This opening chapter presents postcolonialism in a series of snapshots, with a central role reserved for two scenes. The first emerges when we try to grasp the object in one glance in order to glean its most basic features. The resulting image of postcolonial studies viewed through the lens of humanism suggests the possibility, if not the necessity, of transitioning to a second perspective that considers the transcendental aspect of contemporaneity, of which postcolonial studies is an integral part. Accounting for the cultural circumstances of scholarly discourse and its implications allows for the formulation of a theoretical position, proposed in the final part of the chapter, for postcolonial criticism in the era of the exhaustion of postmodernism. Since this position also underpins this book, this chapter is a methodological statement, formulated from a spatially and temporally determined perspective—from the perspective of an East-Central European country after the Western “boom” of postcolonialism.

Looking at postcolonialism from a distance that helps to locate it in a longue durée perspective, I propose viewing it simply as a history of the human being. What cannot be stressed enough is that this chapter, along with the book it opens, presents my own perspective on postcolonialism, which is grounded in Christian humanistic thought with its vital component of personalism. I consider personalism a fitting philosophical framework for reflecting on the historical experience of populations that sought emancipation from the colonial grip (such as Polish society under Soviet rule). The role of the person as acting agent is crucial for liberating processes, but it can be described in diverse ways that also depend on philosophical premises. Personalism offers an alternative to the secular philosophies, such as Marxism, that underlie the main currents of postcolonial studies, which have furnished individuals with nearly unlimited agency and offered prospects of absolute freedom. It accentuates personhood as the supreme value of human beings, treating both individualism and collectivism as contrary to human dignity. To be true subjects of history, human beings must act as persons, not merely as individuals. This means that their actions must reflect their self-governance: they act “assuming the awareness of who one is and the disposition of the will to choose the value which is proportional to that awareness.