Narrative, History, Timelessness in Waiting for the Barbarians

J.M. Coetzee has created an Empire that is timeless and placeless, yet at the same time, can be traced and seen throughout history. Writing in a time and place, and in a culture founded by and rooted in oppression, we see an Empire that is all too realistic and reflective of the nature of Man, and political injustices. While there are many instances in history that can relate to the themes in Waiting For The Barbarians, I was reminded of a more recent example that demonstrated these ideas-that was ahead of Coetzee's time: The American War in Iraq and Afghanistan. It seemed all too coincidental, too, when you consider the dates in time of these invasions, and look at the year this book was awarded the Nobel Prize. 

In the first 50 pages of the novel there are explorations into humanity, civilization vs. savagery, racism, and imperialism that are similar to Conrad's Heart of Darkness. Similar to the controversy surrounding torture that emanated out of the US in the early first decade of the 21st century, there are multiple torture scenes in this book that are described in agonizing detail. These moments, and others, as narrated by the magistrate, intend to investigate the moral-ness of human nature, but at the same time, expose the injustices of political institutions that have been aggressive in their histories. Further, the Colonel in charge of torturing the barbarians, is frequently alluded to and given special attention to for his glasses, which some confuse as a symbol of blindness. This, paired with his wrongful or misinformed pre-emptive imprisonment of the fishing people on the outskirts of the town, echo events similar to the US invasion of Iraq. This also correlates to a point the magistrate brings up on page 43, where he says that he does not want to create a dependent people (much like post-colonial Africa), through the corrupt virtues of an immoral "civilization"(his own scare quotes). 

Coetzee makes his ideal clear when he describes the torture of the Magistrate, who comes to the realization of the truth of the nature of man, and learns a major lesson. This particular passage also resinates a bit of a 1984 (George Orwell) vibe for me.

In the end, the Barbarians never strike. They vanish, seemingly, but their presence, or lack there of, is unknown. This is an interesting ending when compared to the initial consideration of the magistrate to get rid of the tortured tribe, to start clean. This, of course did not happen. And in a turn of fate, no one knows what to do once they're gone, they were seen as a problem as the center of the story, but were kind of a solution the whole time.