Postcolonial biblical criticism is the principal theory upon which this study is anchored. Simply stated, “…postcolonial criticism is an interpretive act that is gaining momentum among scholars of formerly colonized societies” (Waweru, 2007:28). The study regards postcolonial biblical criticism as the best positioned tool for reading construction of exousia in Mark’s 1:21-28 because it can reveal how it could be implicated in informing impunity in Kenya. More importantly, the study also views postcolonialism as the best theory because though not a grand theory it incorporates dimensions of other
24
theories (for example liberation, hermeneutics, feminist hermeneutics, inculturation hermeneutics etc.)
According to Sugirtharajah, ‘postcolonialism, has a multiplicity of meanings depending on location and context. More importantly, ‘…it is an oppositional reading practice, and a way of critiquing the totalizing forms of Eurocentric thinking and of reshaping dominant meanings’ (2003:15). England (2004:89) has also observed that:-
…postcolonial studies focus on power configurations that have resulted from the subjugation of indigenous peoples by colonizing powers, and investigates both those regions where the political, economic and cultural realms are still determined and informed by colonialism.
Considering Sugirtharajah’s and England’s views, postcolonial framework was taken up in this study because it offered the best ideological tools, for interrogating how imperial authority is constructed in Mark 1:21-28.
The study’s use of postcolonial criticism is particularly influenced by Sugirtharajah’s (2008) essay, ‘Charting the aftermath: a Review of Postcolonial Criticism21,’ in which he depicts postcolonial criticism as the most appropriate, most enlightening and most fruitful tool of our time. In particular, he convincingly shows that ‘it instigates, and creates possibilities, and provides a platform for the widest possible coverage of critical forces, of multi-ethnic, multi-religious, and multicultural voices, to assert their denied rights and rattle the centre’ (Sugirtharajah 2006:9). This study’s attraction to postcolonialism was not only influenced by this borderless approach to reality but also the possibility of incorporating other methodologies in its service. The findings in this study agree with the premise that imperial ideology not only
25
influenced the production of Mark’s Gospel, but also that the reading and hearing of this gospel informs and helps reduplicate the empire mentality in Kenya.
Postcolonial biblical criticism relies on Marxist tools for ideological criticism. The power of Marxist analysis lies in its ability to illuminate the experience of 20th century colonialism in Africa, as indeed it has clarified of many other dimensions of the history of capitalist development, provided we remember that Marx was as much concerned with how men and women come to the consciousness of political possibilities as he was sure that productive structures and forces shaped historical probabilities (John Scott &Gordon Marshall: 1998). In interacting with Kenyan context, this study pays attention to the ideals of neo-Marxism22 within postcolonial criticism.
This study reveals an awareness that Marxism is a product of at least two centuries of European philosophical, religious and social reflection. However, it notes the emerging views of key postcolonial biblical scholars [see for example, David Jobling (2005), Roland Boer (2001, 2003 & 2005), Miguez Jose Bonino (2006) and West (1999)] that Marxist tools are workable within postcolonialism. This study does, therefore, exclusively employ the ideals of Marxism within postcolonialism as articulated by Jobling and Boer. This enables the critique of the ideology behind excessive capitalism and materialism that constitute what would be termed impunity of materialism in Kenya. To this end, this study holds the view that economic disparity, as experienced in Kenya, forms a fertile seed bed for impunity. The invocation of
26
Marxism may seem uncomfortable to schools of thought that are dismissive of all that is Marxist. Agreeably, classical, orthodox and generic Marxism does try, to classify religion in general and Christianity in particular “as a mere ‘reflex’ of economic conditions” (Bonino, 2006:43). However, within postcolonialism, Marxist critical tools are serviceable not only in reading Mark 1:21-28 but also in critiquing the Kenyan impunity.
This position stems from the impetus impunity is given by particular class differences and struggles. Succinctly stated, “to the extent that postcolonialism is hiding (from itself and others) the resources of the Marxist tradition, it is narrowing the ideological options… of the people in struggle” (Jobling, 2005:191) and this study does not fall into this trap.
Within postcolonialism,23 and in order to adequately question the special and complex type of impunity in Kenya, this study also though in a subordinate way, pays attention to an inculturation hermeneutic as fronted by Justin Ukpong (1995) and a postcolonial feminist hermeneutic as developed by Dube (1997). Ukpong (1995) has rightly noted that “the focus of inculturation hermeneutic is on the reader/interpreter and his/her context in relation to the text and its content” (:5).
Consequently, in inculturation biblical hermeneutics, it is presupposed that the biblical text is plurivalent in that the text can be understood differently, according to different contexts and perspectives, though it is also emphasized that the biblical text cannot mean everything (Ukpong, 1996:189-194). Therefore, Ukpong’s inculturation methodology
27
eschews the idea of one universally valid interpretation of the biblical text (1996:191). Ukpong’s approach though not directly equated to postcolonialism was very useful for this study especially in its seeming advocacy to a freed approach in biblical interpretation, which also postcolonialism does.
As an off shoot, Dube (2007) has developed an African feminist dimension in postcolonialism, which sees women as structured at the bottom of the empire hierarchy, whether among the empire builders or among the subaltern. This methodology employs African Women’s Theology and liberation tools, to offer a new position for women, who are seen to be positioned at the bottom of imperial hierarchical constructions. Although, impunity is not exclusively a male affair, this study incorporated (though not overtly) Dube’s feminist postcolonialism in view of the realization that impunity has a subtle patriarchal dimension that mainly relies on male dominated hierarchical structures. However, this study’s point of departure from Dube and Ukpong hermeneutics was the recognition that postcolonialism takes a unique contour and goes beyond Marxism, and feminist hermeneutics in articulating emancipation from imperial tentacles.