Decadent Indochina and French Colonial Literature, 1880s to 1920s

This thesis investigates the long-neglected relationship between Decadence and colonialism at the fin de siècle which also coincided with the age of France’s high imperialism. Generally considered a European literary and cultural movement, Decadence has rarely been examined outside its Western boundaries, not least in connection with the empire. The fin-de-siècle colonial literature of Indochina emerges as a particularly compelling case reflecting a complex interplay between Decadence and colonialism, aesthetics and politics, at a time when France was seeking to redefine its national identity in relation to the increasingly significant concept of la plus Grande France and in opposition to other European powers. By combining colonial discourse analysis with postcolonial and cultural studies approaches, with special emphasis on a historicist approach, this thesis engages in close readings of novels, short stories and poetry written by a number of French travellers and colonisers, most notably Paul Bonnetain, Jules Boissière, Albert de Pouvourville, Claude Farrère, Myriam Harry, Clotilde Chivas-Baron, and Jeanne Leuba. In particular it focuses on three key decadent tropes: opium, subversive sexualities, and the allure of the néant seen in terms of both spirituality and the ruins of past civilisations. Reading Decadence against colonial ideology and in relation with a wide range of fin-de-siècle scholarly and popular discourses, reveals that the decadent articulation of the colonial encounter is fundamentally political, in contrast to its perceived aestheticist detachment. Through its ambiguous propensity for revelling in what it deprecates, decadent literature often introduces ambivalence and oppositional counter-narratives disrupting the colonialist foundations on which the French rule in Indochina and the neat boundaries between coloniser and colonised are built. A postcolonial reading of decadent literature suggests the presence of ‘critical Decadence’ that points to a need to reassess the monolithic pro-colonial view of colonial literature.