| dc.description.abstract | This thesis analyzes Jenny Erpenbeck's book Gehen, ging, gegangen on the basis of postcolonial theory. The novel is about Richard, a retired professor who befriends African refugees. While he learns about their biographies, he also obtains geographical and political background information. Ultimately, he turns into a refugee aid worker.
In the theoretical part of the thesis, Edward W. Said's book Orientalism, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak's text Can the Subaltern Speak? and Homi K. Bhabha's explanation of stereotypes and the concept of mimicry are presented. The aim is to examine how Erpenbeck deals with the European construction of refugees and Africa as Other and its connection to neocolonialism and decolonization. Erpenbeck's depiction and representation of African refugees as subalterns and their placement in a heterotopia will also be analyzed. Moreover, stereotyping and mimicry as complex psychological processes are addressed. The detailed textual analysis is intended to answer the question of how the novel embeds colonial legacies in the context of the refugee crisis.
The results of the analysis show that Erpenbeck connects colonialism, Nazism, and the German Democratic Republic. In doing so, she draws attention to the moral responsibility towards the Global South and African refugees. Erpenbeck presents the Othering of refugees on a national and personal level, which stems from colonial thought patterns. The decolonization of Richard's mind is juxtaposed with his Othering of the refugees, which exhibits hierarchy, stereotyping, racialization, exoticization, and Eurocentrism. This can be explained as an unconscious psychological process and a sign of fragility in dealing with differences.
Erpenbeck shows how refugees as subalterns are excluded from the hegemonic discourse and the debate about them. This is also reflected in Erpenbeck's description of the refugee shelter as a heterotopia. Through her representation, Erpenbeck can bring the African refugees into the hegemonic discourse and speak on behalf of them as a representative of the intellectual elite. However, since representations like this are themselves rooted in the structure of power, Othering is reproduced. | |
