What we will do is explore the ‘black imagination’ in as much of its facets as possible. We say this with caution because 1) Herding ourselves into the ‘black stable’ is oppressive in and of itself for it is not ours, and never was before the crooked, blood infested, Dupuytren's diseased fingers of imperialism (western) pointed in our direction. 2) Imagination cannot be reduced to/explored within the confines of sub-human concepts. 3) ‘Facets of imagination’ is redundant as the word imagination in and of itself suggests infinite/expansive space to ‘create’/reflect.
Most of the limitations of decolonisation, throughout our recent history, appear to be within the need to thoroughly define what the ‘theory of decolonisation’ is; within the need to find a homogeneous understanding of ‘identity’ (a figment of our imagination) for it seems impossible to be decolonised if we have different conceptions of ‘black’ (also a futile process of trying to legitimize our ‘humanness’). That it is impossible if we do not believe in what we’d call the singularity of mass organization as opposed to the multiplicity inherent in organization; impossible if we do not believe in Nationalism (a sub-human super-structural concept for it erects imaginary monuments, filled with illusory sensations of belonging, that we grab onto for dear life in our quest to define ‘who we are’). These are but a few of many elements that strive to define the ‘theory of decolonisation’, a theory that seems to inspire the emergence of messiah’s/revolutionaries/saviours of a very particular kind. However, we will not explore personalities for it removes us from the task at hand, Decolonisation.
An infant learns and develops the most from an immediate engagement and exploration of the questions it asks, for the infant seems to almost automatically process the external as some sort of tool he/she needs or rather may use to achieve something as he/she explores the infinite landscapes of imagination, without paying much attention to ‘something’ for it is undefined, (but in retrospect will take its place). External theories here act merely as a guide, a guide that is only qualified as a result of the infants vulnerability to its environment, its primal instinct of survival, to absorb the behaviour of its environment in order to mimick it and preserve life. Beyond this point, the infant begins to understand that it has the ability to manipulate it to its own advantage, or at least should.
We use this analogy to illustrate the difference between abovementioned infant, and our infancy (the heirs of this continent) of a very peculiar nature. One in which the duality (theory vs practical) of expression and manifestation is obvious, but fail to be reconciled, a helpless state of being, for we are born into helplessness…. The ‘black imagination’ strangled by the need to adapt or die.
We say let ‘black’ in all its contradictions die and let imagination manifest…Coming to life in the process of dying.
"Decolonization never takes place unnoticed, for it influences individuals and modifies them fundamentally. It transforms spectators crushed with their inessentiality into privileged actors, with the grandiose glare of history's floodlights upon them. It brings a natural rhythm into existence, introduced by new men, and with it a new language and a new humanity. Decolonization is the veritable creation of new men. But this creation owes nothing of its legitimacy to any supernatural power; the "thing" which has been colonized becomes man during the same process by which it frees itself."