Incursions, incisions, omissions: liberal imperialism, violence and British Southeast Asia in Francis Leggatt Chantrey, Major General Robert Rollo Gillespie, and Joseph Edgar Boehm, Richard Southwell Bourke, sixth earl of Mayo

IF 0.3 3区 艺术学 0 ART
Sarah Monks
{"title":"Incursions, incisions, omissions: liberal imperialism, violence and British Southeast Asia in Francis Leggatt Chantrey, Major General Robert Rollo Gillespie, and Joseph Edgar Boehm, Richard Southwell Bourke, sixth earl of Mayo","authors":"Sarah Monks","doi":"10.3828/sj.2024.33.2.06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article considers the sculpted monuments in St Paul’s Cathedral to nineteenth-century protagonists in Britain’s invasion and rule of Southeast Asian territories (including Burma (Myanmar), Indonesia and the Andaman Islands). It focuses on two works in particular: Sir Francis Leggatt Chantrey’s monument to Major General Robert Rollo Gillespie, and the monument to Richard Southwell Bourke, sixth earl of Mayo and viceroy of India, attributed to Joseph Edgar Boehm. The first commemorates the man considered by his supporters to be the hero of the British East Indies after smashing a hole in the Indigenous power structures of the Indonesian archipelago so that it could be claimed for British India. The second remembers a man who was one of the British East Indies’ many victims, even as he ran the place. His story and his monument indicate the extent to which Southeast Asia became a region to which British India despatched its problems – and in which the liberal ideology used to justify nineteenth-century British imperialism met its limits. These two men’s imperial histories and sculpted memorials are read in turn as distinct and divergent instances of liberal imperialism’s simultaneous dependence upon, and denial of, its own capacity for brutal violence. The article argues that, viewed up close and in context, both monuments bear traces of that violence, its consequences, and the alibis, omissions and occlusions with which it was – and, in the neoliberal present, continues to be – cloaked in public discourse.","PeriodicalId":21666,"journal":{"name":"Sculpture Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sculpture Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3828/sj.2024.33.2.06","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ART","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article considers the sculpted monuments in St Paul’s Cathedral to nineteenth-century protagonists in Britain’s invasion and rule of Southeast Asian territories (including Burma (Myanmar), Indonesia and the Andaman Islands). It focuses on two works in particular: Sir Francis Leggatt Chantrey’s monument to Major General Robert Rollo Gillespie, and the monument to Richard Southwell Bourke, sixth earl of Mayo and viceroy of India, attributed to Joseph Edgar Boehm. The first commemorates the man considered by his supporters to be the hero of the British East Indies after smashing a hole in the Indigenous power structures of the Indonesian archipelago so that it could be claimed for British India. The second remembers a man who was one of the British East Indies’ many victims, even as he ran the place. His story and his monument indicate the extent to which Southeast Asia became a region to which British India despatched its problems – and in which the liberal ideology used to justify nineteenth-century British imperialism met its limits. These two men’s imperial histories and sculpted memorials are read in turn as distinct and divergent instances of liberal imperialism’s simultaneous dependence upon, and denial of, its own capacity for brutal violence. The article argues that, viewed up close and in context, both monuments bear traces of that violence, its consequences, and the alibis, omissions and occlusions with which it was – and, in the neoliberal present, continues to be – cloaked in public discourse.
Francis Leggatt Chantrey、Robert Rollo Gillespie 少将、Joseph Edgar Boehm 著,Richard Southwell Bourke, sixth earl of Mayo 译的《入侵、切口、遗漏:自由帝国主义、暴力与英属东南亚》(Incursions, incisions, omissions: liberal imperialism, violence and Britishoutheast Asia)。
本文探讨了圣保罗大教堂中十九世纪英国入侵和统治东南亚领土(包括缅甸、印度尼西亚和安达曼群岛)的主角雕塑纪念碑。它特别关注两件作品:弗朗西斯-莱格特-钱特里爵士的罗伯特-罗洛-吉莱斯皮少将纪念碑和约瑟夫-埃德加-博姆的理查德-索斯韦尔-伯克纪念碑,理查德-索斯韦尔-伯克是梅奥的第六位伯爵和印度总督。第一座纪念碑纪念的是被其支持者视为英属东印度群岛英雄的理查德-索斯韦尔-伯克,他在印尼群岛的土著权力结构上打了一个洞,从而将该群岛划归英属印度。第二座纪念碑所纪念的人是英属东印度群岛的众多受害者之一,尽管他管理着这个地方。他的故事和他的纪念碑表明,东南亚在多大程度上成为了英属印度向其派遣问题的地区--在这个地区,用来为十九世纪英帝国主义辩护的自由主义意识形态遇到了它的极限。这两个人的帝国历史和雕刻纪念碑又被解读为自由帝国主义同时依赖和否认自身野蛮暴力能力的截然不同的例子。文章认为,从近距离和上下文来看,这两座纪念碑都留下了暴力的痕迹、暴力的后果,以及公共话语中对暴力的不在场证明、遗漏和遮蔽--在新自由主义的今天,这种不在场证明、遗漏和遮蔽仍在继续。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信