Running head: 1

The Concept of self and the other in E.M Forster’s A Passage to India: A
Postcolonial Approach

Arfa Riaz, Rimsha Faryad

Department of English, University of Sargodha

 2

Abstract

This is an analytical critique on postcolonial picture of India in E.M Forster’s A Passage to

India. This novel is considered one of famous postcolonial fiction novels in which Forster has

assembled all experiences of Indians in the colonial times. It also provides an insight into

colonized India from English people’s spectacle as well from Indians’ point of view. The

concept of Self and Other is evident throughout the novel. Each major event in the novel is

preoccupation of the Self and Other theme in the novel. Imperial rule gives hard times to the poor

Indians just because they are not alike them and weak.

Keywords: Postcolonial, E.M Forster, Self, Other, India,

 3

1. INTRODUCTION
In the two of Postcolonial terms; Other and Self, the Other is constructed by the Self as
Staszak (2008) puts it, “Otherness is due less to the difference of the Other than to the point of
view and the discourse of the person who perceives the Other as such”. This binary opposition of
Self and Other is created by powerful groups such as colonizers or Westerns in which this one
powerful groups fall in the category of Self and the Others are Colonized or “Others, Barbarians,
savages or People of Color, they relegate the peoples that they could dominate or exterminate to
the margin of humanity” (Staszak, 2008).
The act of marginalizing and dominating the Other or colonized results into several
repercussions on ground and origination of the theory of Postcolonialism; It was born out of
people's “frustrations, their direct, personal and cultural clashes with conquering culture, and
their fears, hope, and dreams about the future and their own identities" (Al-Saidi, 2014).
The key purpose of this study is to understand the concept of Self and Other by using the
formalistic approach (binary oppositions) that will help us to recognize how meanings are
embedded and shaped in a text. Binary opposition is the principle of contrast between two
mutually exclusive terms which argues that the perceived binary dichotomy between civilized\
savage has perpetuated and legitimized Western power structures favoring "civilized" white men.
In a recent article according to Steve Campsall (2019) writes:
“Binary opposition can be shown to work in ways that maintain and reinforce
stereotypical ideas, values and beliefs, what are called a culture's or society's "world view" or
dominant ideologies. The idea was developed by various 20 th century linguists and philosophers
including Claude Levi-Strauss, Roland Barthes and Jacques Derrida.”
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 Postcolonial Theory
Many postcolonial writers emphasize the importance of studying the aspects of the language
because they know well that the translated word or the unspeakable one, as in the case of Friday
in Foe and the barbarian girl in Waiting for the Barbarians, has a higher status than the
untranslated one or the spoken one. This also helps us foreground the differences between the
Self and the Other. Postcolonial theory, as a term can be traced to 1950s. However, it "became
part of critical toolbox only in the 1970s, and many practitioners credit Edward Said's book
Orientalism as being the founding work"(www.faculty.mccfl.edu). However, the actual term
 4

"post-colonial" was not employed in early studies of the power as in Edward Said's Orientalism
as many thoughts, but rather it was first used to refer to cultural interactions within colonial
societies in literary circles as in the work of Ashcroft et al. in 1977. By the mid-1980s the term
post-colonial and post-colonialism first appear in scholarly journals as subtexts in Bill Ashcroft,
Gareth Griffiths and Helen Tiffin's book: (The Empire Writes Back: Theory and Practice in Post-
colonial Literatures. 2002). By the mid-1990s, both terms established themselves in academic
and popular discourse. Originally postcolonial theory was formulated to deal with the reading
and writing of literatures written in previously or currently colonized countries. Whether from
the perspective of the colonizer or the colonized, post-colonization is about people and their
personal experiences: the sense of disempowerment and dislocation. Postcolonial theory is built
in large part around the concept of Otherness. The concept of Otherness sees the world "as
divided into mutually excluding opposites: if the Self is ordered, rational, masculine, good, then
the Other is chaotic, irrational, feminine, and evil" (www.faculty.mccfl.edu) . This construction
of the Other is a process of demonization, which in itself expresses the 'ambivalence at the very
heart of authority' (Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin. 2002, P.3). Post-colonialism is continually
described as a term that portrays not a "we" talking about or to "them", but a "them" talking back
to an "us". This implies that post-colonial literature in one way or another is about categorization
of center and margin. Homi Bhabha (1994) argues that the paradoxical nature and ambivalent
nature of the colonizer\ colonized relationship has been a focus for post-colonial theory: …the
colonial presence is always ambivalent, split between its appearance as original and authoritative
and "its appearance as original and authoritative and its articulation as repetition and difference.
It is this ambivalence that makes the boundaries of colonial positionality- the division of self\
other and the question of colonial power – the differentiation of colonizer\ colonized- different
from both Hegelian master-slave dialectic or the phenomenological projection of 'otherness' "
(www.books.google.co.uk). Post-colonial novels are written to present the "unequal relations of
power based on binary opposition: "Us" and "them", "First World" and "third world", "White"
and "black", "Colonizer" and "colonized",(Kehinde, Ayobami.p.108) "Self" and "other",
"Powerful" and "powerless", "Torturer" and "tortured", "Master" and "slave", "Civilized" and
"savage", "Superior" and "inferior", "Human" and "subhuman". This superiority of the white
races, one colonist argued, clearly implied that "the black men must forever remain cheap labor
and slave"(www.vuursteen.b).
 5

2.2 Binary Oppositions

It is in the mid of 20th century, "two major European academic thinkers, Claude Levi Strauss
and Roland Barthes, had the important insight that the way we understand certain words depends
not so much on any meaning they themselves directly contain, but much more by our
understanding of the difference between the word and its 'opposite' or, as they called it 'binary
opposite'. They realized that words merely act as symbols for society's ideas and that the
meaning of words, therefore, was a relationship rather than a fixed thing: a relationship between
opposing ideas" (thomhartmann.org). Other oppositions that can help us understand the idea are
the youth/age binary, the masculinity/femininity, the good/evil binary, and so on.
Fanon sees "the dichotomy (colonizer\colonized) as a product of a "Manichaeism Delirium", the
result of which condition is a radical division into paired oppositions such as good-evil, true-
false, and white-black" (Kehinde, Ayobami. p.110 ) where blackness confirms the white Self,
and whiteness empties the black subject (195). The Other, the colonizer believes, has to be
owned, altered and ravished -he is deceptive and fertile. This postcolonial model is based on the
tension between colonizer and colonized, and dominating and dominated. This points to the
importance of binary oppositions in post-colonialism. This means that postcolonial writers
protest against western ways of categorization. Their attempt at exposing binaries often
expresses itself in the rewriting of canonical stories that are at the basis of inequality. The result
of this rewriting is that it sometimes reverses a binary opposition, so that what used to be the bad
half becomes the good one.
2.3 Colonization
Colonization, however, "relates to the 'I': the seeing\perceiving 'I' or 'eye' of the colonizer, the
one who sets the standard, who sees the Other and makes the agenda through his or her own
point-of-view. Thus writing itself can be seen as an act of colonization, of imposing ones
authority through culture\ meanings\ language onto someone else" (www.ub.uit.no) . In other
words, the aim of colonization is to impose ones culture\language\meaning onto the Other.
 6

3.METHODOLOGY
The analysis of subject is carried out with the help of two approaches. Firstly, an overall thematic
analysis is drawn to underpin the purpose of the study and to explain the problem and secondly
Rene Girard’s Triangle is used to analyze the structure of self and other in the selected novel.
4. ANALYSIS
E.M Forster’s A Passage to India, is about the relations between English people and the Natives
of India during the British colonization in India. The novel shows a major postcolonial feature of
Self and Other.
Otherness
In the novel ‘otherness’ is demonstrated in many ways. From the first chapter of the novel,
Forster revealed that India and Indians are inferior to Europeans. He makes himself clear that he
belongs to the colonialists, with his inappropriate select of words in describing the city of
Chandrapur says:

…by the river Ganges,it trails for a couple of miles along the bank, scarcely
distinguishable from the rubbish it deposits so freely […] The streets are mean, the
temples ineffective, and though a few fine exists they are hidden away in gardens whose
filth deters all […] Chandrapore was never large or beautiful…(A.P.T.I,p.9)

He added that the city is devoid of any work of art. India is considered as an ‘evil’ and
‘barbarous’ landforms ,also, had described the Indian people in bad manner: ‘’people are
drowned and left rotting’ ’Everything Indian is ‘abased’ and ‘monotonous’ .Then ,he compared
the Anglo-Indian city station which is so different than the Native one ‘’Houses belonging to
Eurasians stand on the high ground…Chandrapore appears to be a totally different place […] it is
no city but forest…’’ ,so, his comparison between the Eastern and Western landscape, it shows
the superiority of the British colonizer, and the inferiority of the Indian colonized.
In the second chapter, Forster moved from places to characters. E.M Forster represented
the Indian women as the spirit of sacrificing for their families. Hamidullah’s wife can not take
her dinner before it is taken by men(her husband).She believed that the woman can not have a
full life without marriage and men. The Indian women are considered as passive to men.
 7

It was difficult to get away,because until they had had their dinner she would not begin
hers […] What is to become of all our daughters if men refuse to marry?They will marry
beneath them […]Wedlock,motherhood,power in the house-for what else is she born…
(A.P.T.I,p.15-6)

The Westerners showed no respect towards the Orientals.The Major Callendar called Aziz
to his house.Aziz says: ‘’Old Callendar wants to see me at his bungalow […]He might have the
politeness to say why […]He has found out our dinner hour, and chooses to interrupt us every
time,in order to show his power’’(A.P.T.I,p.17) ,but Aziz found neither the Major nor a message.
It is a kind of power and authority of the Colonizer over the Colonized.
Adela says that she wants to see the real India and real Indians. However, Ronny laughed
about her interest about seeing the Natives. In other words, how the British woman who has lived
in England, is curious about seeing India and meeting the Indians. How an English person whose
country had colonized India, is impatient from visiting it. As if Indians are not humans and
lesser. Ronny and the other Anglo-Indians thought themselves better than the ‘Other’. The
British colonizer treated the colonized as ‘stereotypes’. Forster claimed:
…and Miss Quested announced anew that she was desirous of seeing the real India. Ronny was
in high spirits. The request struck him as comic’’ Another one said: ‘’Wanting to see Indians!
How new that sounds! Another Natives! why, fancy! Let me explain Natives do not respect one
any the more after meeting one, you see (A.P.T.I, p.27)
Ronny was upset when he knew his mother’s talk with a Native, as he called him
‘Mohammedan’. While he thought that she is speaking and describing an English doctor, he
found that the English doctor is one of the Indian Natives. He said:
‘Oh, good gracious! Not a Mohammedan? Why ever did not you tell me you had been talking to
a native?’ (A.P.T.I, p.31)
The Bridge Party that was suggested by Mr. Turton, it is ‘’…was not the game, but a party
to bridge the gulf between the East and the West’’(A.P.T.I,p.28) It shows the high-rank of the
English people. Forster had described the Indians as uncivilized and anxious people, when he
says: ‘’…most of the Indian guests had arrived even earlier, and stood massed at the farther side
of the tennis lawns, doing nothing’’(A.P.T.I,p.39) Ronny and Mrs. Turton spoke about the
attendance of the
 8

Natives at the club in stereotype manner: ‘’It is the first time we have ever given a party like this
at the club. Mr. Heaslop, when I am dead and gone, will you give parties like this?...The great
point to remember is that no one who is here matters ;those who matter do not
come…’’(A.P.T.I,p.39) It is a mockery from Indians. Because ,the British people treated them
not as humans, and considered them as objects and lesser than them. Likewise, Ronny judged the
Indian guests who attended the party as ‘seditious at heart’.
Mrs. Turton had continued her anger from Indians: ‘’Why they come at all I do not know […]
You are superior to them, any way. Do not forget that. You are superior to everyone in
India…’’(A.P.T.I,p.41-2)It showed the Britishers’ power. She used to speak with them the Urdu;
for her, it is a language of lesser people. Forster says: ‘’…and said a few words of welcome in
Urdu. She had learnt the lingo, but only to speak to her servants…’’(A.P.T.I,p.42) So, Mrs.
Turton could not consider them as individuals.
Some Indian ladies had been described just as ‘taller’ and ‘shorter’ ladies. ‘’All the ladies
were uncertain, cowering, recovering, giggling, making tiny gestures of atonement or
despair’’(A.P.T.I,p.43) The Westerners look at Eastern women as voiceless, submissive and
promiscuous.
Mrs. Battacharya, the Indian woman that Mrs. Moore and Adela met, is presented as ‘child’, who
does not know what she is talking about; ‘’…seemed not to know either. Her gesture implied that
she had known’’(A.P.T.I,p.43)
Mr.Turton, the Collector, see the Indians or as he called them ‘guests’ as reductives, he states:
‘’when they had not cheated, it was bhang, women, or worse, and the desirables wanted to get
some thing out of him’’(A.P.T.I,p.44) It is a kind of Western construction of the East as Edward
Said(1978) had described, and the Orientals as constructions of various disciplines by which they
are known to Europeans, such a construct serves to reinforce the colonizer subjugation over the
colonized.
Fielding,the schoolmaster of Government College, when he met the two ladies, Mrs.Moore
and Miss Adela, they talked about Dr .Aziz .Fielding claims: ‘’I know all about him.I do not
know him’’(A.P.T.I,p.46) This statement marked what the ‘West’ has already perceived about
the ‘Orient’. It represents the concept of ‘otherness’ in the minds of Westerners. E. Said
said :‘’The Orient is […] its[Europe’s] cultural contestant, and one of its deepest and most
recurring images of the Other’’(p.1)
 9

Ronny told his mother Mrs. Moore that: ‘’We are not out here for the purpose of behaving
pleasantly […] we are here to do justice and keep the peace’’ and ‘’We are not pleasant in India,
and we do not intend to be pleasant. We have something very important to do’’(A.P.T.I,p.50) He
adds:‘’…we are out here to do justice and keep peace […]India likes gods. And Englishmen like
posing as gods’’(A.P.T.I,p.49) It is a symbol of domination and hegemony. The colonizer has the
full control over the colonized. Ronny claimed that India degrades for its incapacity for self-
government, an incapacity often associated with infertility and immaturity. Seen as a “baby”
country, India thus needs a mature adult to take care of her, to make decisions for her, and above
all, to claim sovereignty over her. He described India as a ‘wretched country by
force’(A.P.T.I,p.50)
In the beginning of the chapter six, the writer had noted that Major Callendar denied Dr.
Aziz proficiency, when he says: ‘’What can you expect from the fellow? No grit, no guts’’ and
he blamed him for not doing his duty ‘’Now do some work for change’’(A.P.T.I,p.53)The
English people ascribed all the negative characteristics to the Orients ,even if they are not true.
They always see them as inferior and backward to them.
Forster portrayed Dr. Panna Lal, Aziz’s friend, as an Oriental man who is excited to be
with the British people. Dr. Lal said to Dr. Aziz: ‘’Yet you promise me, and then fabricate this
tale of a telegram’’(A.P.T.I,p.59) Also he described Dr. Aziz as cringing towards the British and
living with fear. Forster notes: ‘Once on his feet, he had creeping fears. Had he offended the
Collector by absenting himself?’ and ‘’Can I get on with people? Are they stronger than
I?’’(A.P.T.I,p.59) The Indians are represented as extremely excited to meet the British people at
the party, and how they
wish to please the English superior ruler, so that, the Indians gave them the chance to
treat them as inferiors.
Forster claimed another stereotype that is related to Indians. He represented them as careless
people. Mrs. Moore and Miss Adela were invited by Bhattacharyas. It was supposed that they
will send a carriage to take the two English ladies, but nothing like that was happened. Miss
Quested says to Aziz:
I want you to explain a disappointment we had this morning; it must be some point of
Indian etiquette…We are by nature a most informal people…An Indian lady and a
gentleman were to send their carriage for us this morning at nine. It has never come. We
waited and waited and waited; we can not think what happened (A.P.T.I,p.67)
 10

Forster had continued in describing Indians badly. He portrayed Aziz as ‘provocative’,

‘’he (Ronny) said nothing, and ignored the provocation that Aziz continued to offer’’ Ronny
ignored the Indians(Aziz & Godbole)as they did not exist: ‘’As private individuals he forgot
them’’(A.P.T.I,p.75)Ronny saw them as inferior. He considers themselves as better than
‘Others’.
Ronny was always criticizing and mocking the Natives. He says:

…he(Aziz) had forgotten his back collar-stud, and there you have the Indian all over:
inattention to detail; the fundamental slackness that reveals the race […] I won’t have you
(Mrs. Moore & Adela) messing about with Indians any more! If you want to go to the
Marabar Caves, you will go under British auspices(A.P.T.I,p.80)

When in fact it was Fielding who was missing the stud and Aziz who kindly lent him his own.
Mr. Heaslop treated Indians as they are not humans and as they did not deserve respect. He
misinterpreted the Indians’ actions, he always expected the worst. Forster says: ‘’But nothing in
India is identifiable…’’(A.P.T.I,p.83-4) He means that Indians have no identity. They are living
in their country with an unknown identity.
Forster compared between the Natives and Anglo-Indians people. The former are
superstitious and irrational: ‘’…superstition is terrible, terrible! oh, it is the great defect in our
Indian character’’ He shows the Indians as indifferent to morals and individual responsibility.
Whereas the latter are reasonable: ‘’…I can not imagine that they have been as successful as
British India, where we see reason and orderliness spreading in every direction…’’(A.P.T.I,p.90)
This comparison between the ‘West’ and the ‘East’ gives the power of domination of the
‘Occident’ against the ‘Orient’,
and it also shows the Westerners’ superiority over the Orientals.
crooked upon the dirty walls’’(A.P.T.I,p.106) Forster shows that even educated Indians like
doctor Aziz have dirty houses.
The chapter ten reminds the reader that India is different than Britain. The writer pointed
that everything related to India is bad and ugly. He says: ‘April, herald of horrors ,is at hand. The
sun was returning to his kingdom with power but without beauty-that was the sinister
 11

feature’’(A.P.T.I,p.111-2) It means that April is a month of horrors. Indian sun, instead of having
beauty and glory, is sinister.

Forster describes Indians with no responsibility. One of the officials says: ‘’the Indians are
incapable of responsibility’’(A.P.T.I,p.131)This can be seen through Fielding and Godbole’s
missing the train. ‘…Appalling catastrophe! The gates had been closed earlier than usual. They
leapt from their Tonga […]He jumped, he failed, missed his friend’s hand, and fell back on to the
line. The train rumbled past’’(A.P.T.I,p.130-1) Also, the picnic arrangement was described as
‘odd’, Forster claims: ‘’She was not the least unhappy or depressed, and the various odd objects
that surrounded her’’, and the purdah carriage is made fun of as ‘comic’. He adds: ‘’…the comic
‘purdah’ carriage, the piles of rugs and bolsters, the rolling melons, the scent of sweet oils, the
ladder…’’(A.P.T.I,p.132) Indians are portrayed as disorganized people.
Forster sees India as ‘an appeal’. It is the country which represents the malaise of men, who
can not find their way home. He says: ‘’The important towns they build are only retreats, their
quarrels the malaise of men who can not find their way home. India knows of their trouble. She
knows of the whole world’s trouble […]she has never defined. She is not a promise, only an
appeal’’(A.P.T.I,p.135) India and the Indians are confused. They are able of inventing and
fabricating stories, which dos not exist. He adds:
…there was a confusion about a snake which was never cleared up. Miss Quested saw a
thin, dark object reared […]and Aziz explained: yes, a black cobra, very venomous, who
had reared himself up to watch the passing of the elephant. But when she looked through
Ronny’s field-glasses, she found it was not a snake, but the withered and twisted stump of
a toddy-palm […]Aziz admitted that it looked like a tree through the glasses, but insisted
that it was a black cobra really […]Nothing was explained,[…] increased the confusion
(A.P.T.I,p.139)

The Natives do not bother to verify the fact and they can invent a snake instead of stick in
order to create a sensation. They are sensitive people. This led to another construction of the
Orientalists.
According to Mrs. Moore, India was described as ‘horrid, stuffy place’. Forster states:
‘They did not feel that it was an attractive place or quite worth visiting […]A ruined tank held a
 12

little water which would do for the animals, and close above the mud was punched a black
hole…’(A.P.T.I,p.140)The English people were not satisfied of India’s landscape and Indians.
They always referred to them with inferiority.
The ‘Other’ Aziz, can not make the difference between hospitality and intimacy. Forster
says: ‘’Like most Orientals, Aziz overrated hospitality, mistaking it for intimacy, and not seeing
that it is tainted with the sense of possession’’(A.P.T.I, p.141)So, for Anglo-Indians, the Indians
were known by foolery.
Mrs. Moore, as she said before, found the caves as ‘horrid’. Here, she played the imperial
model for the British empire against Indians. She got mad in the cave:

…the circular chamber began to smell. She lost Aziz in the dark, did not know who
touched her, could not breathe, and some vile naked thing struck her face and settled on
her mouth like a pad. She tried to regain the entrance tunnel, but an influx of villagers
swept her back. She hit her head. For an instant she went mad, hitting and gasping like a
fanatic (A.P.T.I, p.145)

She experienced the crush and the stench, because of the presence of so many Indians in
the cave. Also, the terrifying echo, which is entirely ‘devoid of distinction’. Whatever said or
done in India; hope, politeness, or anything else, the echo is the same monotonous noise. Forster
mentions: ‘’Whatever is said, the same monotonous noise replies […]Hope, politeness, the
blowing of a nose, the squeak of a boot, all produce ‘boom’ ’’(A.P.T.I,p.145)The echo signifies
that, India is full of chaos. So, Mrs. Moore’s romance with India is over. Forster says: ‘’…since
her faintness in the
cave she was sunk in apathy and cynicism. The wonderful India of her opening weeks, with its
cool nights and acceptable hints of infinity, had vanished’’(A.P.T.I,p.156)
Forster has characterized Aziz as an ‘Oriental’, who behaved like a child in the face of the
Inspector of Police, who intend to arrest him on charge of an attempted crime. He says: ‘’The
young sobbed-his first sound-and tried to escape out of the opposite door on to the line […]and
shook him like a baby’’ However, Fielding, the Englishman, is portrayed as a superior human
being who took control of everything. Forster adds: ‘’A second later, and he would have been out
[…]we are coming to McBryde together, and inquire what is going wrong […]Put your hat
straight and take my arm. I will see you through’’(A.P.T.I,p.159) The Indians, in such case of
 13

misfortunes, wail and weep. While, the Anglo-Indians keep calm.

Aziz has been accused of ‘insulting’ Miss Quested in the caves. Mr.Turton, the collector,
says: ‘’Miss Quested has been insulted in one of the Marabar Caves’’(A.P.T.I,p.160) and ‘’Miss
Quested herself definitely accuses him of – ‘’(A.P.T.I,p.161)The ‘West’ assumes that Indians are
‘rapists’ even if they had done nothing like that, another harsh stereotype.
Miss Adela invented a story about Aziz. McBryde narrates what Miss Quested told him, he
says: ‘he followed her into the cave and made insulting advances. She hit at him with her field-
glasses; he pulled at them and the strap broke, and that is how she got away’(A.P.T.I,p.164) She
charged Aziz with something that did not happened at all.
The Indians are called as ‘niggers’, Forster says: ‘…she dared not return to her bungalow in
case the ‘niggers attacked’ ’(A.P.T.I,p.178) The ‘colonizer’ treated the ‘colonized’ with bad
manner as it is dangerous for it. They referred to the Indians with the word ‘subaltern’, Gayatri
Spivak’s term, which means the lower rank of society, who are the ‘Orientals’.
The English whipped up stories about how Aziz had paid others to suffocate Mrs. Moore in
the cave, so that, he could be alone with Miss Adela. Forster reports: ‘Heaslop also found out
something from his mother. Aziz paid a herd of natives to suffocate her in a cave […]Nicely
planned, wasn’t it? Then he could go on with the girl…’(A.P.T.I,p.183) They carried on in
accusing Indians with something they had not done it. The English officials assumed that he is
‘guilty’. They showed the domination over the ‘Orient’. It is the Britishers’ assumption that is
based on the notion that the ‘West’ is civilized and the ‘East’ as barbaric and uncivilized.
During Aziz’s trial, Mahmoud Ali, the pleader, is portrayed as an immature and childish
person who behaves in an extremely irrational way. Forster notes: ‘Mahmoud Ali had been
enraged, his nerves snapped; he shrieked like a maniac […]He was almost out of his
mind…’’(A.P.T.I,p.218) McBryde describes him as ‘the natural gesture of an inferior
race’(A.P.T.I,p.216).The Indians, are described a community of people, who seek a grievance, if
not available, they could invent one, like they do in the case of Mrs. Moore’s departure. He adds:
‘’He blazes up over a minor point […]What he seeks is a grievance, and this he had found in the
supposed abduction of an old lady’’(A.P.T.I,p.221)
Every Indian is a spy. Forster says: ‘’…I was surrounded by enemies. You observe I speak
in a low voice. It is because I see your sais is new. How do I know he is not a spy? He lowered
his voice: Every third servant is a spy’’(A.P.T.I,p.266 7)Also, every Indian is blessed with the
 14

licentious imagination, it is another European construction of the East. He adds: ‘The licentious
Oriental imagination was at work’(A.P.T.I, p.267)
All in all, the Indians are portrayed as ashamed of themselves, of their culture and of their
identity. Moreover, they are presented as Other and inferior to the British people.
5.THE TRIANGULATION OF OTHERNESS

As presented earlier that A Passage to India depicts the issue of Otherness very explicitly
as most literary critics approach the text through a set of binary oppositions. The discussion of
Otherness usually involves two opposite constitutes. Except in A Passage to India it involves
not only an opposition between two elements but a more complex relation between different
entities, namely the main characters of the novel; Mrs. Moore, Adela Quested, Aziz, Ronny
Heaslop, and Cyril Fielding and some other entities that are considered on the position of
Observer and other such as Indians, Aziz’s friends, Major Callendar . All of them inhabit at
different moments the positions of the Self, of the Other and the observer. To prove this, we can
draw upon Rene Girard's triangle to explain how these different characters show up throughout
novel and contribute to the theme of self and Other. Seen as Others, Indians; especially Aziz, are
taken as Others and Britishers’ attitude towards them is brutal. It is obvious in the novel that the
target of British brutality is not a single person but a whole nation and that is why we see Indians
at the position of other in two instances. they are all victims of power. However, Aziz suffers his
fate at the hands of colonizers the most. The structure of the triangle changes with the changes in
the plot regarding the theme of the Self and the Other.
In A Passage to India there is not always a straight line present in the relation between
two of the characters but there is also a third person involved, the one that Girard defines as "the
mediator" (ibid) who can be referred as the observer in this analysis and with whom also the
relation between the Self and the Other would, probably, not exist or might be different.
 15

Mediator (Observer)

Subject (Self) Object (other)

In the beginning of novel, the relation of Self and Other can be observed between Major
Callender and Aziz. The Major Callendar called Aziz to his house. Aziz says: ‘’Old Callendar
wants to see me at his bungalow […]He might have the politeness to say why […]He has found
out our dinner hour, and chooses to interrupt us every time, in order to show his
power’’(A.P.T.I,p.17) ,but Aziz found neither the Major nor a message. It is a kind of power and
authority of the Colonizer over the Colonized. Aziz is Object and Major Callendar is Subject in
this scenario. It is clear, here, that the men of the Empire, by occupying a position of power, have
the privilege of formulating their own rules, and, furthermore, to disregard anyone’s self respect.
The observer here is Aziz’s friends whom he addresses that how Major is treating him, but
they have no part to play in his situation.

Aziz’s Friends

Maj. Callendar Aziz

 16

As the story evolves, things become more evident regarding the contempt and hatred of
colonizers towards colonized. There is a bridge party hosted by Mr. Turton where Indians are
also invited to bridge the gap between both people, ‘’…was not the game, but a party to bridge
the gulf between the East and the West’’(A.P.T.I,p.28). But Englishmen and women’s remarks
clearly show that the gap never meets between a colonizer; Self and colonized Other since there
is power and hegemony which is used to rule them not to treat them pleasantly. When Mrs.
Moore, a polite old lady asks Ronny to behave nicely with Indians he replies, ‘’We are not out
here for the purpose of behaving pleasantly […] we are here to do justice and keep the peace’’
and ‘’We are not pleasant in India, and we do not intend to be pleasant. We have something very
important to do’’ (A.P.T.I, p.50). Hence the second triangle shows triangle between Ronny and
other English people, Mrs. Moore and Indians. Ronny is at the position of self, he thinks very ill
and low of Indians while Mrs. Moore is mediator as she tries to address the harsh behavior of
Ronny to Indians.

Mrs. Moore

Ronny, Mrs. Turton Indians

The colonizer has the full control over the colonized. Ronny claimed himself as superior
and noble and claimed that India degrades for its incapacity for self-government, an incapacity
often associated with infertility and immaturity. Seen as a “baby” country, India thus needs a
mature adult to take care of her, to make decisions for her, and above all, to claim sovereignty
over her. He described India as a ‘wretched country by force’ (A.P.T.I, p.50). Thus, India is
Other here.
 17

The next worth-mentioning scene is where Fielding invites Adela, Mrs. Moore and Aziz to
a tea party but Ronny who is Adela’s Fiancé, does not that Adela is invited along with Indians.
So when all of Fielding’s guests are arrived, they are sitting together and discussing new things
about India. Suddenly Ronny arrives and looks Adela sitting with Aziz. He loses his temper and
schools Fielding that why has he left Adela with Indians. He does not even consider Indians as
human beings and always expects something horrific from their side, it helps to glorify Self, to
distinguish Self, from Others. In triangle position Adela has just been located as observer. She is
new in India and it seems that her intellect dominates her observation rather than feelings.
Fielding’, dislikes Adela because of her intellect. He says: ‘’…the girl is a prig […] she struck
me as one of the more pathetic products of Western education. She depresses
me”(A.P.T.I,p.116).

Adela

Ronny Indians

In the next major event, the relationship in the triangle is once again changed, when Aziz,
Mrs. Moore and Adela’s trip to Marabar caves proves catastrophic despite Aziz’s utmost
hospitable picnic arrangements. Everything from carriages to caves seems very odd to Mrs.
Moore and Adela. Caves prove to be an unidentifiable, mysterious object which have nothing
attractive, ‘’Whatever is said, the same monotonous noise replies […]Hope, politeness, the
blowing of a nose, the squeak of a boot, all produce ‘boom’ ’’(A.P.T.I,p.145)The echo signifies
that, India is full of chaos. The worst happens and Adela gets lost in cave and gets confused
rather mad. She accuses Aziz of raping her. Mr.Turton, the Collector, says: ‘’Miss Quested has
been insulted in one of the Marabar Caves’’(A.P.T.I,p.160) and ‘’Miss Quested herself
definitely accuses him of – ‘’(A.P.T.I,p.161)The ‘West’ assumes that Indians are ‘rapists’ even if
 18

they had done nothing like that, another harsh stereotype. Adela invents this story because of her
previous knowledge that Indians are Others; always bad, immoral and brutal, this ropes her wit
to stand allegations against Aziz.

Fielding

Adela Aziz

However, Fielding is mediator, he is observing the situation of Aziz, in fact he fully backs
Aziz. He goes to collector and justifies that Aziz is innocent. Then he asks collector if he can see
Adela Quested. This matter is resolved when Adela comes to her senses and clarifies to everyone
that she was mistaken and Aziz is not a rapist. Aziz comes clean but with many lessons learned.
The next triangular relation is about Aziz’s new perspective of Self and Other.
Aziz has realized something new about the relationship of Indians and Imperialists. He is
now at the position of Self and Fielding is Other in the eyes of Aziz. He claims this position of
Self by refusing to Fielding for being friends. This is evident from an important quote below:

“Why can't we be friends now?" said the other, holding him affectionately. "It's what I
want. It's what you want." But the horses didn't want it — they swerved apart: the earth
didn't want it, sending up rocks through which riders must pass single file; the temple, the
tank, the jail, the palace, the birds, the carrion, the Guest House, that came into view as
they emerged from the gap and saw Mau beneath: they didn't want it, they said in their
hundred voices "No, not yet," and the sky said "No, not there.” (A.P.T.I,p.357)
 19

The World

Aziz Fielding

As mentioned above in the quote, Aziz involves the whole world as witness or observer or
mediator to make the fact clear to Fielding that there can not be any relationship of friendship
between the Powerful and the weak, Colonizer and colonized, Self and other. Aziz was always
congenial with English people in the beginning because he considered himself and Indians as
Others. There was hegemony that made him think of himself as other and inferior but after
witnessing their brutality and misuse of power, he considers them as Others, those others who
can not be considered as close ones.

CONCLUSION

The Empire's power rests in its ability to name, to label, to categorize, and to define the world
according to its own whims. The Empire, moreover, divorces names from their intrinsic meaning
and undermines the basis of its power- the absoluteness of its own definitions. "In doing so, the
Empire undermines its ownership, for if the Empire cannot categorize a person or a place, how
can the Empire be said to possess something?"(www.deptorg.knox.edu).
 20

The ironic moral objective of the Empire is to reduce suffering; as those colonized live a very
primitive life which the colonizer considers it to be as a kind of suffering and sees that it is his
duty to change this kind of lifestyle and to make the world a better place for the civilized. He
sees the colonized as a scapegoat who has to bear the burden of the guilt of the civilization. They
believe that humanity is possible by forcing colonized to change their system and society.
However, this notion has collapsed at the end of novel as we see that Aziz refuses to answer
Fielding’s friendship with the same.
In A Passage to India, Forster draws a picture of the division between colonized Indians and
colonizer British. Since the beginning of novel, other Indians and Aziz seem pretty disturbed
because of brutal and disrespecting behavior of British officials appointed in India. It can be
clearly seen that the gap between Self and Other in this novel is large and unmeetable.
The story though revolves around Aziz still there are important incidents that must be taken
into account, in order to prove the binary oppositions in novel, portrayed by Forster. Thus, the
Triangulation does not only emphases on Aziz’s story and his position at different stages of
novel but Indians as a whole, because of the fact that Forster has tried to convey the picture of
self and other at a larger level. As the story moves ahead, new events take place and new
characters replace old ones.
Apart from other factors, it is important to note how Aziz’s thought develops throughout the
novel. We see that although he was not fond of English people but still, he always presented
himself to accompany them, such as Mrs. Moore and Adela to Marabar caves and at Fielding’s
tea party. He thought himself at place where he could still befriend English people, but at the end
he realizes that he is a colonizer of a poor and uncivilized country and it is impossible to remove
this tag and get freedom and respect. So he decides to give up on English people or Anglo-
Indians. All in all, Colonizer succeeds, colonized gives up. Rulers and ruled maintain their
distance and differences.
 21

References

1. Forster, E.M. (1924). A passage to India. Great Britain: Penguin Books.

2. Abu Baker, A,MS. (2006). Rethinking Identity: The Colonizer in E.M. Forster’s A

Passage to India. Directory of Open Access Journals, 3(2), 68-85.

3. Staszak, Jean-Francois. (2008). Other/Otherness, Publie dans International Encyclopedia

of Human Geography, Elsevier 2008

4. Al-Saidi, Afaf.Ahmad. (2014). Post-colonialism Literature the Concept of self and the

other in Coetzee's Waiting for the Barbarians: An Analytical Approach, Journal of

Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 95-105, January 2014

5. Campsall, Steve. (2019). Binary Oppositions. Retrieved from

http://www.englishbiz.co.uk/extras/binaryopposition.htm

6. Forster, E.M. (1924). A passage to India. Great Britain: Penguin Books.

7. Ashcroft, Bill, Gareth Griffiths & Helen Tiffin, (eds.) (2004). Key Concepts in

Postcolonial Studies. London & New York: Routledge.

8. Ashcroft, Bill. (2002). The Empire Writes Back: Theory and Practice in Post-colonial

Literatures. 2nd ed. London & New York: Routledge.

9. Baldick, Chris. (2001). Concise Dictionary of Literary Terms. New Delhi: Oxford

University Press.

10. Bhabha, Homi K., ed. (1994). The Location of Culture. New York: Routledge.

11. Girard, Rene. (no date). http://www.pkp.ubc.ca/pocol/index.php.

12. Grace, Daphne. (2007). Relocating Consciousness: Diasporic Writers and the Dynamics

of Literary Experience. Amsterdam- New York: Rodopi.

 22

13. Loomba, Ania , Suvir Kaui , Matti Bunzi & etl. (2005). Postcolonial Studies and Beyond.

Durham & London.

14. Loomba, Ania. (1999). Colonialism\ Postcolonialism. London & New York: Routledge.

15. Moore, Lindsey. (2008). Arab, Muslim, Women: Voice and Vision in Postcolonial

Literature and Film. London & New York: Routledge.

16. Said, Edward W. (1993). Culture and Imperialism. New York: Vintage Books.

17. Tiffin, Helen. "Post-Colonialism, Post-Modernism and the Rehabilitation of Post-

Colonial History," Journal of Commonwealth Literature.

(http://class.georgiasouthern.edu/litphi/JCPCS.html)