Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 22:15:23 -0500 (EST)
From: Sharmila Mukherjee <sm396-AT-is7.nyu.edu>
Subject: Re: Some More


Volker
By "American academia" I meant a certain kind of institutionalized space,
with its own institutional props and armatures. However, if you wish to
extend the geographic scope of what I said to cover the world I don't
mind. I can only speak from within the space of "American academia" about               
what the status of poco studies is. This is the only kind of academia that
I have had a direct and sustained encounter with. So I have a greater
understanding of how this machinery works. Also I was refering to "poco
studies" as a disipline--an academic discipline, 'cuz I guess my response
was to the "need" to "defend" teaching of poco lit in university
curriculum. So my focus was a lot narrower than you think. For me, it's
important to be "narrow" in this sense--I am currently working on a
dissertation so I have trained myself not to fly off into the wide world
of infinite implications of a certain problem or case. 
I noticed the cultural diversity of this list too--of course the diversity
is a given, after all the intention of this list is to invite diverse and
"marginalized" voices. I was focused on the "western world" anyways. I
myself had my schooling in India, a fromer "colony" if you will, and I
attended a premier liberal arts college there--we began with Cahucer and
ended with eliot. I believe poco studies is a bigger industry in America
and Britain Australia than it is in Indian academia. Anyhow I am veering
off a little bit here. My apologies.
Thanks
sharmila


On Mon, 8 Feb 1999, Volker Schmidt wrote:

> Sharmila,
> 
> _American_ academia?
> 
> I am aware that you are trying to make clear that your statement about the
> need to debate poco studies can in a way be placed in a certain culture - but
> _America_? As far as I noticed, there are lots of people on this list from all
> kinds of places - (former) colonies as well as (former) colonizers. Since it
> is probably not necessary to formulate why the formerly colonized should deal
> with poco studies - it's "their" literature, after all! -, might it make sense
> to limit your search for justfication to the so-called "Western world"? Or did
> you actually use the term "American" with an intention I didn't catch?
> 
> Just a qustion from a Eurocentrist,
> Volker
> 
> 
> 
> Sharmila Mukherjee wrote:
> 
> > I don't think it's a question of "defending" the need to teach poco lit in
> > Western academia. That kind of tone smacks a little bit of arrogance and
> > polemicism. The idea is to open up a rational inquiry into this area of
> > academic interest. If you read histories of literature you'll find that
> > even an intellectual as "maligned" (by posterity I suppose) as Matthew
> > Arnold has accused Western culture and literary tastes of being
> > "provincial" and "exclusive". I don't think poco people are the pioneers
> > in this respect, though their intent is more overtly political
> > (justifiedly so). I think it's really important to have this debate going:
> > the nature and function of poco studies in American academia.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>      --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
> 



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