Таърифҳоро таърифкунандагон месозанд, на одамонеро, ки таъриф мешаванд.

Ин ибора ба маънои он аст, ки таърифҳое, ки ба падидаҳо ва мафҳумҳо дода мешаванд, бештар таҳти таъсири назариёт, пешфарзҳо ва манфиатҳои афродие қарор доранд, ки ин таърифҳоро пешниҳод мекунанд на худи падида ё мафҳуми мавриди назар. Яъне, таърифҳо сохтаи дасти инсон ҳастанд ва ҳатман инъикоси дақиқ ва бетарафи воқеият нестанд.

Тони Моррисон

Toni Morrison’s quote, “Definitions belong to the definers, not the defined,” is a profound reflection on power dynamics, identity, and language. The statement suggests that the power to define and label belongs to those who hold authority, rather than to those who are being labeled. Here’s an analysis of the quote’s meaning and implications:
1. The Power of Definition
The core idea of Morrison’s quote lies in the concept that the act of defining — whether it’s a person, a group, a culture, or even an idea — is a power-driven process. Those who control the definitions shape perceptions and, by extension, shape the way others are seen, understood, and treated. The “definers” in this context are the ones who have the authority, social capital, or cultural influence to determine what is considered “normal,” “acceptable,” “worthy,” or “true.”
For example, historically, groups with societal power — such as colonial rulers, slave owners, or patriarchal structures — have defined other groups, such as marginalized racial, ethnic, or gender groups, according to their own biases and interests. This can lead to misrepresentations, dehumanization, and oppression. As Morrison suggests, the people who are “defined” often have little say in how their identity is constructed or perceived.
2. Implications for Identity and Agency
This quote also speaks to the struggle for identity and agency, particularly for historically oppressed or marginalized groups. When others define you, they control the narrative of who you are and what you can be. This creates a dangerous space where individuals or groups may internalize these external definitions and lose their ability to assert their own identity.
For example, in the context of race, many Black people throughout history have been defined by others — from being seen as “inferior” or “property” during slavery to being stereotyped as violent or uneducated in more recent times. Morrison’s quote highlights the injustice of this imposed definition, and the need for marginalized people to reclaim their own identities.
3. Colonialism and the Politics of Naming
The relationship between definitions and power is particularly evident in colonial histories. Colonizers often imposed definitions on the cultures, languages, and beliefs of colonized peoples, deeming them “primitive,” “savage,” or “backward.” These labels served to justify colonial rule and exploitation. The act of naming things, places, and people under colonial control gave colonizers power over the very essence of those they sought to dominate.
Morrison’s quote suggests that the ability to define others — especially to reduce them to simplistic categories — is itself an expression of dominance. The “defined” are seen not in their full complexity, but as flattened, controlled entities, defined by others’ terms, often in a way that strips them of their humanity.
4. Social Constructs and Normativity
Definitions also play a key role in establishing social norms. What is considered “good,” “bad,” “beautiful,” or “acceptable” is often defined by those who hold power in society. For instance, beauty standards, gender roles, and social expectations around behavior are largely dictated by those in power, such as media moguls, political leaders, or cultural elites. The “definers” construct these definitions, and those who are being defined — the general population — may feel compelled to conform to these standards, often without question.
Morrison’s quote challenges us to consider who is doing the defining and why. It calls for a re-examination of the dominant cultural definitions of beauty, success, morality, and other values, suggesting that we must reclaim the right to define ourselves and challenge the norms that limit our potential.
5. Empowerment Through Reclaiming Definitions
One of the most powerful aspects of Morrison’s quote is the implication that those who are defined — particularly those who have historically been oppressed — must take control of their own definitions. This is a call for empowerment: the act of re-defining oneself can be an act of resistance and liberation. By asserting one’s own identity and rejecting imposed labels, individuals and groups can break free from the narratives that have been constructed around them.
A prominent example of this is the reclamation of racial and gender identities in recent decades. For instance, the term “Black” was once used as a derogatory definition imposed by colonizers and enslavers. Today, many Black people embrace the term with pride, asserting ownership of the identity and countering centuries of negative definitions. Similarly, the LGBTQ+ community has reclaimed and redefined terms like “queer” and “gay” that were once used to stigmatize them.
6. Language as a Tool of Liberation or Oppression
Language, in this context, is not neutral; it is a tool that can either empower or subjugate. Morrison’s quote speaks to the idea that language shapes our perception of reality. When the language of the “definers” dominates, it marginalizes alternative narratives, viewpoints, and experiences. But when people take control of the language that describes them, they have the opportunity to reshape their world.
For instance, the feminist movement has worked to redefine gender roles, sexuality, and power dynamics. By rejecting traditional, patriarchal definitions of what women should be or do, feminists have empowered women to define themselves — on their own terms.
7. Historical and Contemporary Examples
Morrison’s insight can be applied to various historical and contemporary contexts:
Slavery and Racism: During the era of slavery, the definitions of Black people were crafted by white slaveowners, who defined them as property, as less-than-human. Today, efforts to reframe African-American identity on terms of empowerment and pride (e.g., the Black Lives Matter movement) challenge those past definitions.
Feminism and Gender: Historically, women have been defined by male-dominated institutions, often as subordinates or objects. The feminist movement has worked hard to shift these definitions and assert that women can define their own roles and identities.
Indigenous Rights: Indigenous peoples have long been defined by colonial powers as “savages” or “primitive.” Contemporary Indigenous movements seek to reclaim their culture, language, and histories, asserting their own definitions of identity, sovereignty, and culture.
Conclusion
Toni Morrison’s quote “Definitions belong to the definers, not the defined” is a potent commentary on power, identity, and social structures. It underscores the idea that the power to define is inherently tied to control. The act of defining is not just an intellectual exercise but a political one that can shape the lives, opportunities, and perceptions of individuals and groups. Morrison’s words urge us to recognize the power dynamics involved in definitions and to reclaim the right to define ourselves, to resist being confined to the labels imposed on us by others, and to challenge those in power who dictate how we should be seen and understood.