What postcolonial theory doesn't say
Lazarus, Neil, 1953-. (2011) What postcolonial theory doesn't say. Race & Class, Vol.53 (No.1). pp. 3-27. ISSN 0306-3968Full text not available from this repository.
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0306396811406778
This article proposes that there is a category error at the heart of 'postcolonial studies' as an academic field. There has been a notable failure in the field to situate the historical projects of colonialism and imperialism in the determinant contexts of the inception, consolidation and development of the modern world system, whose developmental logic is that of combined and uneven development. Even on the best postcolonialist accounts, imperialism is typically situated in civilisational terms and refers to 'the West' rather than to capitalism. The social and temporal power identified through this means is a euphemism. The idea of 'the West', as it is deployed in postcolonial studies, inevitably issues in a dematerialised - and, for that matter, unhistorical - understanding of the forces powering the world system over the course of the past 500 years. This case is argued through reviewing work by Edward Said, Andre Gunder Frank, Benita Parry, Fredric Jameson, Susan Bassnett, V. Y. Mudimbe, Rey Chow and novelists such as Ngugi wa Thiong'o and Ousmane Sembene, inter alia.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Subjects:||J Political Science > JV Colonies and colonization. Emigration and immigration. International migration
P Language and Literature > PN Literature (General)
|Divisions:||Faculty of Arts > English and Comparative Literary Studies|
|Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):||Postcolonialism, Postcolonialism -- Study and teaching, Eurocentrism, Orientalism, Comparative literature|
|Journal or Publication Title:||Race & Class|
|Publisher:||Sage Publications Ltd.|
|Page Range:||pp. 3-27|
|Access rights to Published version:||Restricted or Subscription Access|
Actions (login required)