REVIEW: BRITISH GUIANA*
The remainder of this article will be confined to a critical review of chapter V, VII, VIII. Dr. Smith presents the nature of the problems of ethnic distinctions and social class quite clearly in a sentence of far reaching content. “In so far as we find distinctions are made between persons on the basis of their physical appearance, the reasons for using this as a distinguishing factor rather than some other must be sought in the structure of society itself and not merely in the fact of multi-racialism.”[2] The present structure of Guianese society has its origins deep in Guianese history.
Colour is an important but limiting factor to individual achievement in Guiana. It is one of the key elements in the establishment of the present hierarchy of persons. As such it has its roots far back into our system of slavery. Colour in Guiana is subject to extensive differentiation. Nevertheless emphasis on performance criteria, particularly in economic and occupational roles is a factor permitting limited social mobility. Part of the difficulty of course lies in the fact that racial groups were introduced into specific occupational roles as a basis for their arriving in Guiana. Subsequent development has led to a partial breakdown of some of the old occupational categories and colour alignments.
At the top of the colour hierarchy of persons is the ‘white’ group. ‘White’ has a peculiar Guianese meaning. It is more European than North American in content. It specifically excludes the Portuguese and certain white elements like sailors and soldiers but certain ‘blacks’ are included. ‘White’ is supposed to be the epitome of colonial values. The white European group achieved dominance in the society and (partly through result and partly cause) they have been the key agency through which Colonial values have been transmitted to the rest of the society. In contemporary Guiana this group has lost some of its dominant characteristics and has become of late self-consciously paternalistic. Nevertheless, as Dr. Smith correctly argues, they are so distant from the mass of the population as to be unable to ever energize the total community in any reforming (or revolutionary!) direction.
Dr. Smith’s analysis of the Portuguese group needs considerable modification in light of recent political developments. We shall have more to say about this later.
In discussing the Negroes Dr. Smith is dealing with an integral group of Creole society. The Negroes have not unnaturally suffered most from a system that ascribes status according to colour. Overcoming the disadvantage of colour has come by way of emphasising occupational mobility. Entry into white collar jobs, the Civil Service and teaching has been the ladders on which many negroes have entered into the ranks of the middle class. Geographical mobility was also important in overcoming some of the disadvantages of the colour system in so far as the plantation was formerly the primary unit in which the system was effectively operated. Substantial urbanization of the negroes was a natural consequence of the movement from plantation to village. By and large the urban negro has lost most of the remnants of his African heritage. (It should be noted that a conscious effort at rediscovering these origins is an important past-time for some intellectual and artistic elements in the urban negro population). In the rural areas many more heritages are preserved, although in a substantially modified form.
The Indian group is the subject of a very careful analysis by Dr. Smith. He begins by attacking some of the stereotyped images held about the Indians. In many instances these images referred to a period of the past. To say the Indians live in the country, and work solely on the land is of course misleading. The drift to the towns although unmeasured is certainly substantial and the Indians are becoming increasingly city workers, and are entering into the professional ranks in larger numbers. Sometimes the stereotypes are contradictory. Always they hinder the process of integration. Some of the stereotypes go strongly against available evidence. The widespread belief that the Indians save more than the Negroes and spend less on clothes can easily be checked against the evidence of the I.L.O., survey of 1956. This is almost never attempted.
