From: Andrew_Spencer-AT-baylor.edu
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 13:58:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Not White, Not Quite?


Then how do you explain male authors that write about the plight of women?  Or
female authors that write about men?  To *truly* understand the motives and
emotions a member of a specific gender feels, don't you, by this definition,
have to be a member of said gender?  How can Achebe, I use him as I just
finished re-reading _Things Fall Apart_, write about what a mother feels for
her son from a male perspective?  According to this definition, if I read you
correctly, he can't, because he's not a woman, and hasn't "been there, done
that" so to speak.

Andrew

On Tue, 27 Jul 1999 10:22:58 +0000 bglncait-AT-uab.edu (Benjamin G.
Lanier-Nabors) wrote:

>	Sympathy is not enough; in fact, it perpetuates the dichotomy of one being
>able to condescend to the level of another--superior/inferior complex.  It
>is more akin to pity: i.e., "I pity(or My sympathies are with) you because
>the police used tear gas against you; I was aghast when I saw it on
>television."  Whether intentionally or not, the sympathizer is working from
>a privileged vantage in a culture or from a relatively safe distance
>physically or existentially.  Also, he or she might be motivated by pure
>emotion, but as one often sees, pure emotion and sentimentality are rarely
>long-lasting or strong motivations for confronting injustice.  Even though
>it may come from the outside, empathy implies a more lateral, or
>egalitarian, link:  "I empathize with you because Pinochet, de Galle,
>Reagan, Clinton, etc. took similar actions against us."
>	Therefore, I agree totally with your contention that "to critique from
>within still, in my opinion, requires insight that comes from personal
>sociohistorical experience that provides the affective base to make theory
>work."  Mere sympathy doesn't "cut the mustard," as it were.  Empathy
>implies your criteria for affective critique.
>
>Always yours respectfully,
>Ben
>bglncait-AT-uab.edu
>
>At 06:14 AM 7/27/99 -0700, you wrote:
>>>you just can't
>>>have sympathy to be a dehegemonizer.
>>Do you mean: sympathy just isn't enough....?
>>
>>to critique from within still, in my opinion, requires insight that comes
>>from personal sociohistorical experience that provies the affective base to
>>make theory work...
>>
>>such people are often currently considered "white" ....
>>lets face it Gramsci was "white" but he wasn't "quite right" enough and
>>penned that stuff in jail because he was "left"
>>the spaceo-racial metaphors are no coincidence because of the way space is
>>organized by "whiteness" and "rightness" which goes back to seating
>>arrangements and living arrangements on the land to indicate status....and
>>the very different perspectives they represent.....English confounds such
>>in a way that tends to obscure it where as other languages use markers
>>which retain it....its probably a product of language development of the
>>nation state and colonization....and the other the discourse that is
>>anti-hegemonic......
>>so we could possibly ask: what is the nature of the historical experience
>>of oppression that is the model for ones own anti-hegemonic
>>tendencies....and then how is that model sufficient or insufficient for
>>transferrance onto other situations...what are the limitations....this is
>>tough de-constructive slogging...not for the faint of heart....
>>
>>At 05:49 AM 7/27/99, you wrote:
>>>I think you mean empathize.  Also, there is a term which signifies a person
>>>who is part of the dominant culture but who critiques it from within for
>>>the purpose of ceasing hegemony and, thus, opening more space in the
>>>discourse for the silenced "subaltern."  This Spivakian term is
>>>"de-hegemonizer," and I think that she borrows the notion from Gramsci.
>>>However, the criteria for such a person are rather intense--you just can't
>>>have sympathy to be a dehegemonizer.
>>>
>>>Ben L.-N.
>>>
>>>
>>>At 05:07 PM 7/25/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Steinbeck and Joyce have not/could not meta themselves in their writing
>>>>>from that perspective....
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Why not?  Are you saying that only a colonized person can relate to the
>>>plight
>>>>of the colonized?  I have never suffered from the AIDS virus, yet I can
>>>>certainly sympathize with those who have.  I don't pretend to know the
>pain
>>>>they feel, but I can certainly attempt to offer my own interpretation of
>it
>>>>and thereby offer some sort of sympathetic mind set.
>>>>
>>>>Andrew
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     --- 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 ---



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