File spoon-archives/third-world-women.archive/third-world-women_1996/96-06-05.103, message 19


Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 22:56:48 -0800
From: soumitra-AT-ix.netcom.com (Soumitra Bose )
Subject: Re: An answer (was Re: work, women's status, etc )


You wrote: 
>
>
>
>On Sat, 16 Dec 1995, Soumitra Bose wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> The word hegemony as a category itself is of course a gramscian 
>> construct . I was referring to that rather than the leninist 
construct 
>> of considering hegemony as a military construct only. Now the matter 
of 
>> knowledge when it is considered in the dichotomised sense of 
>> possessing/non-possessing breeds hegemony and is thus 
>> institutionalised. I wanted to point only this , not anything 
relating 
>> to the mode of discourse ....
>
>I agree with your point regarding the news item, and the possession of 

>knowledge and it's relationship to institutions. What I was trying to 
>point out was the continuity between the oppressed and the oppressors. 

>Ashis Nandy has argued this point very cogently.
>
>
>> 
>Be that as it may let us for a change get out of the text-book 
exercise 
>> of trying to fit a growing phenomenon into one or the other model 
and 
>> then trying to understand it through deja-vu modes of analysis .What 
I 
>> meanst was clear if we try to keep aside the models . 
>> 
>Exactly. That is why I was unhappy with your reference to Foucault. 
>
>Shashwati
>
Could you sent me what Ashis Nandy said , well interesting ,, now I 
have to learn politics from Ashis Nandy ... OK , why don't I give it a 
try...


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005