logo
Adrift in Conscience: ‘Small Boat' Navigates Guilt and Apathy, But Finds No Just Shore

Adrift in Conscience: ‘Small Boat' Navigates Guilt and Apathy, But Finds No Just Shore

The Wire30-05-2025
Menu
हिंदी తెలుగు اردو
Home Politics Economy World Security Law Science Society Culture Editor's Pick Opinion
Support independent journalism. Donate Now
Top Stories
Adrift in Conscience: 'Small Boat' Navigates Guilt and Apathy, But Finds No Just Shore
Suvanshkriti Singh
14 minutes ago
Vincent Delecroix's Booker-shortlisted novel probes bureaucratic cruelty and moral fatigue. Yet, its vision remains troublingly narrow, haunted more by moral posturing than ethical clarity.
Illustration via Canva.
Real journalism holds power accountable
Since 2015, The Wire has done just that.
But we can continue only with your support.
Contribute now
For a book that was shortlisted for the International Booker Prize, French philosopher Vincent Delecroix's Small Boat seems to have flown almost completely under the literary radar. Translated by Helen Stevenson, the novel is a fictional account of the drowning of 27 migrants attempting to cross the English Channel from France into England. It is inspired from a real event, and reconstructed from the forensic data produced as part of its public investigation.
Despite its politically relevant subject – or, perhaps because of it – hardly a handful of major English language media outlets, including those in India, have spared it any considerable thought. Those that have, have commended Small Boat for its moral stance; few have interrogated its ethically ambiguous politics on the racialised violence migrants experience.
Vincent Delecroix's
Small Boat
Small Axes (2025)
The novel is narrated from the point of view of the unnamed French coast guard officer who received distress calls from those attempting the ultimately failed crossing. She is being held accountable for their deaths due to her refusal to send help despite receiving 14 calls in the span of two hours.
She insists her inaction was based on the simple, concrete fact of territorial jurisdiction: the dinghy with the migrants had crossed over into British waters, and all she could do was to inform her English counterparts of the situation, which she did.
The first part of the novel sees the narrator being interviewed by a policewoman, strikingly like herself in appearance, demeanour, and tone of voice – later revealed to be the former's own conscience. This externalisation of internality is a deft narrative device; it allows Delecroix to paint the portrait of a weary, haunted woman through his political and philosophical arguments.
Bubbles in her coffee appear to the narrator as sinking boats, and yet out loud she asks if the true cause for the dead migrants dying was not 'their inability to stay sitting quietly in a room.' And, surely, she cannot be held responsible for their choice to migrate. Or, perhaps, the cause was the under-funding of rescue services, necessitating difficult decisions about resource allocation. All the narrator did was her job in the way she was trained to do, she insists – without the professional handicap of emotions or opinions. A true and mere functionary, but one unable to rid herself of visions of African construction workers sinking in a sea that has encroached inland.
Delecroix is clinical and unsparing in his condemnation of the banality of evil, the bureaucratic production of inhumanity, and its psychological toll. But, the primary aim of Small Boat is to take to task the ubiquity of apathy, and the complicity of Every(wo)man in the making of what we end up calling a tragedy.
The novel uses the figure of the narrator as the insider who calls out society on its indifference, both through the novel's indictment of her own impassivity and her narratorial defence of it. Delecroix resolutely portrays the narrator as a burdened, enervated woman whose inaction, in a different context, could perhaps be forgiven. She is not so much vile as pathetic; no more a monster than anyone – which is everyone – who deems themselves a neutral, unobligated party to crises happening to other people.
However, the novel's moral posture is its greatest limitation, for it gets in the way of its ability to take an ethical stance. Significant portions of the novel read like liberal fantasy, where the admission of guilt relieves one of any reparatory obligations: absolution through self-flagellation.
The plot's resolution involves the narrator committing suicide. Unable to bear her guilt or to rationalise it away, she walks into the English Channel. Violence begets violence, but justice is nowhere in sight, nor is any notion of what it might look like.
The moment of resolution is presaged by one of Delecroix's sharpest insights. The narrator concludes it is not her actions but her words that have condemned her: it is in the expectation that she would reassure the migrants they will be saved – and not in their actual survival or death – that society had unsuccessfully sought its redemption. But, coming as it does after repeated attempts on the part of the narrator to deflect responsibility, reaching for every explanation other than her own racial antipathy, the critique loses some of its bite.
Then, there is the novel's second part: a detailed, but trite description of the hours-long drowning. Delecroix writes – or Stevenson translates – his migrants as featureless, racialised bodies. They are human only insofar as the bruising experience of closely witnessing their suffering. This is trauma porn barely disguised as liberal humanism. The novel is prey to the same tendency of which its narrator is accused – an inability to conceptualise migrants as individuals outside of their victimhood.
These perversities reveal further frailties. Despite its philosophical nature, the novel often misses opportunities for original, innovative critique. Consider the narrator's claim that her 'judgment has…no fissures, but it does have boundaries, which correspond exactly to the boundaries of territorial waters.' Minimally, it offers an occasion for examining individual responsibility against structural forces. At best, it is an opportunity to reckon with the validity of the structure itself. But, having glimpsed the possibility, Delecroix forgoes it, focusing instead on rhetorical empathy.
Similarly, for all its erudite musings about racial violence, the novel never really asks why it is so that the experience of migrants arouses concern only when their victimisation finds its completion in death. This, despite such a line of inquiry being amply indicated in the narrator's assertion that 'these people were sunk long before they sank.'
Its flaws are not insignificant, and for many, Small Boat won't be a book that moves – it wasn't for me. It may even be one that incites pessimistic helplessness, if not cynicism. This may have something to do with its intended audience being primarily White. But, literature has the great advantage of being universal; it can always be read in the context of one's own circumstances. If the fates of those crossing the Channel seem too distant as a subcontinental reader, one can always recall the Rohingya refugees India abandoned in the Bay of Bengal.
Despite its imperfections, this is still a well-written novel that warrants reflexive conversation through its own questioning, quietly suggesting that we hold both ourselves, and the political structures we legitimise, accountable for our complicity in the suffering of our others.
Suvanshkriti is a journalist and researcher. She has a master's in European Studies from the University of Göttingen, Germany, where she specialised in the literature and politics of migration and citizenship. She writes about books, gender, sexuality, democracy, and global justice.
Make a contribution to Independent Journalism
Related News
An Open Letter: 'I Have Small Eyes, Mr Prime Minister'
Banu Mushtaq's 'Heart Lamp' – Translated By Deepa Bhasthi – Is 2025 International Booker Prize Winner
Humour, Scepticism and the Realities of the Familial in Banu Mushtaq's 'Heart Lamp'
Most Indians Can't Even Afford Entry-Level Cars. Maruti Suzuki Chairman Explained Why
'Heart Lamp' Wins International Booker: Banu Mushtaq's First Reaction
The Politics of 'Heart Lamp' Is Profound, Urgent and Reflects the Lived Reality of Millions
SIPs, Usually Popular, See Decline in New Registrations
'Completed' on Paper, But Missing in Key Border Areas: J&K Authorities Probe Centre-Funded Bunker Project
Choksi Abduction Complaint Shines Light on Modi Government's Attitude to Global Passport Business
View in Desktop Mode
About Us
Contact Us
Support Us
© Copyright. All Rights Reserved.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

What India's passionate support for an assassinated Congolese leader says about today's world order
What India's passionate support for an assassinated Congolese leader says about today's world order

Scroll.in

timea minute ago

  • Scroll.in

What India's passionate support for an assassinated Congolese leader says about today's world order

On February 19, 1961, thousands of people gathered in New Delhi to protest the murder of the young leader of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Patrice Lumumba. The freedom fighter Aruna Asaf Ali, one of the organisers of the event, compared the martyrdom of 35-year-old Lumumba to the hanging of revolutionary Bhagat Singh by the British colonial administration. Congress politician Indira Gandhi said that Lumumba's loss was that of 'somebody very near'. She added that there is more India could have done to protect Lumumba. Footage of the event shows that the large crowds were drawn across the political spectrum. Artist Amrita Pritam wrote a poem for Lumumba in Punjabi, asking 'Can the white sheet hide this red spot in its folds?' There were several tributes in Urdu including by Makhdoom and Sahir Ludhianvi. Sahir's poem translated into English by KA Abbas had the lines 'Every drop of a martyr's blood, Will Light an Immortal Flame'. Abbas himself wrote a story based on Lumumba. What caused this passionate indignation and upsurge of support in India for Lumumba, whose birth centenary is being celebrated this year? It reflected a time when India was closely involved in the liberation struggles in Africa through the state, the activities of solidarity organisations and sympathetic individuals. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru described the murder as 'a turning point' in the history of Africa, predicting that 'a dead Lumumba is infinitely more powerful than a live Lumumba'. Lumumba had been murdered just a year after being elected prime minister of the Democratic Republic of Congo on June 30, 1960, when the country gained independence from Belgium. By January the next year, he was brutally tortured and assassinated. His body was dissolved in acid. As is now well documented, the US and the Belgians both worked to overthrow the young African leader. The Congo had become embroiled in a political crisis after independence because the Katanga region – extremely rich in mineral resources – announced its secession with Belgian help. The Belgians were antagonistic to Lumumba and the country's press routinely carried racist characterisations of him. With Katanga's secession, the Belgians found their opportunity to weaken him by sending a large number of armed personnel to the province. Lumumba appealed to the United Nations for help. Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld obtained permission from the Security Council to send a mission to the Congo. An Indian diplomat, Rajeshwar Dayal, was appointed Special Representative of the United Nations in the Congo and joined in September 1960. By the time Dayal arrived, it was too late. His predecessor, Andrew Cordier, had actively worked against Lumumba. Frustrated with the inability of the United Nations to assist him, Lumumba had asked for Soviet help – greatly alarming the West. Lumumba's overthrow had reportedly been ordered by US President Dwight Eisenhower. With the backing of the US Central Intelligence Agency, Dayal wrote in his Mission for Hammarskjöld, Colonel Mobutu Sese Seko undertook a military coup. 'We had no doubt that Mobutu's own weak will had not provided the driving urge,' he observed. 'We had our suspicions which did not point to the CIA alone.' Eventually, Dayal himself had to leave the Congo as Western powers lobbied for his removal and his life was threatened. The failure of the United Nations to protect Lumumba brought to light its ineffectiveness. As Kwame Nkrumah, the first president of Ghana, wrote in his Challenge of the Congo, this was 'the first time in history that the legal ruler of a country' had 'been done to death with the open connivance of a world organisation in whom that ruler put his trust'. The Soviets asked for the resignation of the secretary general, Hammarskjöld. In a letter to Nehru, Nikita Khrushchev expressed his shock at Lumumba's assasination, condemning the United Nations and asking for the resignation of Hammarskjöld. Nehru expressed his sympathy with his views but did not believe that replacing Hammarskjöld would achieve much. Hammarskjöld soon died in a mysterious plane crash in September 1961. Eventually, Nehru decided to send several thousand Indian soldiers to the Congo under the United Nations mission to end the secession in Katanga. To understand the rise and assasination of Lumumba, it is first important to understand the significance of Congo. It is a country rich in natural resources, including cobalt, copper and diamonds. It is almost three-fourths the size of India. When the continent of Africa was partitioned among European powers in the late 19th century, Congo became the personal property of King Leopold of Belgium. During his 23-year rule, an estimated 10 million Africans were killed. In 1908, international alarm over the atrocities forced him to give up the territory. Congo became a Belgian colony. At independence, Congo had some of the lowest living standards in Africa. Lumumba, who was born in 1925 in a poor peasant family, grew up hearing stories of the Belgian atrocities. He was an autodidact, a voracious reader with a particular interest in philosophy, history and sociology. In his years working as a postal clerk, Lumumba became involved with and led several societies and organisations. He took an active interest in discussing colonialism and race relations. He started writing for the newspapers and also wrote poetry. He had also learnt several Congolese languages including Lingala and Swahili. As he travelled around the country and met with a variety of people, his fame as an orator rose. Lumumba's growing popularity worried the Belgian colonial administration who arrested him on charges of embezzlement in 1956. While in prison, Lumumba worked on a book titled Congo, My Country. The book was addressed to Belgian rulers and proposed a Belgo-Congolese union. 'My investigations,' he wrote, 'have not been limited to the évolué class; they have also been carried out among the working-class and the traditionalist leaders…with people of all types and all shades of opinion.' Lumumba started identifying with the majority of the Congolese population. Play This explains how his political views rapidly changed. In 1958, he became one of the founders of the Congolese National Movement. The idea of a national movement that built unity across ethnic divisions in Congo was a revolutionary idea. Soon afterwards, he was the Congolese delegate to the All African People's Conference organised in Ghana, which had declared its independence a year earlier under the leadership of Kwame Nkrumah. Lumumba would become a committed Pan-Africanist. For Lumumba, unity was a principle of struggle, unity against tribal divisions in the Congo, unity among African nations and ultimately unity among all the oppressed fighting for their freedom. Lumumba had studied the ideas of Mahatma Gandhi and the Indian freedom struggle. 'We have chosen just one weapon for our struggle, and that weapon is nonviolence, because we believe that whatever the goal, it can be reached by peaceful means,' he said in 1959. 'This is what our struggle represents…' In an interview one year later, he said that the Congolese owe this principle of nonviolent action to Gandhi. Lumumba did not have the time and the people to fully consolidate the state in the Democratic Republic of Congo. His ideas of African unity and true independence were seen as too dangerous by Western powers in the context of the Cold War. The story of Lumumba reflects the heroism and the tragedy of African freedom struggles. In the century since his birth, understanding the history of these struggles continues to carry lessons for our unequal world order.

Israel-Gaza war LIVE: U.N., media groups condemn Israel's deadly strike on Al Jazeera team in Gaza
Israel-Gaza war LIVE: U.N., media groups condemn Israel's deadly strike on Al Jazeera team in Gaza

The Hindu

time31 minutes ago

  • The Hindu

Israel-Gaza war LIVE: U.N., media groups condemn Israel's deadly strike on Al Jazeera team in Gaza

Condemnations poured in from the United Nations, the EU and media rights groups on Monday (Augsut 11, 2025) after an Israeli strike killed an Al Jazeera news team in Gaza, as Palestinians mourned the journalists and Israel accused one of them of being a Hamas militant. Al Jazeera called the strike a 'targeted assassination' while press freedom groups denounced the rising death toll facing Palestinian journalists working in Gaza. Mourners laid the journalists to rest in Gaza City. Palestinians reported the heaviest bombardments in weeks on Monday in areas east of Gaza City, just hours after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he expected to complete a new expanded offensive in the enclave 'fairly quickly'. French President Emmanuel Macron on Monday (August 11, 2025) slammed Israel's plans to step up its military operation in Gaza as a disaster waiting to happen and proposed an international coalition under a United Nations mandate to stabilise Gaza.

Video Captures Moment A Palestinian Activist Is Shot By Israeli Settler
Video Captures Moment A Palestinian Activist Is Shot By Israeli Settler

NDTV

timean hour ago

  • NDTV

Video Captures Moment A Palestinian Activist Is Shot By Israeli Settler

New video footage appears to show the moment a Palestinian activist was killed as an Israeli settler fired toward him during a confrontation with unarmed Palestinians in the occupied West Bank last month. The video released Sunday by B'Tselem, an Israeli human rights group, shows Israeli settler Yinon Levi firing a gun toward the person filming. The footage cuts but the camera keeps rolling as the person moans in pain. B'Tselem says it obtained the video from the family of Awdah Hathaleen, 31, an activist, English teacher and father of three who was shot and killed on July 28, and who they said had filmed it. Levi, who is shown firing his gun twice in a video shot by another witness and obtained by The Associated Press, was briefly detained and then released from house arrest by an Israeli court, which cited lack of evidence. In video footage obtained by B'Tselem, filmed by al-Hathaleen himself, Levi is seen shooting at him. The footage is immediately cut off as the injured al-Hathaleen collapsed. Awdah al-Hathaleen, a human rights activist and resident of the village of Umm al-Kheir in the South… — B'Tselem בצלם بتسيلم (@btselem) August 10, 2025 The shooting occurred in Umm al-Khair, a village that has long weathered settler violence in an area profiled in the Oscar-winning film "No Other Land." Settler attacks on Palestinians have spiked since the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war, as have attacks by Palestinian militants. "Awdah's killing is another horrific example of how Palestinians, both in Gaza and in the West Bank, are currently living without any sort of protection, fully exposed to Israeli violence, while Israeli soldiers or settlers can kill them in broad daylight and enjoy full impunity while the world watches," said Sarit Michaeli, the international outreach director for B'Tselem. Levi was previously under US sanctions that were lifted by the Trump administration. Both videos appear to show the same confrontation between Levi and a group of Palestinians. The earlier video shows him firing two shots from a pistol but doesn't show where the bullets struck. Several witnesses had told the AP they saw Levi shoot Hathaleen. Avichai Hajbi, a lawyer representing Levi, told the AP that Levi acted in self-defense - without specifying what his actions were. Hajbi pointed to a court's decision earlier this month that released Levi from house arrest, citing insufficient evidence. The judge said Levi did not pose a danger justifying continued house arrest, but barred him from contact with the villagers for a month. The Israeli police didn't immediately respond to a request for comment about whether they'd seen the videos. B'Tselem said Levi was with a crew that brought an excavator from a nearby settlement into Umm al-Khair. Residents, fearing it would cut the village's main water line, gathered on a dirt road to try and block its path, and at least one individual threw a stone at the vehicle's front window. Levi then confronted the crowd while waving a handgun. The new video shows Levi arguing heatedly with three men before firing the gun in the direction of the person filming. Hathaleen was standing at the village community center about 40 meters (130 feet) from the confrontation, said B'Tselem. The bullet hit him in the chest and he collapsed on the spot, it said. Eitan Peleg, a lawyer for Hathaleen's family, said they told him Hathaleen had shot the footage on his phone. He said the police asked him for the video, which they hadn't seen. Peleg said he's urging the district court to investigate Levi for more serious crimes. Levi helped establish a settler outpost near Umm al-Khair that anti-settlement activists say is a bastion for violent settlers who have displaced hundreds since the start of the war. Palestinians and rights groups have long accused Israeli authorities of turning a blind eye to settler violence. In a 2024 interview, Levi told the AP that he was protecting his own land and denied using violence. After Hathaleen's killing, Israel's army initially refused to return his body for burial unless conditions were met for the funeral, including limiting the number of people and the location. After an agreement was made with the police about a week later, Hathaleen's body was returned and buried. Hathaleen had written and spoken out against settler violence and had helped produce the Oscar-winning film. Supporters have erected murals in his honor in Rome, held vigils in New York and have held signs bearing his name at anti-war protests in Tel Aviv. (Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store