Book Review: Waiting for the Barbarians

Book Review

Waiting for the Barbarians - J.M.Coetzee

“One thought alone preoccupies the submerged mind of Empire: how not to end, how not to die, how to prolong its era” (Coetzee, Barbarians, 146).

J. M. Coetzee’s novel Waiting for the Barbarians, set in the confines of an unidentified empire, explores the tormented struggle of his protagonist’s morality, the magistrate. The empire within which the magistrate debates his morality and later sanity, is profoundly influenced by historical context. In 1980 Coetzee was surrounded by the faces of empire, decolonisation had and was rapidly spreading across Africa, yet apartheid as a regime remained potent. Simultaneously, the Cold War presented the battle of two empires, jostling for global hegemony. Each of these regimes, apartheid South Africa no less than the others, was preoccupied with maintaining its position, sustaining its life, contemplating “how not to die” (Coetzee, Barbarians, 146). Yet Coetzee does not tackle any given empire or regime, his novel is timeless, rather conversely to his arguments of empires, which are defined by “time of rise and fall” (Coetzee, Barbarians, 146), by beginning and ending. This lack of time and space can be read as an exercise in avoiding censorship, denying the censor the ability to take offence. The theme of offence is certainly prominent in Coetzee's later critical work. However can we examine Waiting for the Barbarians to uncover the modern relationship between the oppressed and the oppressor? Arguably more than thirty years on from the date of publishing, and almost sixty years since the first wave of decolonisation began in Africa, the relationship remains largely unchanged. The official chains of colonialism have been replaced with the doctrine of free markets and economic imperialism.

In relation to Coetzee’s critical work on censorship in South Africa, Waiting for the Barbarians certainly questions the legitimacy of censorship which is founded on the basis of paranoia. Paranoia is evidenced in the Empire’s consistent and methodical approach to the Barbarians, indeed Colonel Joll epitomises this paranoia: 

“Pain is truth; all else is subject to doubt” (Coetzee, Barbarians, 5)

The intensity, and conviction of this belief somewhat resonates with Soviet Russia, striking images of secret police and forced confessions, all at the convenience of the state. Coetzee effectively works paranoia into the empire, critically in relation to the elusive barbarians, which define the empires boundaries. Strikingly though Coetzee plays with the boundaries of social behaviour, touching on the dominance of discourse. Our conflicted protagonist is only able to break the social discourse and morality once he has escaped its boundaries, i.e the frontier walls. Beyond the constraints of society the magistrate is able to engage in intercourse with the barbarian girl, although as we later realise this is not a complete escape. The magistrate is unable to avoid the consequences of transcending social boundaries.

However, Coetzee’s novel derives it attractiveness, its readability or power if you will, not through subtle experiments with censorship and boundaries but through the intensely depicted personal conflict of the magistrate. The magistrate is constantly hurled between opposing spectrums of experience. No sooner does the euphoria of freedom overwhelm his consciousness, than does his humanity desert him, “I am now no more than a pile of blood, bone and meat that is unhappy” (Coetzee, Barbarians, 93). Following this internal conflict is the novel’s most distinctive and enticing feature. Not only does this conflict represent the guilt of empire, it more importantly, artistically speaking, ensures that the reader fails to see the magistrate as a hero. The magistrate’s acute awareness of his own immorality and his own position as an oppressor serves to prevent the reader from idealising our protagonist. As the magistrate does, the reader is also brought to comprehend the salience of the moral conflict:

“I was the lie that Empire tells itself when times are easy, he the truth that Empire tells when harsh winds blow. Two sides of imperial rule, no more, no less.” (Coetzee, Barbarians, 148)

Rather astutely Coetzee creates a conflict of moral responsibility, the magistrates internal struggle is externalised - it becomes apparent in its simplicity and given a tangible identity through his relationships -  it’s cause is identified, but no remedy provided. 

In accord with this moral conflict the magistrates sexuality plays a prominent role. The pseudo-sexual relationship which evolves between the magistrate and a barbarian girl, aptly depicts his moral conflict. The relationship, as with so many others in the novel is heavily intertwined with power relations. However the relationship is complex, and consequently dramatically engaging, for much of the novel “the ritual of washing” (Coetzee, Barbarians, 32) becomes the epicentre of activity, the physical manifestation of moral conflict. Initially, and perhaps almost too passively “She yields to everything” (Coetzee, Barbarians, 32) allowing the magistrate to direct the relationship. However, almost in accordance with the magistrates own narrative this passivity does not remain. Although, unlike her counterpart she is eventually, and much to the relief of the reader, able to escape the structures imposed upon her. Outside the confines of the settlement she rejects the magistrate, and reveals what he cannot, his inability to fully emancipate himself form the discourse of the society to which he is bound.

At this point I return to my earlier question, to what extent can Waiting for the Barbarians comment on our modern dominant and subaltern relationship? If Achebe’s Things Fall Apart represents the beginning of colonialism then Waiting for the Barbarians represents the beginning of Neo-imperialism, and it is equally as heartbreaking. The novel ends seemingly with all our characters where they started, albeit changed for the experience, but essentially in the same roles. The magistrate as the epitomising character is unable to escape the doctrine of social morality, the censorship of society is inescapably imposed. Similarly, the ‘third world’ finds itself maintained in a position of dependency. Unable to escape the censorship of societal structures, most potently economic imperialism, the colonial relationship manages to re-manifest itself.

Bibliography:
Coetzee, J.M. “The Work of the Censor: Censorship in South Africa.” Giving Offense: Essays on Censorship. Univ. of Chicago Press, 1996, 185-203

Coetzee, J. M. Waiting for the Barbarians. London: Vintage, 2004. Print.