303 Historiography Paper: Frantz Fanon

Frantz Fanon was a 20th century psychiatrist, philosopher, and revolutionary. Born in the

French colony of Martinique in 1925, Fanon’s family could be considered part of the colony’s

“black bourgeoisie” – part of a social class that generally sought assimilation with the colonizing

French culture. Fanon thought of himself predominantly as French, not black, and upon traveling

to France to fight in World War II was shocked by the racism he faced in the army. Following

the war, Fanon went on to be a psychiatrist, philosopher, and advocate for Algerian

independence before dying young of leukemia in 1961. During his short life, Fanon published

several writings on the subject of race and colonialism that have gone on to be hugely influential

in postcolonial and racial thought into the present day.1 Fanon’s work stretched across many

disciplines, and his life and works are still a subject of scholarship across numerous disciplines

and perspectives.

In his article “Revisiting Fanon,” Guy Martin examines a variety of these different

perspectives on Fanon.2 Martin examines what he refers to as the “second generation” of

scholarship on Fanon, from the 1990s onward. That it’s possible to divide the responses to Fanon

between generations speaks to the longevity of his influence; the variety of responses Martin

covers speaks to the breadth of it. Martin covers perspectives such as post-colonial, postmodern,

populist, and political. A unifying factor between most authors is that, regardless of their

particular perspectives, they all agree that Fanon’s ideas are still relevant in the modern day,

particularly in Africa. Some authors even assign a “prophetic genius” to Fanon, arguing that he

1
Tracey Nicholls, "Biography of Frantz Fanon," Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, accessed
May 6 2017.
2
Guy Martin, "Revisiting Fanon, From Theory to Practice: Democracy and Development in
Africa," Journal Of Pan African Studies 4, no. 7 (November 2011):
was able to predict historical developments in the colonial sphere decades after his death. 3

Several of the authors Martin discusses touch on this divinatory element, arguing that the cultural

and political realities Fanon discussed are still extant in Africa, such as the emergence of a

“national bourgeoisie” in the void left by colonialism.4 These authors contend that Fanon’s

conception of a total ideological break from the Western framework is the only way for Africa to

escape the shadow of colonialism. Evidently, both academics and activists still seek to use

Fanon’s ideas as a foundation for both intellectual and political change in Africa.

However, this positive outlook is by no means universal among Fanon scholarship. L.

Adele Jinadu takes a skeptical perspective on Fanon’s understanding of African politics beyond

Algeria. He argues that Fanon’s belief that African society before colonialism was homogenous

is misguided; furthermore, he critiques Fanon’s invocation of the “peasantry” as a revolutionary

power as being vague and unproven. Nevertheless, Jinadu concludes by saying that despite some

issues with his philosophy, it is still “valuable, instructive, and suggestive.”5 Jinadu’s outlook

shows the nuance in scholarly responses to Fanon. Another of the authors discussed by Martin

shows a more unambiguously critical perspective. David Macey critiques Fanon as overly

idealistic and inflammatory, among other things. 6 Macey’s outlook on Fanon is certainly one of

the more overtly hostile responses. His perspective seems to be an outlier among Fanon scholars;

the vast majority of responses to Fanon are positive or at least nuanced, such as Jinadu’s article.

That his work can invite both lofty praise and unbridled scorn is suggestive of the power and

influence of Fanon’s writings.

3
Hamza Hamouchene, "The Legacy of Frantz Fanon," CounterPunch, last modified March 13,
2015, accessed May 6, 2017, http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/03/13/the-legacy-of-frantz-
fanon/
4
Martin, “Revisiting Fanon.”
5
L. Adele Jinadu, "Some Comments on Frantz Fanon and the Historiography of African
Politics," The Journal of Developing Areas 7, no.2 (1973):
6
Martin, “Revisiting Fanon.
 Perhaps the most controversial aspect of Fanon’s work is his outlook on violence. In his

book The Wretched of The Earth, Fanon posited that decolonization couldn’t occur without

violence. He didn’t advocate for violent action by the colonized or make an attempt to justify it

morally; rather, Fanon argued that as violence was the method colonizers had used to assert and

maintain control, it was the only valid form of response. 7This outlook, more than any other, is

what places Fanon in the “revolutionary” camp of our cultural consciousness. One author places

this theory of violence in a historical tapestry of radicalism, comparing it to both Marxism and

the communist revolution in Russia, and modern events such as the Arab Spring. 8 According to

Cornell professor Siba Grovogui in a lecture given at CSULB, many young political radicals in

South Africa use the Fanonian perspective on violence to justify their own violent actions.

According to him, this is a misinterpretation of what Fanon truly meant; he invoked the image of

radical students who had never read the book carrying The Wretched of the Earth as an

ideological totem.9 Jinadu, on the other hand, decries the focus on violence in scholarly

responses to Fanon. He cautions against the broad scope of Fanon’s ideas being lost behind

single-minded focus on violence.10 While it is understandable that a controversial point by a

controversial author like Fanon would garner attention, Jinadu and other like-minded scholars

prefer to focus on ideas beyond his theories on violence, examining other issues through a

“Fanonian” lens.

Returning to South Africa, one local philosopher, Mabogo More, wrote an article

focusing on how Fanon’s thought was relevant to apartheid. 11While he did mention violence, he

7
Frantz Fanon, "Concerning Violence," in The Wretched of the Earth.
8
Hamouchene, “The Legacy of Frantz Fanon.”
9
Siba Grovogui, "Frantz Fanon," Lecture, History 302, Long Beach, CA, April 25, 2017.
10
Jinadu, “Some Comments on Frantz Fanon.”
11
Mabogo More, "Locating Frantz Fanon in Post-Apartheid South Africa," Journal of Asian and
African Studies 52, no.2 (December 2014)
discussed it in a more abstract, mental and political form – focusing on Fanon’s ideas of racial

consciousness and compartmentalization that were the focus of his other notable book, Black

Skin, White Masks. While Fanon drew most of his examples from his own experience in the

Caribbean and Algeria, More examines how his theories on race and consciousness can be

applied across the post-colonial world. More, like other authors, is passionate in his belief that

Fanon’s ideas can be applied to modern mentalities and politics. In addition, like his ideas on

revolutionary violence, his writings on race and culture can also be connected to those of the

past. Fanon’s idea of the black/white compartmentalized mind, for example, is comparable to

W.E.B. DuBois’ theory of “double consciousness”.12

Evidently, Fanon’s life, works, and ideas are still widely applicable and relatable,

contributing to the broad corpus of Fanonian scholarship. Discussion of Fanon covers a varied

academic spectrum, ranging across the entirety of post-colonial thought and beyond. Many

lenses are used to examine the many questions Fanon raised. Jinadu puts it best: “Fanon is a

difficult writer to grasp; yet this is also his strength, the source of his fascination to readers. We

are left baffled by unresolved paradoxes and dark passages.”13 If Fanon had lived longer, he may

have answered these questions and resolved these paradoxes himself. In his absence, discussion

rages on.

12
Nicholls, “Biography of Frantz Fanon.”
13
Jinadu, “Some Comments on Frantz Fanon.”