Take a photo of a barcode or cover
books_ergo_sum 's review for:
The Wretched of the Earth
by Frantz Fanon
informative
reflective
medium-paced
Part case study of Algeria’s decolonization in the 50s, part philosophy of man. This book did that thing I love with all my soul: combine philosophical chops with facts on the ground. This book is about national liberation movements understood through 20th century French philosophy—that classic mix of existentialism, Marxism, psychoanalysis, and Hegel. With three themes:
📕 on violence
📓 stages of a national liberation movement
📗 the psychological impact of colonial oppression
‘On Violence’ is (in)famous. Fanon's explanation that colonialism is “naked violence and only gives in when confronted with greater violence,” is the most famous line in the text. There’s WAY more nuance to the section than that line suggests (like how a bourgeois class transforms this resistance into one of nonviolence) but Fanon definitely makes peeps uncomfy here.
I became curious about this book when so many pro-Palestinian interviewees were invoking Fanon's philosophical language. When Fanon says that violence is the "perfect mediation" (the Hegelian philosophy way to say ‘violence is the answer’), I'd want to compare his arguments to where Hegel himself said violence is merely an incomplete mediation (aka not the answer). I side more with Hegel than Fanon here—but if we don’t understand this argument, how can we even begin the conversation?
That first section was chilling. But the rest of the book was eye-opening. The middle chapters (on the stages of liberation movements, how post-colonial states develop, and the difficulties they face) make Fanon look like he had a crystal ball. And in the last section, on mental disorders, Fanon used case studies of his own Algerian therapy patients to illustrate the psychological trauma of colonial oppression, in its many forms.
Am I one of the "certain pharisees" that Fanon denounces for thinking "humanity has got past the nationalist stage"? Yes--I think Fanon is not critical enough of nationalism. And even if he thinks it is "nothing but a crude, empty fragile shell," history has shown that it's not as easy as he thinks to abandon it after a nationalist liberation movement is successful. And that leads to a ton of problems, to put it mildly.
A super important and approachable work of philosophy. I highly recommend.
📕 on violence
📓 stages of a national liberation movement
📗 the psychological impact of colonial oppression
‘On Violence’ is (in)famous. Fanon's explanation that colonialism is “naked violence and only gives in when confronted with greater violence,” is the most famous line in the text. There’s WAY more nuance to the section than that line suggests (like how a bourgeois class transforms this resistance into one of nonviolence) but Fanon definitely makes peeps uncomfy here.
I became curious about this book when so many pro-Palestinian interviewees were invoking Fanon's philosophical language. When Fanon says that violence is the "perfect mediation" (the Hegelian philosophy way to say ‘violence is the answer’), I'd want to compare his arguments to where Hegel himself said violence is merely an incomplete mediation (aka not the answer). I side more with Hegel than Fanon here—but if we don’t understand this argument, how can we even begin the conversation?
That first section was chilling. But the rest of the book was eye-opening. The middle chapters (on the stages of liberation movements, how post-colonial states develop, and the difficulties they face) make Fanon look like he had a crystal ball. And in the last section, on mental disorders, Fanon used case studies of his own Algerian therapy patients to illustrate the psychological trauma of colonial oppression, in its many forms.
Am I one of the "certain pharisees" that Fanon denounces for thinking "humanity has got past the nationalist stage"? Yes--I think Fanon is not critical enough of nationalism. And even if he thinks it is "nothing but a crude, empty fragile shell," history has shown that it's not as easy as he thinks to abandon it after a nationalist liberation movement is successful. And that leads to a ton of problems, to put it mildly.
A super important and approachable work of philosophy. I highly recommend.