Kiossev uses the self-colonizing concept in explaining the succumbing of cultures to the impositions of the West on them.[1] Evidently, through colonization, the European and Western cultures successfully invaded the less powerful nations and imposed their cultural rhetoric. According to the author, self-colonization happens when cultures are assimilated and flattened by Western culture without being invaded or when Western culture imposes itself as the only viable imposition of “civilization.”[2] Major impositions have emerged in the process, including imposition of power, knowledge, standardization, normalization, religion, educational models, and the economy.
The recipients of the impositions have been altered by the historical conditions turning them into extracolonial “peripheries,” tangential audiences whose lives have been impacted by the contact with the colonial powers. However, they have neither been impacted on by the significant colonial conflicts or the mechanisms used by the masters in colonizing them.[3] On the contrary, they have been placed in a situation within which they had to acknowledge the supremacy of the culture of their colonial masters and in turn, soak up in the values and customs introduced to them by the West.
According Bhabha, just like narratives, nations have the potential of losing their origins with time. Their horizons can only be realized in the eye of the mind. The nation’s image could appear like metaphors. However, the same cannot be said for the constructions of the nation in the west. The political thought traditions have allowed the images to play a critical role in the literary language as well as the political thought of the western nation. It is the notion whose cultural significance is based on the unfeasible unity of the understanding of a nation as a symbolic factor.[4] However, the discourse available in the west has not been entrenched in the colonized mind.
Colonialism is not only rule over distant territories and ‘Other’ populations but it is also an imposition of a Eurocentric narrative in the West. It is, as philosopher Charles Taylor argues, an intuitive background knowledge, a body of stereotypes shared by a community.[5] The “colonial” imagination started functioning as a “Universal” (Eurocentric) symbolic order, valid everywhere in the name of civilization, progress, modernity, Westernization, and Europeanization. The west communicated its values and ideals, which became entrenched into the colonial mind. In this scenario, an asymmetrical global geography emerges, which is strongly hierarchical and hegemonic in the Eurocentric World. Everything that is not commonly standardized in Western canons is stigmatized as backward, barbaric, exotic, or shameful. The western ideals are communicated as the only superior ideals, while the “other” is considered inferior and uncivilized.[6]
About this, the human activist Shailja Patel declares that colonialism makes the colonized carry the shame of oppression.[7] People who are not aligned with Western standards internalize their birth stigma and perceive themselves through it – a process of traumatic collective identity-building, which is a painful and sometimes shameful collective subjectivization and a lack of sense of belonging. In fact, they perceive themselves as out of context. They have been made to believe that they are inferior and as long as they do not subscribe to the western values they remain insignificant. This condition, implemented through governmental and political mechanisms, can be countered by a process of cultural self-determination and self-awareness. It can only be countered by freeing the colonized mind through implementation of the doctrine and discourse of freedom made accessible to them.
Problem Statement
The world has been changing, but the end of colonialism remains elusive. The structure of the global system remains hierarchically structured where the West remains in the domineering position. The capitalist and global system has promised equality, but has completely ignored the underlying forces, leading to the withdrawal of the equality from the majority.[8] Spivak recognizes that in allowing the Subaltern to have a collective speech, it will create an assumption of cultural solidarity among a heterogeneous people and a dependence on Western intellectuals “to speak” for the Subaltern condition instead of the Subalterns speaking for themselves.[9] However, such premise remains in theory and not in practice. The West continues to impose itself as a sovereign ruler of the entire globe, presenting itself as the only way and creating the concept of Us vs. Them. The system is referred to by Spivak as “worlding of a world.”[10] Through this process, the West has created its Other, and considers them objects to be analyzed, and thereby takes the power to represent and control them.
Purpose of the Study
The experiences outlined in the research narrative were the underlying drivers for the doctoral study; with the main intention to understand and connect a developing field from both scholarly and design-based perspectives. The study is proposed out of the experience with inadequacies of the Western model, a rigid system from which it is difficult to escape, for designers through my interconnected professional roles as a designer, researcher, and teacher. The study is born out of the need to design the discourse aimed at freeing the colonized mind to achieve cultural self-determination and self-awareness. The research takes place within the fields of design and colonialism studies, with outcomes that focus on design practice; however, the findings may apply to other institutional contexts. The research project looks for new or alternative ways to enrich the experience of design practice in order to facilitate creative processes for educational institutions or governments. The research field has been identified in Iceland. The study’s findings can be applied to similar situations elsewhere and contribute to wider discussions on cultural self-determination.
Significance of the Study
The research explores theories and solutions for addressing the self-colonialism in current design practice and how to apply these solutions into practice. Spivak argues the possibility of the oppressed understanding and working on their conditions as long as they are given the chance and the voice.[11] Creation of solidarity politics forms the basis for the formation of the critical opportunity necessary for the oppressed to work out their way to freedom. Hence, the discourse is critical that will allow the oppressed to understand their conditions and work towards freeing their minds from the oppression.
The findings of the study will provide a better design for application in theory and practice. Good design essentially consists of a search for ways to create a better world. Design practice is about finding solutions, making improvements in human beings, addressing problems or opening up possibilities for a better life, paying particular attention to other living beings and the natural world. Just like the West plan the limiting design that has oppressed the colonized, it is possible to come up with a positive design to get them out of the oppressed. It all begins with creating a positive view of the self and the cultures. According to Herbert, it is possible to design the kind of world that the person desires to live in.[12] The author devised courses of action aimed at changing existing situations into preferred ones. For designer Victor Papanek, all human activities involve some form of design, which is the basis for the achievement of the desired goals. Designing is what human beings do.[13] Hence, it is possible for the oppressed to have in place a liberalized mind as long as they are willing and have the resources to design, including the pertinent discourse.
Research Questions
- How is it possible for a woman and designer, to more effectively communicate ideas by engaging with decolonizing design in Icelandic context?
- Through the practice of decolonized design, is it possible to create a consciousness and acceptance of other cultures through a democratic design experiment?
Hypothesis
The hypothesis is that colonization is not only domination, but also hegemony through internalization of cultural values, narrative, images.
Methodology
The scope of the first section of the study is to survey a wide range of literature to provide context and to build a wide-ranging rationale for the collaborative design practice explored. The second section explores a transformation design model of transformation based on experience. The study will be based on critical review and analysis of the available literature on the colonization of the mind with the aim of coming up with a better design in discourse for freeing the colonized mind. The design process is based on three fundamental elements, interconnecting theory and practice in order to create a model for change. The investigation will use abductive reasoning, which applied within this research project, refers to making temporary conclusions in line with a comparative analytical approach and then further testing these with new situations in an iterative mode. As Jarvis argues, knowledge is also based on practical results rather than empirical tests or logical derivations.[14] In this approach, the creative work situates itself as a form of research with specific research outcomes where the body and mind blend in search of new experiences.