Introduction: “The Education Of Desire and The Repressive Hypothesis” by Ann Laura Stoler
“The Education of Desire and The Repressive Hypothesis” by Ann Laura Stoler first appeared in her book Race and the Education of Desire: Foucault’s History of Sexuality and the Colonial Order of Things, published by Duke University Press in Durham and London in 1995. This work is a significant contribution to both postcolonial studies and Foucauldian theory, where Stoler critically engages with Michel Foucault’s ideas on sexuality and power. She explores how these concepts intersect with the dynamics of colonialism, highlighting the role of race in the construction of desire and repression. Stoler’s work stands out for its innovative re-interpretation of Foucault’s History of Sexuality, and it has been influential in reshaping discussions about the entanglement of sexuality, race, and power in literary theory and cultural studies. This book is a cornerstone in understanding the colonial order and the ways in which sexuality and race are intertwined in the fabric of historical and contemporary power structures.
Summary of “The Education Of Desire and The Repressive Hypothesis” by Ann Laura Stoler
1. Desire is Constituted by Power and the Law
- Stoler highlights that, contrary to Freud’s notion of repression, Michel Foucault argues that desire is not something repressed by law but rather constituted by it. As Stoler explains, “Where there is desire, the power relation is already present,” meaning that power is intrinsic to the creation of desire, and repression comes after the fact. This challenges the Freudian idea of an innate, primal desire that civilization represses.
2. Foucault’s Rejection of “Original” Desire
- Foucault disputes the idea of an “original” desire that predates law, as Stoler references Foucault’s assertion: “desire follows from, and is generated out of, the law.” Instead of repression, law actively constructs the very desires it appears to regulate, thus aligning with Judith Butler’s view that “the law succeeds rather in naming, delimiting, and thereby giving social meaning” to desires (Butler, Subjects of Desire, 218).
3. Sexuality and Identity in 19th-Century Europe
- Foucault’s analysis focuses on how the 19th century produced sexuality as an index of individual and collective identity. Stoler notes, “the cultural production of the notion of ‘sexual desire’ as an index of individual and collective identity” became a key element of control. Desire was tied to notions of racial and bourgeois identity, cementing a link between sexuality and social order.
4. Colonial Power, Sexual Desire, and Regulation
- Stoler critiques how colonial power relations have often been explained through a Freudian lens of sublimated desires rather than through Foucault’s framework of power-produced desires. She points out that colonial histories “hardly even registered the fact that the writing of colonial history has often been predicated on the assumption… of repressed desires in the West,” which misses Foucault’s emphasis on how these desires are manufactured by regulatory discourses.
5. Racialization of Desire in Colonial Historiography
- The essay explores the racial dimension of desire in colonial discourse, where sexual instincts attributed to racialized others were used to justify imperial control. Stoler critiques the Freudian assumption that “sexual desire itself remains biologically driven, assumed, and unexplained,” noting that such ideas persist in colonial narratives that treat desire as a pre-cultural, primal instinct.
6. Intersections of Freud and Foucault in Colonial Contexts
- While Foucault’s framework rejects the notion of repressed desires, Stoler notes that “Freud has, albeit indirectly, turned us toward the power of fantasy, to imagined terror,” which still shapes how colonial anxieties were understood. In this way, colonial histories draw from both Freud’s psychological models and Foucault’s critique of repression to explain power relations.
7. The Problem of Repressive Hypothesis in Colonial Historiography
- Stoler points out that, despite Foucault’s rejection of the repressive hypothesis, colonial studies have continued to apply Freud’s models of repression. She questions the ease with which colonial historiography has assumed that “racism and Europe’s imperial expansion” are expressions of sublimated sexual instincts, urging for a more Foucauldian analysis that accounts for the production of desires through power and discourse.
8. Sexuality as a Colonial Tool of Governance
- The regulation of sexuality in the colonies wasn’t merely about controlling deviant behaviors but was deeply tied to governing power structures. Stoler references how colonial authorities deployed discourses around sexuality to distinguish between civilized and uncivilized, noting that “the confessional apparatus of medical exams, psychiatric investigations, pedagogical reports, and family controls” were mechanisms for both pleasure and power.
9. Complicated Relationship Between Freud and Foucault in Postcolonial Theory
- Stoler acknowledges that colonial studies have not fully disentangled the tensions between Freud’s psychological explanations and Foucault’s theories of power. As she suggests, “saying ‘yes’ to Foucault has not always meant saying ‘no’ to Freud,” indicating that colonial historiography has often struggled to integrate these differing frameworks when discussing power, repression, and desire.
Literary Terms/Concepts in “The Education Of Desire and The Repressive Hypothesis” by Ann Laura Stoler
Literary Terms/Concepts | Explanation |
Repressive Hypothesis | Foucault’s critique of the notion that power suppresses desires, arguing instead that power produces desires through regulation. |
Discourse | A system of thoughts, beliefs, and values communicated through language, shaping knowledge and social practices. |
Genealogy | A historical analysis method Foucault uses to trace the origins of concepts like sexuality, demonstrating how they change over time. |
Power/Knowledge | Foucault’s theory that power and knowledge are intertwined, and how they are used to regulate behavior and control societies. |
Sexuality as a Social Construct | The idea that sexuality is not innate but is shaped and defined by cultural and historical discourses, particularly in modern power structures. |
Colonial Desire | The way colonialism constructed desire as a racialized concept, linking sexuality to control over colonized populations. |
Biopolitics | The regulation of populations through state mechanisms, particularly in relation to bodies, health, and sexuality. |
Confession | Foucault’s concept of how individuals internalize societal norms through ‘confessing’ their thoughts and desires, especially about sexuality. |
The Gaze | A term borrowed from Lacanian psychoanalysis, it refers to the power dynamics of viewing and being viewed, often tied to desire and surveillance. |
Intersectionality | A framework that examines how race, class, gender, and sexuality intersect and shape social identities and power relations. |
Contribution of “The Education Of Desire and The Repressive Hypothesis” by Ann Laura Stoler to Literary Theory/Theories
- Colonial Power and Desire: Stoler’s analysis highlights how colonialism shaped the concept of desire, not as a pre-existing drive but as something constructed through power relations. She critiques the Freudian assumption that colonial power is a sublimated expression of repressed desires, noting that colonial history often ignores how desire is produced by regulatory discourses.
- Reference: Stoler writes, “We have looked more to the regulation and release of desire than to its manufacture,” emphasizing that colonial power structures created desire rather than simply repressing it.
- Racialization of Desire: Stoler illustrates how desire in colonial settings was racialized, linking sexual instincts to the justification of imperial rule. Colonial power was deeply intertwined with racial hierarchies, where sexuality was used to mark racial differences.
- Reference: Stoler critiques the colonial tendency to treat “sexual desire itself [as] biologically driven, assumed, and unexplained,” rather than seeing it as a socially constructed phenomenon shaped by colonial power dynamics.
2. Foucauldian Theory
- Rejection of the Repressive Hypothesis: Stoler builds on Foucault’s critique of the “repressive hypothesis,” arguing that desire is not something repressed by law but constituted by it. She aligns with Foucault’s idea that power produces desire through its regulatory functions, rather than simply suppressing it.
- Reference: Stoler writes, “Where there is desire, the power relation is already present,” directly engaging with Foucault’s assertion that power is intrinsic to the creation of desire.
- Power/Knowledge and Sexuality: Stoler deepens Foucault’s concept of how power and knowledge regulate sexuality. She critiques the idea that sexual desire existed independently of societal structures, demonstrating how sexuality, race, and power are intertwined in colonial contexts.
- Reference: “For Foucault, ‘desire follows from, and is generated out of, the law… out of the power-laden discourses of sexuality where it is animated and addressed.'”
- Critique of Freudian Repression: Stoler engages with psychoanalytic theory by critically examining Freud’s notion of repressed desires. She contrasts Freud’s model, where “civilization is built upon a renunciation of instinct,” with Foucault’s view that desire is historically constructed through discourse. This critique is central to her argument that colonial studies have overly relied on Freudian explanations of repression.
- Reference: Stoler explains, “Freud accounts for the psychological aetiology of perversions, Foucault looks to the cultural production and historical specificity of the notions of sexual pathology and perversion themselves.”
- Freud and Colonialism: Stoler addresses how colonial histories often apply Freudian models of repression to explain racial and sexual dynamics. She argues that the repression of instinct as a causal explanation in colonial contexts oversimplifies the production of racialized desires.
- Reference: She critiques colonial historians for using “Freudian notions of sublimated and projected desire… to account for racism and Europe’s imperial expansion.”
- Intersection of Gender, Race, and Sexuality: Stoler’s work contributes to feminist theory by examining the intersectionality of race, gender, and sexuality in colonial contexts. She critiques how colonial discourse constructed native women’s bodies as hypersexualized and European women as paragons of virtue, thus reinforcing racial and gendered power structures.
- Reference: Stoler notes how colonial texts cast native women’s sexuality as an “object of the white male and white women [as] assiduously protected from it,” reinforcing both racial and gender hierarchies.
- Gender and Desire in Colonial Histories: By focusing on the gendered dimension of desire, Stoler brings attention to how women, particularly European women, were positioned as moral gatekeepers of colonial society. She critiques the lack of attention to how colonial discourses of sexuality were also about controlling women’s desires and bodies.
- Reference: She discusses how colonial policies “reaffirmed that the ‘truth’ of European identity was lodged in self-restraint, self-discipline, in a managed sexuality that was susceptible and not always under control.”
5. Biopolitics
- Regulation of Bodies and Desires: Stoler’s work touches on Foucault’s concept of biopolitics by examining how colonial governments regulated bodies, particularly through the control of sexual desires. The state’s intervention in regulating sexuality was a key tool for maintaining colonial power and racial hierarchies.
- Reference: Stoler refers to colonial discourses on sexuality as part of a “biopolitical” project, where the regulation of “pleasure and power” was central to the governance of populations.
Examples of Critiques Through “The Education Of Desire and The Repressive Hypothesis” by Ann Laura Stoler
Literary Work | Critique Through “The Education Of Desire and The Repressive Hypothesis” | Key Reference from Stoler’s Work |
Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad | Stoler’s analysis of colonial desire highlights how European characters, like Kurtz, project racialized and sexualized fantasies onto Africa, reinforcing imperial domination. This echoes how Conrad portrays the colonial enterprise as deeply intertwined with racialized desires and fears. | Stoler critiques colonial histories that are predicated on “repressed desires in the West… in a romance with the rural ‘primitive’ or in other more violent, virile, substitute forms.” |
Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë | Stoler’s framework can critique the portrayal of Bertha Mason, the “racialized other” in Jane Eyre, by exploring how colonial discourses of desire and repression frame her as a symbol of uncontrolled, “primitive” sexuality. This reinforces colonial hierarchies of race and gender. | Stoler notes that colonial discourses often depict the racialized Other as having “unbridled sexual appetite and a propensity for ‘Venery,'” which underwrites European control. |
Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys | Applying Stoler’s work to Wide Sargasso Sea reveals how the novel challenges colonial power by deconstructing the repressive sexual and racial dynamics imposed on Antoinette. It critiques the European narrative that frames desire as dangerous and something to be repressed or regulated. | Stoler’s critique of colonial histories that focus on the regulation and release of desire—rather than its construction—aligns with Rhys’ portrayal of Antoinette’s struggle for identity. |
Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe | Stoler’s work can critique the way Western characters in Achebe’s novel view African culture through a lens of racialized sexual desires, often dismissing it as primitive. The imposition of colonial sexual mores on indigenous communities reflects the regulation of desire as a means of control. | Stoler highlights that colonialism relied on “discourses of sexuality productive of class and racial power,” which can be seen in the European interactions with Igbo society. |
Criticism Against “The Education Of Desire and The Repressive Hypothesis” by Ann Laura Stoler
1. Over-reliance on Foucauldian Framework
- Critics might argue that Stoler’s analysis heavily relies on Michel Foucault’s theories, which can limit her exploration of other theoretical perspectives, such as those from non-Western or indigenous traditions. This could potentially narrow the scope of her critique, especially in colonial contexts that involve multiple layers of local and cultural dynamics.
2. Limited Engagement with Gender-Specific Issues
- Although Stoler addresses intersections of race and gender, some might argue that her treatment of women’s roles in the colonial discourse of sexuality is not fully developed. Feminist critics could claim that she doesn’t sufficiently explore the gendered dimension of colonialism, especially in terms of how European women’s desires and sexuality were constructed differently from men’s.
3. Ambiguity in the Critique of Psychoanalysis
- While Stoler critiques Freud’s notion of repressed desires, some scholars might find her analysis insufficiently clear in reconciling the differences between Freudian psychoanalysis and Foucauldian theory. Her critique could be viewed as lacking depth in addressing how these two theoretical frameworks interact or contradict each other in more nuanced ways.
4. Western-Centric Approach
- Stoler’s work could be criticized for maintaining a largely Western-centric approach in its critique of colonialism. By focusing on European colonial power and its relationship to desire, she may overlook the perspectives and resistances of colonized peoples themselves. This could result in an incomplete understanding of how desire and power operated from the viewpoint of the colonized.
5. Lack of Concrete Case Studies
- Some critics might argue that Stoler’s analysis is overly theoretical and lacks concrete case studies or specific historical examples. The abstract nature of her argument could benefit from more grounded examples to illustrate how the production and regulation of desire operated in various colonial settings.
6. Overshadowing of Economic and Material Factors
- Critics may point out that by focusing on the discursive and psychological aspects of desire and repression, Stoler may underplay the economic and material dimensions of colonial power. Colonialism was also about economic exploitation and resource control, and an overemphasis on desire might obscure these aspects.
Representative Quotations from “The Education Of Desire and The Repressive Hypothesis” by Ann Laura Stoler with Explanation
Quotation | Explanation |
“Where there is desire, the power relation is already present.” | This quote reflects Foucault’s idea that desire is not independent of power; instead, desire is produced within power relations. Stoler uses this to critique the notion of desire as something that is repressed, arguing that power structures generate and shape desires. |
“Desire follows from, and is generated out of, the law.” | Stoler emphasizes Foucault’s rejection of Freud’s theory of original desire being repressed by law. Instead, the law creates and shapes desire through discursive and regulatory mechanisms, underscoring the social construction of desire rather than its repression. |
“The truth of our sexual desire… is not a starting point for Foucault.” | Here, Stoler points out that for Foucault, sexual desire is not an innate truth about the self, but a historically constructed object. The idea of “true” sexual desire is not a condition for critique but a product of power relations and cultural discourse. |
“Colonial power relations can be accounted for and explained as a sublimated expression of repressed desires.” | Stoler critiques the tendency in colonial historiography to explain imperialism through a Freudian lens of repressed desires. She argues that colonial power relations involve the production of desires, not just their repression or sublimation. |
“We have looked more to the regulation and release of desire than to its manufacture.” | This quote critiques how colonial studies focus more on how desire is regulated or repressed, rather than on how it is produced by colonial power. Stoler pushes for a Foucauldian analysis that sees desire as constructed by discourses of power, especially in colonial contexts. |
“Sexual desire is a social construct, not a pre-cultural instinct.” | Stoler rejects the Freudian idea of desire as a biological instinct. Instead, she argues that desire is shaped by social and cultural forces, particularly in the context of colonial power, where sexuality is constructed in ways that reinforce racial and social hierarchies. |
“The discourse of sexuality contains many of the latter’s most salient elements.” | This refers to Stoler’s argument that the colonial discourse on race deeply influenced the European discourse on sexuality. The racial hierarchies of empire informed how sexual norms and desires were constructed in Western societies, intertwining race and sexuality. |
“Race comes late into Foucault’s story in The History of Sexuality, not basic to its grammar.” | Stoler critiques Foucault for not incorporating race adequately into his analysis of sexuality and power. She argues that race should be a more central component of Foucauldian analysis because colonialism played a crucial role in shaping discourses of sexuality. |
“There was no ‘original’ desire that juridical law must respond to and repress, as for Freud.” | This statement summarizes Stoler’s alignment with Foucault over Freud. For Stoler and Foucault, the idea of an original, primal desire that needs to be repressed by law is a misconception; rather, desire is a product of the legal and power structures in society. |
“Discourses of sexuality productive of class and racial power.” | Stoler argues that sexuality in colonial contexts was not just about controlling behavior, but about producing social hierarchies and power dynamics. Sexuality was used as a tool to reinforce racial and class boundaries, shaping how power was distributed in colonial societies. |
Suggested Readings: “The Education Of Desire and The Repressive Hypothesis” by Ann Laura Stoler
- Beidelman, T. O. Anthropos, vol. 92, no. 1/3, 1997, pp. 305–06. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40465439. Accessed 12 Oct. 2024.
- STOLER, ANN LAURA. “THE EDUCATION OF DESIRE AND THE REPRESSIVE HYPOTHESIS.” Race and the Education of Desire: Foucault’s History of Sexuality and the Colonial Order of Things, Duke University Press, 1995, pp. 165–95. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv11319d6.9. Accessed 12 Oct. 2024.
- Stoler, Ann Laura. “Imperial Debris: Reflections on Ruins and Ruination.” Cultural Anthropology, vol. 23, no. 2, 2008, pp. 191–219. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20484502. Accessed 12 Oct. 2024.
- Stoler, Ann Laura. “Tense and Tender Ties: The Politics of Comparison in North American History and (Post) Colonial Studies.” The Journal of American History, vol. 88, no. 3, 2001, pp. 829–65. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2700385. Accessed 12 Oct. 2024.