Coetzee on Post-Colonialism II

The early pages of J.M Coetzee’s Disgrace set up the dynamics of white supremacists, elitist superiority of a post-colonial upbringing. It is as Edward Said’s posited it; “Independence was for white and Europeans, the lesser or subject peoples were to be ruled” (374). In Disgrace’s South African setting, white men, although the minority typically viewed the native blacks as ‘subjected’. Coetzee’s protagonist David Lurie, was involved in relationships that mimicked this power and race supremacy.
This introduction follows with a story, exploring post-colonial “residues” which permeated the mindset of David Lurie’s generation. Lurie’s age, mid fifties, is significant because he was raised in a generation that fiercely maintained this supremacist attitude. This stance is evident in David’s behavior towards his daughter Lucy’s neighbor, the black Petrus. David finds it difficult to accept the modern, equal, neighborly relationship that exists between Petrus and Lucy. Admittedly, David does make an effort to rectify this indigenous position, “In spite of which he feels at home with Petrus, is even prepared, however guardedly, to like him.” (117) David is perpetually conscious of the stereotype of white dominance that he has been rigid for so long. Petrus, at one point, at a loss for a proper label, calls Lucy his “benefactor”. David recognizes the societal necessity of reevaluating language to accomadate the changning dynamic. “A distasteful word” David muses about Petrus’s choice of ‘benefactor’, “the language he draws on with such aplomb is, if he only knew it, tired, friable… what is to be done?... nothing short of starting all over again with the ABC.” (129)
Notably, Lurie’s attitude is juxtaposed to that of his daughter, Lucy, more liberal minded, and obviously of a newer generation. Lucy although initially having hired him as an employee, honestly views him as an equal, insisting; “’I can’t order Petrus about. He is his own master.’” (114) David cannot as easily allow the overturning relationship, that Petrus could essentially be his daughter’s master. Conversely, Lucy was willing to accept Petrus as a husband, claiming her father must not “get on [his] high horse with Petrus” (204).
It seems David was correct when he recognized that “Between Lucy’s generation and mine a curtain seems to have fallen.” (210) As a reader, I am inclined to think the revolutionizing is positive.