The invention of tradition is a multidirectional and complicated concept. Hobsbwam’s book takes patience to discern the distinction between customs and traditions as a way of understanding their unique qualities. Traditions are denoted as being inflexible by nature and support the notions of values and symbolic representations of power relationships and accepted norms. These traditions are linked with the idea of the past, a history, that is seen a suitable and continuous. Customs have a more organic and flexible nature is based more in the agency of smaller interactive groups and individuals. The author notes that a tradition in its basic developmental evolution may initially begin as ritualized behavior or routine which overtime evolves into a more established norm.
Every culture has established traditions that contribute to its functional and bureaucratic organization. These traditions are intertwined with customs and represent the relational dynamics at the base of the society. How “invented tradition” differs seems based largely on the symbolic representation of ideas or values imbued by a society as an attempt to replicate or mythologize the past, real or imagined. Perhaps idealized and manufactured connections would be a better definition of how invented traditions are distinguished from regular ones. This is not to suggest that the motives behind the invention of traditions are full of malice or mendacity.
One might suggest that since traditions are a reflection of human societal structures they are vulnerable to changes in human evolution, both positive and negative. The group that engenders common understanding and control through symbols, based in essential concepts of social psychology and economic hierarchy will not only gain authority, but also likely establish itself as historically justified, if not predestined. Symbols represent values and identifications which are less bound by language. How these powerfully infused symbols are manipulated and imposed is a central theme throughout European history during the last three hundred years. The definition and manipulation of symbols and the invention of tradition to communicate these concepts is recognized as a central theme in revolutionary history as well as during Imperial colonialism and industrial revolution.
Though Hobsbawm examines the invention of tradition through the lens of the British monarchy, he draws important parallels to the French republic and the German Kaiser system during the colonization of Africa. In each case he explores how in the initial stage of colonization the use of invented tradition was imposed as a method of management and control over native populations. He notes how this invention emphasized the more symbolic and paternalistic aspects of Imperial power as a way to establish and justify the spread of the Empire. In a time of confusion and chaos, it would be understandable how these images could be wrongly interpreted as inclusive and respectful by Africans who had no experience with Europeans, and might be dazzled by shows of technology and military and economic power.
It is important to realize that invented traditions were a form of psychological colonization in the most destructive way for most Africans. The imposed traditions of the Europeans created new power stratifications based on the willingness of those natives to accept the imposed rule of the imperialists. The internalization of these symbolic traditions impacted the consciousness of the inhabitants and created dissonance between the old ways and the emerging awareness of a larger interconnected world, to which many thought they would be invited to share. Invented traditions were used to connect the consciousnesses of Imperial subjects to the myth of the benevolent monarch. This justified the transfer of power and control without military attack, except in India, briefly, during British rule. It is important to note that since invented traditions and symbols are culturally derived, as they develop into more sophisticated usage or more widespread application in cultures that did not originate them, they have a likelihood of breaking down.
The example of how Welsh literati invented tradition has a significantly different set of motives. Inventing traditions as a method of cultural preservation is more justifiable as an act of cultural preservation rather than a tactic of imperialism. The idea of connecting to a past with undisputed mythological and historic value is still a method of achieving power, but inventing tradition for you own culture is fundamentally different in character than imposing it on another. One seems constructive in a historical sense, the other rhetorical.
Perhaps the invention is not the issue at hand, but the purpose behind the invention that necessitates scrutiny. This is yet another level of which one needs to be aware as a historian. What is the role of the historian in the process of perpetuating inventions? What is the historian’s responsibility in relation to this awareness?
No comments:
Post a Comment