Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 16:08:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: cyberdiva <radhik-AT-bgnet.bgsu.edu>
Subject: Re: Behula's Dream


>Soumitra,
>Well, it seems that my reply did not fully reach you. Yes, I know the
>``problems'' of essentialism and representation VERY WELL. I do
>have a great sympathy for the subaltern to speak, ect. Nonetheless,
>I also believe that being in a priviledged position such as mine
>I MUST have EMPATHY for those I represent and believe it or not,
>I did it with FULL EMPATHY otherwise I would have written a sociological/
>philosophical article not a POEM.

In all the translation and countertranslation I don't know if I
misunderstood Soumitra - but  I understand  Rinita  and I agree with her.

	The attempt to speak *with* is important.By saying "I cannot speak
for the `subaltern' because I am far too privileged to understand hir and
to interpret hir actions `correctly'" etc, we are in fact "disappearing"
(not just "silencing" ) the subaltern and risking the danger of not even
engaging with the problems and issues concerning the less privileged
(materially, culturally etc) of the world. This is the easy way out. When
we refuse to "speak for" we forget that "the subaltern"

(a label given by us Academics....and when we look for the definition, then
too we reach for those volumes on the shelves...thus continuing to subject
the less privileged to our more privileged *gaze* even as we suggest that
we cannot "speak" for "them"..)

has less access to the structures of power than we "middlemen" do and yet
`subaltern-ness' does not prevent the less privilege from being vulnerable
to structures of power and oppression.


Not representing is as bad and sometimes worse than misrepresentation. If
nothing, misrepresentation at least angers some people enough to move them
to some kind of action...sometimes...

I think it is up to us to examine both issues of misrepresentation and
non-representation *conscientiously* and acknowledging our accountability
to whoever it is we are attempting to re-present.





Radhika