This time spent in isolation has made me reflective. I’ve considered starting a podcast, writing a novel, embarking on a cooking journey that I meticulously document (if you are looking for some light evening entertainment, the Making Perfect series on the Bon Appétit YouTube channel is delightfully bingeable, and has left me wondering if it be possible to make the entire Thanksgiving dinner by myself) . It proves that I am no closer to achieving the goals we set out at the beginning of the semester. I still procrastinate. Like the sticker on the back of Bernhard’s iPad, I have a word document that is full of eight things I have started with great intentions, but have very little motivation to continue or indeed finish. Therefore, I believe is no time like the present to address and break this habit (as in I have literally nothing else to do or more fruitfully occupy my days, as time and deadlines still march on). My point being, I have to write about my long project in this week’s blog. A Covid-19 rant or queries into the semantics of online dating will not cut it today, if I am to achieve my goal of staying on top of goals, and not leaving things to the last minute. I am also trialling honesty. I have not spent enough time trying to flesh out the strands of this project. I have not pulled the at the dough to see what sticks and what breaks (more cooking references!), so indulge me for a few moments.

I have found the starting point of my project, the Rhodes scholarship as a transnational connector, facilitator even, difficult to relate back to. This is because I have attempted to link the Rhodes scholarship to a creation of a black cultural identity, through the case studies of Alain Locke and Stuart Hall, both celebrated academics, both Rhodes scholars although separate by about half a century. They were both heavily influential in creating social movements in the US and UK respectively, that served to develop ‘blackness’ in their contemporary contexts. The Rhodes link was of particular interest therefore, both with its inherent colonial links and that of empire, but also because within both men’s biographies and summaries, the fact they were Rhodes scholars is constantly mentioned. Locke is famously the first African-American Rhodes scholar, and spent three years at Oxford from 1907-1910. He was turned away from many colleges, and was shunned by other Rhodes scholars who refused to live with him. When he passed away, his tombstone was funded by a group of Rhodes scholars who believed that he paved the way for future generations, was a pioneer. There wasn’t another African American chosen until 1960.

This narrative clearly places Locke as someone extraordinary, and while there were not many black men walking the streets of Oxford at that time, it is not clear he was the only one. The establishment of the Rhodes scholarship was initially under a different name while Cecil Rhodes was still alive. It was called the Empire scholarship, and was aimed at colonies. Jamaica has produced one scholar every year since 1903, and although there were black scholars chosen before 1960. The one of interest to me being Stuart Hall. He took up the scholarship in 1951, which interestingly coincides with the Windrush generation. This heavily influenced his work and conversations around a cultural diaspora and hybridity within the black identity. I guess what I hope to explore is which of these factors was more significant in influencing his/their work. Was Alain Locke spurred to edit The New Negro because of the prejudice he faced at Oxford and his home institution Harvard? Or was it because he found like-minded intellectuals and wanted to expose their voices? Was Hall influenced by the work of those before him, like Locke (who he has cited, which I thought was pretty cool but am unsure of how to work this in, bear with me), or rather the cultural context he found himself in? Many of his fellow West-Indians were raised to be British, but suddenly found themselves isolated in a country they thought would welcome them? Does his status as an academic raise him above, and allow the establishment to take his voice more seriously? Would the New Left Review have succeeded otherwise? These are open ended questions, and ones I think will be difficult to answer. But through this blog post, at least I’ve made them known to myself.

Additionally, I am aware my project still looks like I’ve thrown paint at a wall and am hoping it will stick. There are issues. How am I to prove that there is a global black cultural identity? Is this important for the project, and will I be able to cover this within my word count? Does their position as Rhodes scholars really provide them with legitimacy, or is this an outdated imperial lens I have just enforced on these concepts? I have presented myself with questions, and you with an evening’s distractions (perhaps a good reward for reaching a milestone or word count). I guess I’ll see you pixelated kids on Tuesday.

The Rhod(es) to success is long and winding

One thought on “The Rhod(es) to success is long and winding

  • April 7, 2020 at 8:53 am
    Permalink

    A great blog – because or in spite of all the doubts and the tricky times…including the honesty how difficult it is just now to find focus and fight procrastination. On the latter: I am tempted to put some time aside today and go back to habit…now that we may that even more.

    On the project 2 things:
    First, I wonder whether the Kohlrausch/Steffen article triggered something on those careers from Poland, out of Poland, back to Poland?
    Second, and crucially on your last paragraph: You do not need to prove “global black cultural identity”. That cannot be the expectation for this semester. That is PhD and full 3 years. The main thing is to come up with these questions, articulate them, embed them in scholarship, and in conversation with scholarship, show an awareness of how to do it (rather than fully doing it…research, primary sources…we neither have the time nor the resources.)

Comments are closed.