Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2000 16:52:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: British colonialism


Hmm..been thinking to address this issue for a while, but have been a bit
reluctant. First, I do kind of agree that British colonialism might be
overemphasized within UNIVERSITITES (as will become clear, I don't know
whether the creature "poco studies" actually exists) because of the
hegemony of the English language. At the same time, however, I have a
rather simple explanation for why I study British colonialism: I am
located in an ENGLISH department.  One could ask an autobiographical
question about why I chose to study English literature and not, say,
Comparative Political Science.  One could also ask about the artifical
institutional distinctions between different disciplines--although the
reality of the job search and tenure requirements means that we have to
work within those confines even as we contest them (and to tell you the
truth--most English departments are quite traditional enough for us to
simply leave the study of English literature to those who want to focus on
the traditional canon).  However, I don't see why we have to adopt a
universalist approach here--sometimes, Eric, I get the feeling you are
saying if we don't study all empires and forms of colonialism at the same
time, we are going to run into a blind alley (and I think very few on the
list may identify themselves as "postcolonialists"--I think we all know
the problems with the term, and are using it more as a short-cut than
anything else). I think that the issues surrounding British colonialism
and English language and literature are quite difficult enough to get a
grasp on, thank you very much, and I think that expanding that study to
include not only European forms of colonialism but also Asian/African
would be to lead to rather thin scholarship or essentialist "mentalite" 
studies.  So rather than chastize "postcolonial studies" (whatever that
is) for overemphasizing English, couldn't we also ask why those who study
different areas and languages have (or have not been) been more receptive
to examinations of Empire, colonialism, etc. in their own fields?  And by
the way, although poco may be primarily English-focused (although I even
wonder about that...given that, as far as I know, poco is not housed in
its own department in very many institutions), it doesn't mean that
English departments have so accepted it that we can move to other
geographical/disciplinary areas. I'm still fighting with my department to
recognize that "English" literature from places other than Great Britain
and the US is not simply a fad that will soon disappear. I actually think
specialization is necessary, before so-called interdisciplinary work
(which often--and I'm not thinking of anybody here-- is out-of date,
watered-down work) can take place. Let's not try to conceptually dominate
all forms of intellectual scholarship like the (neo)colonialists try to
rule the globe.There's lots of diverse forms of empires and colonialism,
and I accept as given that any work I do in this field will only be a
partial (and differential) study....Joe F




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