Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 13:37:58 +0000
Subject: Re: Response to Styles post


   I'm surpries at the level of vituperation in Tina Faulk's response to
  Cath Styles comments. First off, to denegrate her intervention as
  parochial misunderstands the complexity of postcolonial -- and for that
  matter colonial -- process. The global flows that produce the postcolonial
  experience are played out in the local. The local impacts on the global.
  Indeed, it is increasingly questionable whether such a division is useful
  in our postmodern world. There seemed to be a further assumption in Tina's
  comment, that thewre is some area of discussion that is somehow more
  'universal' than another. Such a claim, commen to modernity, has been
  unpacked many times now as a hegemonic claim by a dominant group seeking to
  disguise its speaking voice. 
     To say that Howard's opinion is his own is questionable these days when
  there has been such an erosion of the distinction between the public and
  private spheres. Moreover, in this particular instance Howard was clearly
  making a public statement. It is a good point to note that it was in the
  rhetorical form of an opinion, it is, however, to fall into the trap laid
  to think that it actually was an opinion and therefore can not be commented
  on.
     A final point. Postcolonial practice takes place in everyday life. Sport,
  and in this case cricket, is one very important place where this is played
  out. Moreover, sport is central aspect of the Australian cultural
  imaginary. This is evident in the number of sporting metaphors used in
  politics in Aus for example. Historically, cricket has been one of the prime
  sites where Australia's relations with Britain/England have been
  expressed. The politics of cricket history in Australia are also important
  here. For example, it is not general public knowledge that the first
  'Australian' team to play a series of cricket matches in England was 
  Aboriginal. This bears importantly on the point that Cath made. More
  generally, the patterns of who plays what sport are imbricated with the
  patterns of colonial and postcolonial relations. Aside from cricket one 
  might evidence the Japanese playing of baseball. The Sri Lankans are well
  aware of the colonial/postcolonial processes involved here, it would 
  seem. The Australian cricketers on the present tour of that country have
  been nicknamed 'imperialist running dogs'! 
       Jon                                                     (Stratton)


     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---