By the mid 1950s Jamaica was on the up, especially because they discover the bauxite. But the big profit was going to the overseas aluminum companies who invested in the mining, because up to 1954 Busta’s government let the bauxite ore be shipped out for 10 cents a ton. When the government change in 1955, Norman Manley negotiate a new royalty and tax at $1.40 a ton. It was a pittance when you compare it to the profit the aluminum companies was making but still Jamaica was earning and people had jobs and training. It was good but it didn’t stop me from noticing that the whole thing was just like the same way the plantation profits gone to England back in the old days. It was just like a new version of that, including them passing some laws to secure the special rights and status of the foreigners to make them feel more confident, that is how they put it anyway. (Young 89)
This passage contextualizes Chapter 14, showing the reader the critical ways in which Jamaica was changing. The winds of neoliberalism and neocolonialism were again catching up to Jamaica, turning the island nation economy into one dominated by the drive for profit and captured by foreign powers. Young uses a metaphor and italicization to indicate the severity of these issues that would envelope Jamaica and change the direction of Pao’s life. First, Young compares 1950s Jamaica to the plantations “in the old days.” Specifically, the plantation profits went to England. The historical context behind this metaphor is extremely deep, given that Jamaica’s history is marred by its inability to gain independence against a backdrop of forced settlement, slave importation, and resource extraction by the British. The thought of bauxite mining transported back to the “Old World” of the British empire conjures many of the same ideas of colonialism, indicating that the narrative has changed little.
Second, the italicization in the last sentence of the paragraph indicates Pao’s understanding that the “laws to secure special rights and status of the foreigners” were not just to make the foreigners feel more confident. This typeface conveys to the reader simply how ridiculous that laws that protected the rights of foreigners were being passed while Jamaicans were being hurt in a variety of ways by colonialism and everyday interpersonal violence. Both of these literary devices are an example of well-researched writing that brings the historical context of Afro-Asian intimacies in Jamaica to life.
I’m so glad that you pointed this out Darren! It reminds me a little of the discussion we had in class about the book being fictional but having real life scenarios and historical events included. I’m not that familiar with Jamaican historical events so this passage/ chapter definitely was very eye opening and a great learning experience for me. I wanted to say that I agree with the use of italics in this paragraph and wanted to point out further the importance of just that one part of the sentence. Seeing how the whole paragraph had quite a bit of information that has it’s own light to be shone on, it was very purposeful that only this portion was italicized. I believe the author was trying to convey the ridiculousness of the laws, but also trying to interject something further, that I can’t put my finger on at the moment.
This was great, Darren. I am really interested in how these texts are weaving history more closely into the narrative–not quite seamless, but really close. I would say it’s a subtle change of stitch coloring in the fabric of the narrative. I love that you put your finger right on that pulse. I saw Harriet this weekend and one of the things about the film
that discomfited me somewhat was how the dramatization of the gaps in the historical record felt obvious. Pao almost reads that way, but in reverse: when History steps into the narrative arc to voice itself, so to speak, it is sensed if not clearly ‘heard.’
If there was a moment of hesitation for me in your reading, I would say it’s in the idea of ‘the winds of neocolonialism and neoliberalism catching up to Jamaica again.’ My hesitation is simply in that there was no real let-up in the winds–preparations were already being made even as the abolishment of slavery was being considered by the English, with indentiture being the low-cost alternative to slavery’s free labor. For that reason I think I would have read it as the ‘shifting winds’ of exploitive practices rather than there having been let-up in the winds which ‘catching up’ might imply. Still, it’s a really minor hesitation on my part. This was an excellent close reading.
Elias, thanks for your comment. I agree – the winds are shifting rather than letting up and then coming again. I think it’s important to read colonialism as a structure (or structuring) in the context of Jamaica and Afro-Asia.