Universality through Particularity

Senghor in his article introduces its reader to the concept of negritude which is the “the sum of the cultural values of the black world.” This very definition introduces a universality that encompasses all Africans. However, Senghor adds complexity to this universality that he talks about. In other words, he introduces a process that begins with particularity and ends with universality. It does not end  by clumping  all Africans together but he ensures to bring all men together, possessing the same roots. Hence his argument is much more nuanced than saying whether universality exists or not.

To begin with, Senghor defines Negritude as a “sum of cultural values.” This sum is crucial to cause sir. He appreciates the differences that exist within the Africans because of which he uses the phrase “sum of cultural values”, values with an “s”. These different values makes up the sum, the negritude. It is through the “rich complexity of African culture” that he is able to arrive at a certain universality of Black people. He strives to achieve this universality through particularity: “every being, everything – be it only a grain of sand – radiates a life force, a sort of wave-particle; and sages, priests, kings, doctors, and artists all use it to help bring the universe to its fulfillment.” In other words, the beauty of universality lies in particularity. Each individual contributes to the universalism of the Black race.

Once this stage is achieved, he brings together all individuals, all civilizations together, thus achieving universality in total. Quoting Pierre Tielhard, Senghor brings to our attention how traditional dichotomies were distorted and “a living, throbbing unity of the universe” was established. This entailed “a single reality.” This, however, was not a static and uniform reality but a “network of relations” each possessing its unique characteristic, its own rhythm. All the beautiful differences existing within the universe illustrate nothing but different shades of the “same reality.”. This universality, however, transcends all boundaries, may it be of geography, gender and above all of race. The white man and the black man then are just men part of a single reality; It is a reality where black man is no less than a white man. Both are equal in their experiences-experiences of being human. Romanticizing on the idea of universalism, Senghor, however it appears, falls into making the same mistake as his colonizers: the mistake of calling his people wiser than the “other” for he believed that Africans are more sensitive in foreseeing this reality. While this universalism strives for a utopia, it would be unfair to dismiss the universalities that exist within this overarching universality: the Black world and the white world.  

This process, however, is not as simple as it appears. These multiple universalities are pitted against one another. Even more unfortunate is that this black universality appears to be a necessity to respond to the European humanism. It seems like a mere cry to be recognized. And to achieve this, black universalism is observed- bringing to life a force great enough that cannot be dismissed.  But then is everything done in response to the white man’s activity. The “Man” that Senghor talks about who is composed of matter, spirit, body and soul, is he only a man in relation to the White? Do the coloured have no choice then to continue to prove their existence in relation to the white man, to his universe? Here two universalities come into conflict. This harmonious universalism which never really existed then seems threatened.

All in all, Senghor outlines a universalism that brings the Black race into the limelight. This universalism, which is achieved through particularity, also hopes to unite all men together. However, in reality, this too seems like a tool that is used to help the Black man assert their humanism in relation to the European humanism. Then the question really is if the latter is giving birth to the former? Would Senghor’s negritude cease to exist without European humanism?