.
Although Tahar Ben Jelloun, awarded the Goncourt Prize in 1987, is one of the most consecrated authors in
the two cultural spheres constituting his hybrid identity, he is still parked in the same status of Moroccan writer
with westernizing tendencies from one side, and on the other side of a French-speaking author inheriting an exotic
Maghrebi folklore. In the national field, his source of inspiration, Ben Jelloun pursues the colonial mission, and
in the other literary field, at the origin of his literary creativity, he is a French-speaking writer with significant acquired capital.
In this article, two large names are a comparison tool, namely Franz Kafka and Vladimir Volkoff. The primordiality of the origin turns out to be serious in the case of Volkoff, a French author of Russian origin, he is however integrated by birth and considered as one of the most important French literary figures, and far from his literary themes always having a strong link with his origin, he is largely French although he only wanted stateless status. Ben Jelloun in the same category has just the title of French of Papers, whether he likes it or not. This literary discrimination has its own history, namely that of the periphery.
As for the comparison with Franz Kafka, we concluded that there is a similarity between Ben Jelloun and Kafka, due to the fact that both had to go through the same three impossibilities being two authors who found their literary vocation in a language which is not that of their parents. We refer here to the work of Deleuze and Guattari; a similarity with a postcolonial reality added to the statute of Ben Jelloun. In order to put the categorization of postcolonial authors in a more understandable way, we have proposed ‘franperalism’ as a neologism of convenience, and of necessity, a neologism that describes more precisely the content of the adjective ‘francophone’ which qualifies the author of French expression formerly colonized.
Gerard Genette, has defined five main types of intertextuality, we estimate that a sixth dimension is needed to frame the postcolonial transgression usually seen as a form of denunciation of double stranded reception policy. A less institutional origin-based criterion would allow diversity and enhance literal integrity for the good of the place of French literary contribution on the international scale. In this article, Ben Jelloun refers to two major literary figures, Albert Camus in his L’etranger, and Louis Aragon in his L’affiche rouge. Both attempts of transtextuality stated in this article expressed a certain identification to one human condition of struggle and resistance; a collective human and political condition that gives birth to a mutual cultural transfer.
The achievements of the postcolonial author are now legitimate, the French school in the outskirts has successfully completed its "civilizing" mission and the metropolis is ready to reap the fruits of its cultural seed. Legitimacy granted by the former colonizer whose endorsement is the key to consecration, and of course universalism, this takes, from our perspective, a new form of political influence maintained but this time through Literature. The first indicators of this control are pronounced in the bearer parallels of the Western model in the literary production of postcolonial authors; it is about an enriching cultural dynamism of the literary field of the metropolis, a dynamism which opened, in the case of Rachid Boujedra, a debate on self-translation into Arabic as a means of reappropriating the national literary capital.
The transidentity of French-speaking authors makes them multitudes who cross the canonical borders of literary production and who shatter the dogmatic image of the monolingual author of frozen ideology.