Straggling thoughts on mimicry and Wide Sargasso Sea

- Bhabha's language and argumentation point to the idea that the colonial discourse is, by design, self-undermining. The very need on the part of colonialist identity (and therefore discourse) for 'other' defines a need for similarity, but not sameness; indeed, 'other' would not be other in the absence of difference from the 'self' (in this case, the Empire). In the end, this need for a 'similar differentness,' and a perceived unification that supposes to follow, becomes the thing that destabilizes the identity of the colonizer.

- In a metaphoric sense Rochester's actions illustrate the problem of mimicry/assimilation. Rochester's attempts to reform/re-present Antoinette/Bertha create growing problems for him. I'm not sure how you read his success in controlling Antoinette/Bertha; while he does succeed in subduing her, she burns down the mansion - not on her home soil, but in his England, which suggests that on some level she possesses the power to invade and affect his space. Depending on how you interpret Rochester's character in terms of metaphor, this seems hugely significant.

- Rochester also finds himself sandwiched in between Antoinette's narratives in parts one and three. He dominates the middle section of the novel, but the first and last words belong to Antoinette/Bertha

- In a more general sense, the novel as a whole transgresses conventional approaches to the English novel and literary traditions. For instance, Rhys writes an English novel that presents the black, non-English Christophine as the obeah woman endued with a knowledge and power which the English cannot understand or possess. The novel relies upon similarities with traditional 'British' literature, while at the same time defining significant differences, and thereby referring back to the notion of mimicry.