COETZEE THE BARBARIAN !

Coetzee seems to fall into the same problem that Achebe has with Conrad and his portrayal of the natives. Coetzee portrays the natives as Barbarians, in image they may look like Barbarians old, haggard, dirty, and unkempt. In actuality they are not Barbarians, they are just surviving off the land. The attributes that the settlers consider Barbaric, the raiding of camps, raping of tribesmen, are all attempts of the nomads reciprocate against the those who have invaded on there land.

Colonel Joll considers them barbaric when in actuality his actions of torture are barbaric and inhumane; the abuse of a young child is not the actions of a civilized nature. The actions of the settlers over the past 100 years can also be Barbaric, they invaded a land that did not belong to them, they set up villages and settlements in regions usually used for grazing and hunting, in nomadic society life revolves around the lake. They rape the land barren forcing the livestock away with their unconventional ways of hunting; guns have made hunting more efficient drastically dwindling populations.

The settlers see everything opposite to their confirmed lifestyle as being Barbaric, though many of the village soldiers have been drunk, they seem to find drunken nomads as utterly disgusting they describe them as lazy and dirty. The introduction of alcohol, a substance that they nothing about, alters the way the settlers view the nomads. Not only are the “Barbarians” savage but they are drunks too.

I don’t think the problem is with the lack of an explanation of what a Barbarian is, it lies with the fact that the settlers do not realize that their own actions are Barbaric in itself.