The axis on which this analysis turns is one of historical representation – that is, kinds of memory. The historical contingencies of allowing Denmark to gather all the documented data after the sale of the islands to the US and transfer the documents to Denmark still have an impact on the historical and journalistic manifestations in the coverage of cultural events and debates in the USVI and in Denmark. What is more,
the epistemological power sustained through knowledge of the colonial past begs the question of epistemological imperialism and the claim for reparations.
Traditionally in Denmark knowledge of the former colonies is presented in historical accounts. These accounts are based largely on the extensive national archives, interwoven with narratives of private journeys to the islands through which Danish historians (and often their wives) share their experiences of their nation’s former possessions. Below I will discuss these accounts. Suffice it to say at this point, that the history books and educational books offered to students of history – should they choose to take an interest in this topic – are Danish-centred and, to a large extent, nationally romanticised accounts. Perhaps the absence of a black diaspora in Denmark is part of the reason for the lack of interest in the colonial past, or perhaps the urge to uphold a self-image of Nordic tolerance and humanitarianism has kept Danish academics and journalists from developing the scholarship. Books in the narrative style of Richard Price’s Alabi’s World (1990) are not represented in the Danish literature on colonial history. It must be noted, though, that Price’s book, which interweaves four voices in an experimental composition of (hi)story-telling is quite unique. In that book, the voices of the maroons, the Dutch officials, the German Moravian missionaries and Price himself each have a separately identifiable font and style of recording. The Dutch official documents are counter-writing the narrated stories of the Surinamese maroon societies and in this way develop a conversation between the long-gone actors of history and memory.
In Denmark, in the late 1990s, challenging and nuanced approaches were introduced to the discourse on the (post)colonial relation between Denmark and the USVI in the form of scholarly articles, public debates published in newspapers, journalistic documentaries and unpublished doctoral dissertations. The emerging interest and shift in approach in Danish discourse on the former colonies were partly due to the fact that political and academic discussions arose around the 150th anniversary of the abolition of slavery on the colonial islands, in 1998. The political discussions were based mostly on the fact that the Danish minister of foreign affairs was invited to take part in the events surrounding the commemoration, but declined because the invitation was not extended far enough in advance and he could not find the time to travel to the USVI. Needless to say, the response was a disappointment to the USVI.
Academically, symposia were conducted and archives opened and restored so that that part of Danish history became more easily accessible to the Danish public, journalists and scholars. The archives, it must be noted, have always been public, but because of their size it was difficult to have an overview of their contents. Additionally, the records are mainly in Danish and therefore remain inaccessible to people who do not know the Danish language – I will return to this issue shortly.
Denmark probably holds one of the largest collections of artefacts and documents from a former colony of any European country. Hence the uncatalogued archives demanded in-depth knowledge of archival work and of the documents beforehand, as well as a healthy helping of patience, for them to be of any assistance to researchers (assuming that they know the language in which the documents are written). The archives which were sorted in 1998 are the primary source for Alex Frank Larsen’s journalistic TV documentary, Slavernes Slægt (Descendants of Slaves) (2005), about the descendants of slaves living in Denmark and other Nordic countries. This documentary programme will be the focus of the first part of this analysis. In the documentary, the archives are used to trace personal stories through the public means of the national archives, or visualising the national archives through people’s lives and stories. Journalistically the archives are personalised through these narratives and thus call on the viewer to identify with this largely forgotten part of Danish history. It therefore raises the question of journalism’s role in archiving and remembering national and personal histories. It seems to be of little use to uphold the distinction between public and private, which is often the case in journalistic discourses of the public sphere (Habermas 2001) or to place either journalism or archives in one or the other category. Journalistic practice is an integral part of the construction of cultural memories and communication of historical events. The question which I wish to explore in this case study is then: How are cultural and racial stereotypes (re)produced through journalistic cultural memories and representation of historical events and signification in Danish journalism on the Danish-USVI historical relationship? The little journalism that deals with this topic is anti-racist in its intentions. Nevertheless, I argue that the racial stereotypes persist through blindness towards and ignorance of the other and through fixity of the format and practice within journalistic production. I continue the discussion of the possibilities of change within the journalistic practice and production in the following two case studies.
Journalistic institutions also add to the integral position of journalism and archival and historical memory. In 2008 the Jamaican Broadcasting Corporation had its entire collection of music and sound stolen (Orakwue 2008). The broadcasting corporation was entrusted with the cultural heritage of the country – among the recordings were irreplaceable recordings of Bob Marley, the Caribbean musical hero who introduced reggae and a version of Jamaican and Caribbean culture to British and US audiences (Gilroy 2002, Orakwue 2008) as well as the rest of the ‘western world’. The Marley recordings are so important and so irreplaceable, journalist Orakwue (2008) argues in an article on cultural heritage in New African, because being part of Jamaican history the recordings form the passage to Jamaica’s future (Orakwue 2008: 63). Knowing history, then, is the way to understanding the future. ‘Don’t forget your history. Know your destiny’, sings Marley in the song Rat Race. The slogan figures on posters and t-shirts and other Marley merchandise but it is connected with Marley’s broader message of emancipation of the mind and freedom70 and to the ‘recovery of historical knowledge [which] is felt to be particularly important for blacks because the nature of their oppression is such that they have been denied any historical being’ (Gilroy 2002:
280). Similarly, Jeanette Bastian (2003) argues that: ‘A community without its records is a community under siege, defending itself, its identity, and its version of history without a firm foundation on which to stand’ (Bastian 2003: 87). Bastian’s claim is based in the abovementioned issue of the language barrier, to which is added a geographical barrier that hinders USVI citizens’ access to their history, the colonial archives now preserved in Denmark. The Danish archives are mainly in Copenhagen and Washington DC. However, knowing and remembering history is too painful for some. During Black History Month in Barbados 2008 it was widely discussed whether
‘talking about the past just has a negative impact on the present’ or whether
‘forgetting is a means to amnesia and the ability for mistakes to be repeated all over again’ (Williams 2008).
Thus, the issue of historical knowledge is two-headed. Orakwue is basing historical knowledge and cultural heritage on musical and performative cultural production, whereas Bastian and Gilroy argue that historical archives of written documents are
70 I am here referring to Bob Marley as a cultural icon and not to the whole of his body of work.
pivotal to ‘owning memory’ and thereby owning the future (Bastian 2003). If a country does not have access to its historical records, as in the case of the USVI, Bastian argues, ‘the community will replace them with something else – myth, legend, and oral tradition’(Bastian 2003: 86). That sort of cultural knowledge has to be continuously defended against the archival and written knowledge figuring in Danish official documents, to which only Danish-speaking people – the former colonisers – have access, Bastian contends. This means that a structure of power-knowledge is still operational and places the Danish (former) colonisers in an epistemological position of power over the cultural knowledge of the USVI citizens. This became apparent during the anniversary symposia in USVI, in which Danish-American historian Svend E. Holsoe questioned the plausibility of the USVI hero of emancipation, Buddhoe.
The enslaved ‘General Buddhoe’ or ‘Bourdeaux’, according to USVI legend, led the demand for emancipation of the Danish slaves on St Croix in 1848. Statues have been raised in his name, songs written and books authored, and he is depicted holding the decree of emancipation with the words, ‘You have been emancipated’ on a mural in Government House, St Thomas. But Holsoe’s reading of the Danish documents showed no sign of a person by the name of ‘General Buddhoe’ or ‘General Bourdeaux’ and no records of a leader of emancipation as such (Bastian 2003:44-6).
The question is, does it matter that no records of Buddhoe exist in the archives? The history he is embodying may have currency beyond the archives and in a different cultural and historical mode.
Although culturally sustained history can be based on historically documented events, this kind of historical knowledge, which is continuously produced through music, stories, food and re-enactments of historical events among other things, is always in danger of being refuted by the very same power that holds the documented historical archives. Nevertheless, culturally produced knowledge of legends and myths and so on is prominent in the community of the USVI. The archival historical accounts may be termed ‘documenting’ because of their descriptive character – the descriptions of course tend to have a European bias. The cultural historical accounts can conversely be named ‘experienced’ – not in the sense of ‘being there when it happened’ but in the sense of experiencing the history through narratives, family history and re-enactments.
Finally, in addition to the journalistic production of cultural memories and the recording of historical artefacts and events, journalism brings to the (post)colonial space of Danish-USVI relations a potential for a ‘globalised’ or transnational impact and affect – that is, cosmopolitanism. In chapter 3 I defined this potential as the cosmopolitan journalistic relation, which is singular and based in the subject position and in subjectivity. Rather than a professional working relationship which aims at communicating moral obligations ‘globally’, journalistic cosmopolitanism is a networked ethical and singular relation. In this case study I theorise this relation introducing the Deleuzian concept of History to journalistic cultural memory and archival knowledge used in journalistic production and practices. This allows me to return to the theoretical discussion introduced in the preceding chapters on journalistic potential for developing a journalism-becoming-minoritarian in a dynamic and open space.