A bureaucracy of rejection

Petitioning and the impoverished paternalism of the British-Indian Raj

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

Bombay, the hub of Britain's Indian Ocean empire, hosted a ceaseless flow of humanity: Sailors and lawyers, street performers and royal refugees. When fate set obstacles in their way, the residents of this teeming metropolis petitioned colonial officials, looking on them as patriarchal providers of last resort. These petitions, which this article terms 'personal pleas', adeptly braided different, often contradictory, idioms of late nineteenth- A nd early twentieth-century imperial governance, from stylized imitations of traditional authority to bureaucratic proceduralism. Their functional contribution to Raj governance, however, remains a puzzle since the vast majority of petitions were rejected. For the British, the steady flow of rejections threatened to unmask the disjuncture between the expectations and realities of Raj paternalism. As a result, colonial officials viewed personal pleas with a mixture of ridicule and concern. Yet, while unsettling for officials, personal pleas rarely spurred the collective politics associated with anti-colonial resistance. Thus, where other articles in this special issue focus on petitioning's functional contributions to the consolidation of state bureaucracies and the formation of new publics, this article traces the genre's more emotive dimensions. Even as they failed to consolidate colonial discipline or resistance, personal pleas provided a vehicle for the airing of the lived contradictions and tensions of empire. They allowed rulers and subjects alike to fantasize about the possibility of a more benevolent order, and to vent their frustration when those fantasies crumbled in the face of imperial indifference.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)177-202
Number of pages26
JournalModern Asian Studies
Volume53
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

imitation
paternalism
bureaucracy
petition
steady flow
refugee
twentieth century
consolidation
politics
governance
Indian Ocean
metropolis
frustration
lawyer
genre
resident
public
vehicle
Bureaucracy
Paternalism

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Geography, Planning and Development
  • History
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

@article{df938acabfad466ebb2dde1da858c963,
title = "A bureaucracy of rejection: Petitioning and the impoverished paternalism of the British-Indian Raj",
abstract = "Bombay, the hub of Britain's Indian Ocean empire, hosted a ceaseless flow of humanity: Sailors and lawyers, street performers and royal refugees. When fate set obstacles in their way, the residents of this teeming metropolis petitioned colonial officials, looking on them as patriarchal providers of last resort. These petitions, which this article terms 'personal pleas', adeptly braided different, often contradictory, idioms of late nineteenth- A nd early twentieth-century imperial governance, from stylized imitations of traditional authority to bureaucratic proceduralism. Their functional contribution to Raj governance, however, remains a puzzle since the vast majority of petitions were rejected. For the British, the steady flow of rejections threatened to unmask the disjuncture between the expectations and realities of Raj paternalism. As a result, colonial officials viewed personal pleas with a mixture of ridicule and concern. Yet, while unsettling for officials, personal pleas rarely spurred the collective politics associated with anti-colonial resistance. Thus, where other articles in this special issue focus on petitioning's functional contributions to the consolidation of state bureaucracies and the formation of new publics, this article traces the genre's more emotive dimensions. Even as they failed to consolidate colonial discipline or resistance, personal pleas provided a vehicle for the airing of the lived contradictions and tensions of empire. They allowed rulers and subjects alike to fantasize about the possibility of a more benevolent order, and to vent their frustration when those fantasies crumbled in the face of imperial indifference.",
author = "Julia Stephens",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X17001160",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "53",
pages = "177--202",
journal = "Modern Asian Studies",
issn = "0026-749X",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "1",

}

A bureaucracy of rejection : Petitioning and the impoverished paternalism of the British-Indian Raj. / Stephens, Julia.

In: Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 53, No. 1, 01.01.2019, p. 177-202.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - A bureaucracy of rejection

T2 - Petitioning and the impoverished paternalism of the British-Indian Raj

AU - Stephens, Julia

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Bombay, the hub of Britain's Indian Ocean empire, hosted a ceaseless flow of humanity: Sailors and lawyers, street performers and royal refugees. When fate set obstacles in their way, the residents of this teeming metropolis petitioned colonial officials, looking on them as patriarchal providers of last resort. These petitions, which this article terms 'personal pleas', adeptly braided different, often contradictory, idioms of late nineteenth- A nd early twentieth-century imperial governance, from stylized imitations of traditional authority to bureaucratic proceduralism. Their functional contribution to Raj governance, however, remains a puzzle since the vast majority of petitions were rejected. For the British, the steady flow of rejections threatened to unmask the disjuncture between the expectations and realities of Raj paternalism. As a result, colonial officials viewed personal pleas with a mixture of ridicule and concern. Yet, while unsettling for officials, personal pleas rarely spurred the collective politics associated with anti-colonial resistance. Thus, where other articles in this special issue focus on petitioning's functional contributions to the consolidation of state bureaucracies and the formation of new publics, this article traces the genre's more emotive dimensions. Even as they failed to consolidate colonial discipline or resistance, personal pleas provided a vehicle for the airing of the lived contradictions and tensions of empire. They allowed rulers and subjects alike to fantasize about the possibility of a more benevolent order, and to vent their frustration when those fantasies crumbled in the face of imperial indifference.

AB - Bombay, the hub of Britain's Indian Ocean empire, hosted a ceaseless flow of humanity: Sailors and lawyers, street performers and royal refugees. When fate set obstacles in their way, the residents of this teeming metropolis petitioned colonial officials, looking on them as patriarchal providers of last resort. These petitions, which this article terms 'personal pleas', adeptly braided different, often contradictory, idioms of late nineteenth- A nd early twentieth-century imperial governance, from stylized imitations of traditional authority to bureaucratic proceduralism. Their functional contribution to Raj governance, however, remains a puzzle since the vast majority of petitions were rejected. For the British, the steady flow of rejections threatened to unmask the disjuncture between the expectations and realities of Raj paternalism. As a result, colonial officials viewed personal pleas with a mixture of ridicule and concern. Yet, while unsettling for officials, personal pleas rarely spurred the collective politics associated with anti-colonial resistance. Thus, where other articles in this special issue focus on petitioning's functional contributions to the consolidation of state bureaucracies and the formation of new publics, this article traces the genre's more emotive dimensions. Even as they failed to consolidate colonial discipline or resistance, personal pleas provided a vehicle for the airing of the lived contradictions and tensions of empire. They allowed rulers and subjects alike to fantasize about the possibility of a more benevolent order, and to vent their frustration when those fantasies crumbled in the face of imperial indifference.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060802558&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85060802558&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X17001160

DO - https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X17001160

M3 - Review article

VL - 53

SP - 177

EP - 202

JO - Modern Asian Studies

JF - Modern Asian Studies

SN - 0026-749X

IS - 1

ER -