Sympathy, Mutiny & Friendship: Dr. Aziz & his Queer Relationships with the Liberal Colonial (Saad Hafeez)

Colonial allegories abound, Forster’s Passage highlights the tension inherent in the consciousness of the colonial subject, as he struggles to craft relationships with the liberal colonial. The interactions he has with Mrs. Moore, Ms. Quested and Mr. Fielding can be read as Forster’s understanding of the queer nature of the colonial encounter in India. Unable to govern a rich Indian culture, the liberal colonials’ discourse oscillates between Victorian sympathy, the imperial gaze and the marred friendship of the post-colonial.

The scene of the mosque is replete with an understanding of the colonizer as a sympathizing motherly figure. Mrs. Moore’s understanding of local Muslim etiquettes – ‘…makes no difference, God is here’ (17) – coupled with her willingness to confide in Dr. Aziz when speaking against Mrs. Callendar, shows a certain sensitivity in governing the colonial subject. Thus, evoking a certain submissiveness in Dr. Aziz, he is able to embody the ideal Victorian subject- one who must be nurtured, rather than controlled- a subject figuratively in the 'same box’ (19).

On the other hand, Ms. Quested’s vacillating desires to see the ‘real India’ (21) is indicative of the spurious one-sided gaze established in the Imperial encounter. Exclaiming how she’s ‘tired of seeing picturesque figures … as a frieze’ (27), the female traveler’s quest for authenticity brings her to establish an exteriorizing gaze on the Indian landscape. Symptomatic of the colonial gaze, her desire to see India valorizes the picturesque from afar – as with the Marbar hills which looked ‘romantic … at certain distances’ (126) – but brutalizes it in the moment of closeness, that is, when the narrator exclaims on her behalf that a ‘profound disappointment entered with the morning breeze’ (137). In the same way, her relationship with Dr. Aziz maintains a level of civility in distance, but brutalizes him in the caves with the consequent accusation et al. This one-sided desire- to conquer the landscape through the gaze- is anything but authentic, in fact represents the evils of the imperialist- one, which Fielding notes, has no ‘real affection (for) Indians generally’ (259).

Finally, Mr. Fielding’s intimate encounter with Dr. Aziz can represent the final stage of the encounter- the strained private/public nature of the post-colonial relationship. This friendship allows Aziz to elevate the larger geopolitical encounter to one of sentimentality, as he confides in Mr. Fielding about building up India ‘on what we feel’ (107). The colonial master, mixing his professional and personal lives, is depicted as one who ‘travels light’ (111), incapable of being ‘carried away on the waves of emotion’ (108) that inhibit the subject. Simultaneously evoking the quality of a teacher/mentor, Fielding continues to chastise Aziz for his emotionality. While the master perfects the art of civil friendships devoid of emotions, Aziz refuses to boil down the relationship to ‘give and take’, calling it ‘disgusting’ (254).

Although Forster’s text is full of instances of ‘spurious unities’ (80) forming between the liberal colonial and the native subject, the final scene sums up his verdict on the colonial encounter, where the picturesque, the exterior, in fact everything “didn’t want it” (322).

#ilovethisbook