Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 06:58:20 -0500 (EST)
From: 00acking-AT-bsuvc.bsu.edu
Subject: Re: A Quick Genealogy of the World


Dear Leong Yew,

Nice shot. Raises interesting problems. But better to go literature than a
dictionary. Consider Andrew Marvell's 'To his Coy Mistress' probably
written in the 1640s and containing most of your meanings, from the
Chrisitian notion of world and time beginning with the creation
(contrasted to eternity) and 'international' (Peru, Ganges). So all these
meanings would have been available then. But then this is the period oc
colonization, religious groups fleeing to and  colonizing the new world
(Marvell's Bermudas), international trade and battles over international
trade routes. Marvell's patrons and friends would havce been
involved in such expansionism, think of Cromwell's role in Ireland
or his battles against the Dutch or the flight of the Independt
churches to the New World, etc.

So your question raises many issues, and in my mind becomes linked with
one I mentioned earlier about the relationship of Swift and Gullivers
Travels to Poco studies.

A couple of further points. The basic assumption has usually been that
poco
studies represent a rupture, a new paradign, etc. But that is unlikely as
too often they are constructed as answering back Europe, as anti-colonial,
even the post- suggests a continuity. [More horn blowing, but my New in
New Literatures might be said to avodi that]. The way one keeps going
back, responding to 19th century novels, the Tempests, etc, shows there is
no reputure. Basically poco studies are constructed within the discourses
of the Western academy, and that is why most of us are on this list, as
teachers, critics, students. It is not even a good hybrid, there are no
strong elements of other cultural practises involved. For example, if I
study music or do ethnomusicology I use the vocabulary and try to use the
concepts of society I study. In a field like literatgure (my own) we never
do that and attempts to do so haven't worked. I doubt that things are
different in yhour field.

Then there is this curious assumption that the West, especially the
modern West, is alone in imperializing, in univeralizing. Obviously that
is not true, every group 'orientalizes', sees itself as 'the human', its
'world' as the world, its faith as 'the faith'. This is not just a
question of guilt, who has done wrong, but of trying to see history
objectively. If one does not start with assumptions about what 'world'
meant in terms of poco history and begins with the texts themselves one
might come to diferent or more interesting conclusions. It seems obvious
that most of the 'the world' was in contact through trade throughout most
history and that the hybridity, cross-culturatization, etc., we now see as
important was always there. So we need that kind of
international-incultural history, but we also need to look at English
history and litearure again, not like Saidists trying to find complicity
in imperialism, but to se what kind of complexities are really there in
something like 'To his Coy Mistress, 'Bermudas', 'Othello'.

This must come as a shock, a long-winded program of what is to be done,
but obviously I have been thinking about these issues and your interesting
question set me off, especially as the methodological issues were
implicit.

Good luck and best wishes, Bruce King, Bruce

\  \  ' ' \ ' \ '   
  '  '   '   ' ' '
   "    "  ' "  ' "
             
  \U/   \U/  \U/
   |     |    |*


Bruce and Adele King
221 North Alden Road; Muncie, IN 47304, USA
Phone: 765-282-3569; Fax: 765-285-5877

From=20May 10-July 15: King,  chez Rossetto,
11 rue des Tournelles
75004 Paris. Tel: 33-1-48-04-88-60

On Thu, 17 Apr 1997, Leong Yew wrote:

>
> Hello all,
>
> While looking up the Shorter Oxford's entry on the "world" this morning, I came across something interesting which might be of interest to this discussion group. This refers particularly to the word's linkage to concepts and ideas associated with Western philosophy. In postcolonial studies, I can see a number of interesting lines of enquiry emerging from this, not least the formation of colonial subjectivity and consciousness over the meaning of the world.
>
> I've penned some notes about my reading of the dictionary entry (which appear below) and wonder how members of this forum would see postcolonial theory (especially the Bill Ashcroft ala Salman Rushdie's idea of "writing back to the centre") as conveying alternate meanings of the "world" that have been omitted from  English language dictionaries, and in particular, the OED.
>
> ===========
>
> A QUICK GENEALOGY OF THE WORLD
>
> The latest edition of the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary provides three clusters of meanings over its entry on "world." The first is metaphysical, linking the concept to Western philosophies on ontology; the second is empiricist, highlighting the world's physical essence; and the third is socio-philosophical, connoting the world as a societal agglomeration. While the Shorter Oxford serves to authorize the use of the word, the "world" and to control its meanings from proliferating, I couldn't help but notice the historicity of the dictionary entry. By ordering its entry in such a manner, the dictionary unconsciously exposes the history of subjectivity - tying the formation of world-views to changing social formations. For example, the shift from medieval to the modern, from the insularity of the European world to its expansion through colonialism and imperialism.
>
> While the Shorter Oxford's authority in pegging meanings to certain historical periods may be disputed, the Western-centred definitions of the "world" bear a number of consequences on postcolonial studies; in particular how the subject's imagination has been colonized and how certain meanings of the world have been made universal and total. One problem, in this regard, is an "obsolete" use of the word. According to the dictionary, between 1149 and the late 17th century, the world could have been understood as "An age or period in human existence or history." I have italicized the words, "age," "period," and "history" because they exemplify a certain standpoint linked to the end of the middle ages and the beginning of modernity. Johannes Fabian calls this the movement from Sacred (or Christian) time into secular time. Yet why its use should have started in "Old English" and ended in the late 17th century remains a mystery to me. After all, isn't the tendency to historicize or periodize human affairs a trade mark of  modernity?
>
> Here then is a brief reorganization of the entry in the Shorter Oxford:
>
> I.=09Metaphysical - Western Philosophies of Ontology
> Basic definition: "Human existence"
>
> 1. OLD ENGLISH (after 1149): "(Earthly) human existence; this present life"; "Earthly human pursuits and interests; secular or lay (as opposed to religious or clerical) life, pursuits or interests, temporal or mundane affairs."
>
> 2. MIDDLE ENGLISH (after the period 1150-1349): "A state of (present or future) existence"
>
> 3. OLD ENGLISH until Late 17th C: (obsolete) "An age or period in human existence or history." Note the use of  "age," "period" or "history."
>
> 4. Mid 16th C: "[Specifically] an age or period of human history identified by or associated with particular cultural, intellectual, or economic characteristics or conditions. Now rare or [obsolete except] as passing into sense [11]." Particularly, note a more pluralist use of the term, by bringing in diversity in culture, intellectualism and economics.
>
>
> II.=09The Empirical World
> Basic sense: "The earth; a natural environment or system."
>
> 5. OLD ENGLISH: "The earth and everything on it; the globe; the human environment; [collectively] the countries on earth."
>
> 6. MIDDLE ENGLISH: "The (material) universe, the cosmos; creation as a whole; everything that exists. Also?, any part of the universe considered as an entity." This should belong in the above category. The understanding of the world as [divinely] created rather than formed establishes its sacred use.
>
> 7. Mid 16th C: "A section or part of the earth, [especially] as a place of inhabitation or settlement."
>
> 8. Late 17th C: "A particular realm of natural or created things; [especially] the animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms"; "any group or system of [usually similar] things or heings considered as constituting a unity."
>
> 9. Early 18th C: "A planet or other celestial body, [especially] one viewed as inhabited."
>
>
> III.=09Socio-philosophical
> Basic Sense: "People, society"
>
> 10. OLD ENGLISH: "The human race; humankind as a whole; human society."
>
> 11. LATE MIDDLE ENGLISH (after the period 1350-1469): "Human society considered [with reference] to its activities, occupations, problems, etc. Later also, the practices, customs, or social hierarchy of one's society; the concerns of society at large." * "[Usually with specified word] a particular part or section of the earth's inhabitants or of (a) human society, [especially with reference] to the place or time of their existence, or to their status, interests, or pursuits."
>
> 12. Mid 16th C: "Society at large, the public; public opinion."
>
>
> One important thing to note here is that while the clusters of meaning do not flow seamlessly into each other time-wise, how certain meanings have come to prevail over others is indicative of subjectivity. Since my personal interest is on the conflation of the "international" realm with the "world," I was surprised to have discovered no mention of "international" in the dictionary entry. To a certain extent, this was appeased, especially by the ambiguity posed by meanings 4, 5 and 11. Even though these meanings originated during the period of Old English, their continued use hides the discursiveness of "international" and naturalizes it within the context of the 12th century. In other words, the dictionary does not have to define the world as "international" in order for it to be understood as such.
>
> ====
>
> Leong Yew
> Department of Politics
> University of Adelaide
> Adelaide, SA 5005
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>      --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>



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