Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 15:17:49 -0500 (EST) From: Lisa McNee <lm23-AT-qsilver.queensu.ca> Subject: Re: poco loco, or enemies and/are us Pradeep--Thanks for clarifying issues. In rereading your original posting, I find that you warn us that we need to be alert! Best, Lisa On Fri, 3 Apr 1998, Pradeep A. Dhillon wrote: > I thought I was direct. But, this is important so I will take another > shot. First, I am not sure why you think I am trying to delink ideology > and postcoloniality. Second, (if I take your questions to be suggestions > framed as questions) ofcourse, we need to precisely tease out linkages, > events and contexts with regards issues of "purity" and "hybridity." > However, none of this weakens the problem with thinking hard about the use > of "hybridity." They are "hybrid", now think about this in biological > terms, "we" are not. In raising this issue I am not depoliticizing the > term "hybridity"; to the contrary I am trying to point out how politically > loaded this term is. I have not forgotten Foucault; I have his reminders > firmly in mind as I write this. > > I resist this term. "Creolization" may be another kettle of fish > altogether, but I am quite sure that an examination of that term will raise > similar sorts of concerns. > > > Pradeep. > > > >Thanks Pradeep. However, I would like to turn your question around--of > >course, everyone is hybridized/creolized/impure, and the notion of purity > >is as myth that has been used to colonize and dominate. However, when does > >it become a way of masking privilege? When do we lose sight of the > >differences between the experiences of creolization under colonization > >that the colonizer has gained, and those that are part of the experiences > >of the colonized? Why might certain people find it useful to ignore or > >try to erase these differences? > > > >This is not to re-introduce the "us/them" dichotomy that > >I criticized in another posting, but to question the notion that we can > >depoliticize hybridity. And, I would add, hybridity itself seems to imply > >a binary system (thesis/antithesis=synthesis (hybrid), while creolization > >does not.In other words, I am not so sure that we can separate the terms > >and discuss them in an apolitical manner. It would be helpful to me if you > >could give me a more direct approach, or an example, of how we can > >usefully delink ideology and postcolonial studies. Personally, I agree > >with an earlier posting that we cannot forget Foucault... > > > >Best, Lisa > > > >On Fri, 3 Apr 1998, Pradeep Dhillon wrote: > > > >> Quick thought on "hybridity" (I have not yet read the texts mentioned): > >> "Hybridity" is a naturalizing term. If we accept its usage in descriptions > >> of the postcolonial condition-- I for one would like to resist it-- then we > >> do need to address the wider question being discussed here: Who is not > >> naturalized? Privilege masks the mestizo nature of all. In other words, > >> who is "pure"? > >> > >> To use the terms politically, it seems to me, is a separate issue and one > >> we can make a clear decision on. Even if we are against the division > >> between "is" and "ought", it seems to me "postcoloniality" might requre a > >> generally alert attitude with regards the dangers of running one into the > >> other. Not to do so is to reproduce the very intellectual practices we > >> wish to question. "Hybridity" is a term that seems to require such a > >> consideration. > >> > >> Best, > >> Pradeep. > >> > >> > >> > >> >At 09:32 PM 4/2/98 -0500, you wrote: > >> >>eg. literary studies can look at anything by considering it as text > >> >> geography can look at anything by considering it spatially > >> >> history can look at anything by considering it temporally > >> >> feminism can look at anything by considering it as gender > >> >> "postcolonialism" can look at anything by considering it in terms of > >> >>colonization. > >> > > >> >I wonder about the sophistication and the applicability of this formuation. > >> >Take the feminist/feminism line, since Terry seems quite fond of using > >> >feminist studies as an example. I don't know that what femist studies > >> >represents can be very well captured by "looking at anything by considering > >> >it as gender." I have yet to meet a feminist studies scholar that thinks > >> >that EVERYTHING is gender. Many things are not gender and the scholars I've > >> >known who would characterize their area of research as feminist studies > >> >haven't had a problem recognizing this. > >> > > >> >>Having said all that, I think the political commitment of the field is not > >> >>inherent to the approach but reflects the people who decide to pursue it, > >> >>for obvious historical reasons. The same is true of feminism, of gay > >> >>studies, and the other fields which began as the study of the relationship > >> >>between "minority" cultures and established hegemony. > >> > > >> >I mostly agree with this, but would also argue that the political commitment > >> >is expressed in the very term post_colonial_, which doesn't work that well > >> >historically (lots of people have argued this fairly well, but briefly put, > >> >neo-colonialism still rules in many places), and covers far to many > >> >societies (as it is practiced) to attend to much cultural specificity. > >> >Perhaps the fact that I'm a Caribbeanist in an interdisciplinary program who > >> >never sees poco that does much of anything with one of the central > >> >historical, social, and cultural phenomenon of the Caribbean, the Plantation > >> >complex and slavery, makes me more keenly aware of the limits of the > >> >discipline. > >> > > >> >But I've go to run and do some teaching, so I'll have to continue later. > >> > > >> >Keith > >> > > >> >____________________________________________________ > >> > > >> >Keith Alan Sprouse e-mail: kas3f-AT-virginia.edu > >> >New World Studies office: 804.924.4626 > >> >Department of French fax: 804.924.7157 > >> >University of Virginia home: 804.243.4306 > >> >Charlottesville, VA 22903 http://www.people.virginia.edu/~kas3f > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- > >> > >> > >> Pradeep A. Dhillon (Assistant Professor) > >> Dept. of Education Policy Studies, (Philosophy Division) > >> Room 377, 1610 S. Sixth Street, Champaign, IL 61821 > >> 217-356-0363 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- > >> > > > > > > > > --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- > > > > > > > --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- > --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005