Talk:Frantz Fanon/Archive 1

Duplicate articles
There were two articles on Fanon (Frantz and Franz).  01:01, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Category of writer
Shouldn't Fanon be categorized as Carribean writer? Or maybe French? At least Francophone? Or African diasporic? Anti-racist? Anti-colonial? He wasn't an Algerian national. - Guppy 09:55, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Its a difficult one... I'd be inclined to agree, I think he could be definately classed as Carribean, or French or Francophone, but I think his connection to Algeria, the fact that he wrote so extensively about it, his burial there, work for the government warrants his inclusion in this category. Furthermore, he certainly was an Algerian in the sense that he was an inhabitant of Algeria. I'm thinking hard about this for the Frantz Fanon article aswell. FrancisTyers 04:16, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Writers on philosophy are divided: some include him as African, others cite him as a relevant non-African philosopher, others ignore him altogether. On some of the central definition of African philosophy he certainly counts (good grief, I'm listed on one Web site as an African philosopher, and I'm a white Englishman who sometimes writes on African philosophy).  My personal feeling is to go with the second approach, and treat him as relevant to but not part of African philosophy.  What do others think?  Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 09:54, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Fanon's work has had an impact on postcolonial thought and in particular postcolonial writing. His efforts to try to create a true Algerian identity in the wake of the end of French occupation demonstrate his commitment to recovering a positive ethnic identity which Algerians could rally around and lead them to prosper as a nation free of colonial influence. As such Fanon's work is important for all post-colonial nations. Whether Fanon is to be considered Algerian or French is not the question, but his influence has been felt specifically in postcolonial literature and theory throughout Africa, India, the Caribbean, S. E. Asia and even, to a certain extent in colonial nations such as Britain, France. L. P. Mackenzie 12.32, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

As a student that has taken several courses that deal extensively with Fanon, the trend in the academy is to consider him an African diasporic writer, but if he must be categorized specifically, Martinician is the preferred label. Hash789 (talk) 00:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Is the Chirac statement really useful
Is it necessary to say that Jacques Chirac was stationed in Algeria during the Independence War in the middle of a sentence about torture in Algeria. I have never ever seen the slightest glimpse of Chirac implication in torture in Algeria,

NPOV?
From the last paragraph: "There is a sharp disjuncture between western academic usage of Fanon and Third World approaches. The former remains locked in a wrongheaded view of Fanon as an advocate of violence while the latter are concerned with overcoming the overwhelming physical and psychological violence of colonialist/imperialist power." Seems a bit eh... Mikkel 06:04, 27 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that's POV and/or misleading (Fanon clearly was an advocate of violence, although that's by no means all he was. I've changed it. VoluntarySlave 05:48, 28 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Also, as a student at a prominent Ivy League university, I can attest that the sentence about academia is just false. Fanon is mentioned all the time, and I've never even heard of him being associated with anything violent.  He is always invoked in the context of serious postcolonial theory and colonial consciousness, stuff like that.  I find it hard to believe that postcolonial discourse taking place in former colonies has somehow reached a more bloodless pitch than it has here, if that's even possible.  I'm not changing anything b/c I'm not an authoritythis, but I have left this message so as to suggest to someone a more qualified appraisal of fanon's academic reception. Hgparker 04:54, 3 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I think that a big reason why people would think that western academics percieve Fanon as advocating violence is because Sartre always talked about that aspect of his writing. Secondly is the Richard Perle quote that the "Wretched of the Earth are so desperate that they do not fear death at the hands of what they see as the Great Satan." (National Post, 9-19-2001)  This paragraph, then, should make a distinction for how Fanon is sometimes (mis?)read as primarily justifying violence rather than primarily advocating liberation. Smmurphy 05:26, 3 December 2005 (UTC)


 * The thing about Sartre may be true, but Sartre was not part of the academic establishment in his time, nor do his works enjoy today any kind of non-passing-interest reception (I say this despite being a fan). We don't think of Baudrillard as a "terrorist" despite his rhetoric to that effect in some of his works.  I completely agree with you about the distinction in reading Fanon (as violently or non-violently), and this distinction needs to be stressed, definitely.  I just don't know if it's fair or accurate to assign the (mis)reading squarely to "academia."  With that in mind I've edited the passage in question from

"There is a sharp disjuncture between western academic usage of Fanon and Third World approaches. The former continue to concentrate on Fanon solely as an advocate of violence, while the latter are concerned with overcoming the overwhelming physical and psychological violence of colonialist/imperialist power"

to "There is a sharp disjunction between the two dominant readings of Fanon, loosely associated with the West and Third World. The former concentrates on Fanon solely as an advocate of violence, while the latter is concerned with overcoming the overwhelming physical and psychological violence of colonialist/imperialist power." 140.180.150.213 21:05, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Good work, but I think that that part can just be axed. - FrancisTyers 21:14, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't know if it needs to be cut out, I think that we are just making that paragraph vague so that we don't have to figure out which leading scholars or groups hold which views. How about changing that part to:


 * ...the Black Panthers, and many other movements for self-determination. The legacy of these varied groups has led to distinct readings of Fanon, based on the degree of emphasis placed on his militant means and his cultural liberation ends. Amoung some western leaders he is considered an advocate and apologist for violence (reference Perle quote), while to many post-colonial theorists his work established a template for overcoming the overwhelming physical and especially psychological violence of colonial and imperial oppression (do we need a reference here?).  On the other hand, to the revolutionary leaders themselves, Fanon serves an ambiguous role: his goal appeals to humanitarianism and is lauded by the domestic and international left, while his acceptance of violence justifies and inspires gurrilla tactics for those who fight the battles.


 * The last sentence needs work, or may be left out. Hopefully this is acceptable in Princeton without removing the idea that two major and many possible minor readings of Fanon are important today. Smmurphy(Talk) 21:34, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Yeah, we'd need a ref for that, also for the "revolutionary leaders" part too. Perhaps change to:


 * The political advisor Richard Perle considers Fanon to be an advocate and apologist for violence.


 * If we don't have quotes from other western leaders? PS. "amoung" -> "among". - FrancisTyers 21:43, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Not to blindly quote mine, but if I think about it long enough, I am sure I can figure out a French leader who has said something similar to Perle. The revolutionary leaders part would be found in a constructive comparitive politics text (again, I'll look this week).  Once the sources are found, I'll plug that back in.  P.S. I am thinking about starting a clandestine campaign to change the spelling of that word.  If anyone wanted a hundred free edits added to their count, making that change in articles I've edited would do it. Smmurphy(Talk) 22:06, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


 * LOL! I misspell it all the time aswell. It still looks wrong to me even now, even though I've looked it up in the dictionary countless times :) - FrancisTyers 22:18, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

See Also?
Many of the things mentioned in the "see also" section are already mentioned in the article, and indeed in the templates for Pan Africanism at the bottom. Couldn't names such as Steve Biko's could be removed from the "see also," as its already in the article and at the bottom. Basically, I'm looking for reasons to leave any of the "see alsos" at the end, especially if they are already discussed in the article. Right now race theory, Marxist humanism, black/double consciousness, and existentialism are the only major things under "see also" that aren't mentioned in the article but should most definitely be - names of similar thinkers or groups that Fanon has influenced could go into other sections as well. The three schools of though/ideas could be included in the article fairly smoothly. Smmurphy(Talk) 06:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If they are included in the article then I don't think there is any reason to also put them in See also. I'd feel free to remove them. Phaedrus86 08:30, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Citation of breadth in work section
How would something like this be cited? I mean, it seems to me we could just list the table of contents of a couple of his published works, and it would be clear that he is talking about these different subjects. If noone minds, I think I'll remove the "citation needed" thing, there. Also, we should update the page to conform to WP:FOOT. If I get around to it, and I mess up anything, let me know. Smmurphy(Talk) 19:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It shouldn't be too hard to find something that says the same thing, so we can cite that. It looks to me that the whole article is lifted from somewhere else. If we knew where then there might be copyright issues, and we would be obliged to rewrite it. As long as we don't then I think we should try and source all the statements made. Compared to most good Wikipedia articles there is an amazing lack of citation. I'll try and help out. Phaedrus86 22:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You can go ahead and look for that, I still think it seems a silly thing for which to ask for a citation. Otherwise, I used this article a couple years ago as a starting point for a presentation, so I went through quite a few of these references.  I can probably dig up my sources, if you wanted to tag everything you think needs a citation that I don't get to.  The basic skeleton of the article was written by Emkamau in June 2003, which I'm pretty sure wasn't copied.  The article has grown steadily since then, and although individual sentences may be lifted (a problem with all of WP), I haven't noticed anything blatant since I've been around. Smmurphy(Talk) 02:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If you find your sources then it would be handy to put them on the talk page, but please don't go out of your way. I will just keep trawling the Internet. I didn't mean to be insulting to previous authors, and I apologise if it looked that way. I can see by the history that you are quite right, the article evolved and was not copied. I think citations would help. I know that if I read an article that has lots of details that I can't immediately check, then I look for some sort of corroboration. If it's an academic work, you might be able to trust it. If it's Wikipedia or some other online volunteer encyclopedia then I don't know where the material comes from so I can't trust it. If there are lots of citations that I can immediately check to verify the material is from reliable sources then I can trust it more. People tell a lot of lies on the Internet :-) Phaedrus86 04:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

References in the arts
This article is beginning to develop a pop culture section. I understand that some feel the need to chronicle every mention of their favorite star by their other favorite star, and I see that WP is a place where that can possibly be acceptable. However, it is in a very real sense, trivia, which we should avoid (see WP:TRIV). What we should do is integrate these references into the article. By integrate, here we mean give the references context under which we can see how and why Fanon's name is used by others. From WP:TRIV: "Sections which contain facts to be merged into the main body of the article are a list of 'facts pending integration' or 'facts lacking sufficient context for integration'. Don't simply remove it, but seek to minimize it. It is possible to move a trivia section to the talk page to allow other editors to participate with discussing and integrating the information worthy of inclusion in the article. Some trivia is especially tangential or irrelevant, and may not warrant inclusion at all." I have tried to contextualize a couple of the references. In music, for instance, I've taken a couple from major artists, where information about the artists motives as well as the lyrics of the songs are readily available. The other mentions are either "pending integration" or "lacking sufficient context". Where mentions are not notable, however, they should be removed. Smmurphy(Talk) 22:54, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I think I'll delete the uncontexed references if no one has any problem with it. From here on out, we should endeavor to put references and context to references to Fanon in the arts.  If anyone adds such, I don't see a problem with removing it if it doesn't seem to be notable and integrated/integratable into the article. Smmurphy(Talk) 19:08, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Negritude
I would disagree with Fanon being described as a "negritude theorist". Though he was influenced by Aime Cesaire and felt that negritude was at least in some ways a step forward, Fanon disagreed with negritude. He felt that an individual's existence preceded his or her's essence, which is not in keeping with negritude. I think that part should be removed. Any thoughts? 65.95.175.173 23:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You are correct (although I'm not sure how that the existentialist motto is a good starting point to understanding Fanon). That reference in the "arts" section is (probably my) sloppy writing.  The article could probably do with a section on Fanon's influences, where talk of "negritude" could go.  I'll add a stub of that with the connection between Fanon and negritude.  There is lots more, though, so feel free to help out.  Thanks, Smmurphy(Talk) 15:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Fanon's opinions on Négritude are actually constantly changing (his views as expressed in Black Skins, White Masks are substantially different from his views in A Dying Colonialism on this matter). I'm not sure if I would classify him as a theorist of it, but he's not as opposed as 65.95.175.173 seems to feel. I'm also concerned that you're reading Fanon's criticism of Léopold Sedar Senghor's version of Négritude as criticism of Aimé Césaire's variety - they are substantially different (for example, Césaire's approach does not suggest that an individual's essence precedes existence) Hash789 (talk) 00:23, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:01, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Peacock Terms and Fanon's Marxism
User VoluntarySlave reverted my change which was intended to make the lede more neutral by eliminating the 'Peacock' phrase "perhaps the pre-eminent thinker of the 20th century on the issue...." VoluntarySlave claims that this evaluation is supported by the (emory.edu) citation, but I do not find anything close to that in the reference. I see the complimentary terms "potent and influential" which do not go nearly so far. Perhaps I missed it and VoluntarySlave could provide a quote or more detailed citation to justify the sweeping claim made in the original version.

As for "Fanon wasn't a Marxist," that will be news to the many Marxists who are eager to claim him and to those who placed him in the categories: French Marxists | Revolution theorists | Marxist theorists | Marxist writers | Marxist humanists. (See the bottom of the article.) I am adding a link to a scholarly paper that discusses Fanon's Marxism and for more details invite you to do a web search on: Frantz Fanon marxism. Meanwhile I have restored my changes. —Blanchette (talk) 04:46, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Let me voice my agreement with this user. The Sound and the Fury (talk) 03:11, 14 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Furthermore, I wonder why there is no explication of Marx's influence on Fanon. That is something I can look into, unless someone beats me to it. Clearly Marx had a significant influence on Fanon's thought, and one would assume this warrants representation here. The Sound and the Fury (talk) 04:32, 14 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I'd be suspicious of the so-called marxists that claim Fanon as their own. If you read Black Skin White Masks, there's lots more on Hegel's master-slave concept than on Marx; he devoted an entire section to explicating the Prospero-Calaban (Shakespeare's The Tempest) syndrome: Prospero, an expatriate and a prisoner, can still find his "sub-human" (Calaban) to torture and suppress. Much The Wretched of the Earth is devoted to Fanon's notion that cultural restrictions are the direct cause of some neuroses, and Marx wrote nothing about mental illness or the budding psychiatric medicine (called alienism back then). No one (and certainly not a bright guy like Fanon) needs to be reminded that Marx's emphasis was on industrial nations of his time, and he was bewildered indeed that a "Marxism" was taking hold in decidedly non-industrial nations (Russia). Moreover, genuine revolutionary movements in places like North Africa and South America were hardly "marxist," no matter how many "leaders" paid lip service to him. BubbleDine (talk) 01:56, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay good, I may have only read something somewhere and not looked into it carefully. I have been looking for the reference I was thinking of; it may have been something in City Journal. Anyway, if it occurs to me I'll do something about it. Thanks for the info. The Sound and the Fury (talk) 21:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

BubbleDine wrote: "No one (and certainly not a bright guy like Fanon) needs to be reminded that Marx's emphasis was on industrial nations of his time, and he was bewildered indeed that a "Marxism" was taking hold in decidedly non-industrial nations (Russia)." Too true, and the rise of "Marxism" in Russia is as good a refutation of Marx's theory of historical determinism (and therefore one of his major theses) as anything, but what is known today as Marxism is not limited to the thought of Marx and Engels. Marxism does not end with Marx, it begins -- or to be exact the term begins -- with Marx. As Marx said of some of his followers' ideas, "If that is Marxism, then I am not a Marxist." All Marxists after Marx are "so-called Marxists"!—Blanchette (talk) 23:26, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

request for advice from people who have worked on this article
This is a serious question, even if it sounds a bit foolish, but - I want to put together about 50 pages of Fanon's writing e.g. two or three chapters, or excerpts rom chapters (and it can be from either or both of his major books) that best represent what makes him such an important thinker. What would you recommend? Thanks, Slrubenstein  |  Talk 09:19, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

"Martiniquen", "Algerian" ?
How could Fanon be anything but French ? Martinique is in France (the Chapter "France" should be renamed "Paris", BTW), and Algeria was until 1962. And Fanon died before Algerian independence, therefore an "Algerian citizenship" or nationality is impossible... By the way, I never heard of Frantz "Omar" Fanon either, I'd like to know the origin of this fact/myth. He was not muslim, nor Arab, and could not speak the Arabic language, he was even (stupidely, but strongly) criticized on this ground for fighting a fight which wasn't his. I'd like to know if anyone who wrote this article read his books too, I never read anything by Fanon saying that he was in any way "colonized by a language" ! Black Skin, White Masks is mainly a medical statement of the black complex towards the white/metropolitan/dominant/etc. people (we could say inferiority complex, but it would be an oversimplification as Fanon believes taking skin color into account that poses a problem), and not at all a book of racial or cultural revendication. It's important to take into account that Fanon shares little with the négritude writers as Césaire and Senghor. Vol de nuit (talk) 20:01, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Then change it, brother. The Sound and the Fury (talk) 07:20, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm certainly not your brother, but I've changed what I could. But this article is full of mistakes... Vol de nuit (talk) 22:44, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Section on References in the Arts
Is this section really necessary for an encylopedia article? It seems more like random trivia to me....My suggestion is that it should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.231.129.51 (talk) 07:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Does anyone object if this section is removed? 09:12, 10 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.231.129.51 (talk)

Section on Further Reading
The journal articles here are just randomly chosen from many hundreds that are out there. I suggest deletion of this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4200:1010:3:0:0:0:2 (talk) 14:52, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * yes that happens. would be amazing if there were some kind of relatively recent review of books and monographs on Franon that could guide us as to what list there. Jytdog (talk) 17:02, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

negotiating X with Y?
Just visiting this page, (which I thought was excellent) but I stumbled at the very end: "negotiating his position within postcolonial studies with his influence on the formation of contemporary black queer theory" - I find this confusing, to say the least. I'm unsure what "negotiating X with Y" might mean. Balancing/juggling or something is intended? 'negotiating X and Y'? uh.. Maybe the term is used that way in the literature. But to me it just seems wrong. I'm not sure what is meant exactly, and am no expert, so can't change it myself. 110.20.168.169 (talk) 06:19, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Frantz Fanon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150225012853/http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/fanon.htm to http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/fanon.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100417010258/http://www.enriquedussel.org/agenda_en.html to http://www.enriquedussel.org/agenda_en.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:10, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

was he 17 or 18?
from the article: 'Fanon left Martinique in 1943 when he was 18 years old in order to join the Free French forces...'

But also this: 'At the age of seventeen, Fanon fled the island as a "dissident" (a term used for Frenchmen joining Gaullist forces), traveling to British-controlled Dominica to join the Free French Forces.'DanLanglois (talk) 21:08, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Khmer Rouge
I think I understood from [The Trap (TV series)]] that he was an influence on the Khmer Rouge. Did it misunderstand? --Error (talk) 02:32, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 September 2018 and 22 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mingkzhang.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Frantz Fanon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170308054525/http://kilombagem.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/TeseDMF.pdf to http://kilombagem.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/TeseDMF.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:02, 6 December 2017 (UTC)