"The Horror": The Subject of Desire in Postcolonial Studies

1997 ◽  
Vol 99 (2) ◽  
pp. 383-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane M. Nelson
Buddhism ◽  
2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott A. Mitchell ◽  
Thomas Calobrisi

The study of Buddhism in the West is built on the pioneering work of a handful of scholars in the mid-1970s. These individuals were bold enough to take the subject seriously within a reluctant academic discipline. Charles Prebish’s American Buddhism (1979) set the standard and many terms of debate for the decades to come. The field has grown considerably, despite a perceived lack of methodological sophistication (see Numrich 2008, cited under General Overviews). Scholars in this area generally approach the subject from one of three directions: area studies (Buddhism in the United States, Buddhism in France, etc.), something of a reverse area studies (e.g., Japanese Buddhism in the United States, Theravada in Britain), or topical studies (e.g., ritual studies, immigration and ethnicity, Buddhism and psychology). The most wide-reaching debates in the field generally revolve around questions of identification or classification and can manifest themselves in a variety of ways. For example, some question what “the West” is meant to signify, placing their research squarely in the context of postcolonial studies, transnational studies, or the construction of Buddhist modernism (McMahan 2002, cited under Ch’an, Zen, Sŏn). Others, such as Tweed 2002 (cited under Matters of Identity), recognize the difficulty of defining what constitutes a Western Buddhist when Buddhist culture has so thoroughly permeated the broader cultural milieu. Serving as a backdrop to these issues has been the wide-ranging and perennial debate regarding the “two Buddhisms” typology that, over the years since Prebish coined the phrase in 1979, has been considered, reconsidered, rearticulated, expanded to three Buddhisms, and renamed in a variety of ways. This article reflects these methodological approaches and topical debates, and it includes relevant sources from postcolonial studies, ritual studies, and engaged Buddhism. As mentioned, “the West” as an area of study is itself somewhat contested. Is the West limited to areas dominated by European culture? Do we extend this category to Australia and Oceania? For the sake of brevity, this article focuses on North America and Europe.


2009 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nizar F. HERMES

<font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman"><span style="font-weight: normal">Up until the Crusades, it was <em>al-Rūm </em>who were universally seen by Arab writers and Arab poets in particular as the Other <em>par excellence</em>. Nowhere is this more conspicuous than in the sub-genre of <em>Al-Rūmiyyat </em>(poems about the Byzantines), namely as found in the <em>Rūmiyyat</em> of Abu Firas al-Hamdani(d.968), and in the poetic responses of al-Qaffal(d</span><span><strong>. </strong></span><span style="font-weight: normal">946</span><span style="font-weight: normal">) and Ibn Hazm(d.</span><span><strong> </strong></span><span style="font-weight: normal">1064</span><span style="font-weight: normal">) to what was described by several medieval Muslim chronicles as <em>Al-Qasida al-Arminiyya al-Malʿuna </em>(The Armenian Cursed Ode). By exploring the forgotten views of the Byzantines in medieval Arabic poetry, this article </span><span style="font-weight: normal">purports to demonstrate that </span><span style="font-weight: normal">contrary to the impression left after reading Edward Said&rsquo;s groundbreaking <em>Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient</em> (1978) and other postcolonial studies, Orientals have not existed solely to be &lsquo;orientalized&rsquo;. Perhaps even before this came to be so, they too had &lsquo;occidentalized&rsquo;</span><span><strong> </strong></span><span style="font-weight: normal">their Euro-Christian Other(s)</span><span><strong> </strong></span><span style="font-weight: normal">in a way that mirrored in reverse the subject/object relationship described as Orientalism.</span></font></font> <h1 style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; direction: ltr; unicode-bidi: embed; text-align: center" align="center"><strong></strong></h1><h1 style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; direction: ltr; unicode-bidi: embed; text-align: center" align="center"><strong></strong></h1>


Artifex Novus ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 88-103
Author(s):  
Maria Muszkowska

Abstrakt: W jakim stopniu funkcjonujące dzisiaj wyobrażenie „góralszczyzny” odpowiada tradycyjnej twórczości Podhala sprzed prób jej instytucjonalizacji? Tekst stanowi analizę metod konstruowania stylów regionalnego i narodowego, jakie realizowano w programach zakopiańskiej Szkoły Przemysłu Drzewnego z lat 1879–1939. Ówczesna twórczość rzeźbiarska wykładowców i wychowanków placówki oraz prowadzona w jej zakresie edukacja ukazują różnorodność prób instytucjonalizacji oraz instrumentalizacji ludowości. W literaturze przedmiotu brakuje jednak wyczerpującej analizy tych procesów. Celem tekstu jest prześledzenie (nad)użyć folkloru, do jakich dochodziło w obrębie uczelni. Analizie zostały poddane programy edukacji realizowane przez dyrektorów: Franciszka Neužila, Edgara Kovátsa, Stanisława Barabasza, Karola Stryjeńskiego oraz Adama Dobrodzickiego. Genealogia przywołanych koncepcji kształcenia ujawnia pewną ambiwalencję: nauczające wytwórczości ludowej programy były w rzeczywistości formami artystycznej ingerencji w regionalną kulturę Podhala, tworzonymi w większości przez „obcych” i dla „obcych”. Całość rozważań została zrealizowana z perspektywy studiów postkolonialnych oraz historii społeczno-politycznej. Summary: To what extent does the present image of Polish “highland culture” reflect the traditional art and craftsmanship of Podhale from before its institutionalization? This study offers an analysis of methods of creation of regional and national style, conducted at the School of Wood Industry in Zakopane from 1879 to 1939. Art and craft of students and professors and the educational methods demonstrate various attempts of institutionalization and instrumentalization of folklore. Literature on the subject lacks a thorough analysis of those processes. The object of this study was to trace the (ab)uses of folklore that happened on account of the School. Analyzed were the teaching programmes carried out by headmasters: Franciszek Neužil, Edgar Kováts, Stanisław Barabasz, Karol Stryjeński, and Adam Dobrodzicki. Those methods of education reveal an ambivalence: while officially teaching local folklore and craft, they were in fact a form of artistic interference with the regional culture of Podhale, by “strangers” and for “strangers”. The text was based on postcolonial studies and socio-political history.


2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 648-656
Author(s):  
Eleonora F. Shafranskaya ◽  
Tatyana V. Volokhova

The article deals with the problem of orientalism in literature, narrowed to the question of Russian orientalism and its Soviet derivation. The names of Nikolai Karazin and Andrey Platonov are mentioned among Russian literary Orientalists. The researchers identify the differences between Soviet Orientalism and the Orientalism of the XIX century. The analytical paradigm presented in the article outlines the prospects for the scientific study of Uzbek impressions. Salir-Gul (1933) by Sigismund Krzyzanowski and Pavel Zaltzman's novel Central Asia in the Middle Ages (1930s). For the first time, the novel The nomad (Kochevye) by the Russian writer of the twentieth century Leonid Solovyov written in 1929 and published in 1932 is analyzed in detail. Appeal to the folklore, ceremonial, and ritual life of the peoples of Central Asia becomes one of the main techniques of Leonid Solovyov's Oriental poetics. Solovyov's narrator is not a traditional orientalist observer of an alien, and therefore exotic, picture of the world. In Solovyov's poetics, the subject of the story merges with its object and represents a single whole: Russian literature spoke in the voice of a stranger. The material of the article corresponds to the intentions outlined in modern postcolonial studies.


Author(s):  
David Lloyd

Under Representation argues that the relation between the concepts of universality, freedom and humanity, and the racial order of the modern world is grounded in the founding texts of aesthetic philosophy. It challenges the absence of sustained thought about race in postcolonial studies and the lack of attention to aesthetics in critical race theory. Late Enlightenment discourse on aesthetic experience proposes a decisive account of the conditions of possibility for universal human subjecthood. The aesthetic forges a powerful racial regime of representation whose genealogy runs from enlightenment thinkers like Kant and Schiller to late modernist critics like Adorno and Benjamin. For aesthetic philosophy, representation is an activity that articulates the various spheres of human practice and theory, from the most fundamental acts of perception and reflection to the relation of the subject to the political, the economic, and the social. Representation regulates the distribution of racial identifications along a developmental trajectory: the racialized remain “under representation,” on the threshold of humanity and not yet capable of freedom and civility as aesthetic thought defines those attributes. To ignore the aesthetic is thus to overlook its continuing force in the formation of the racial and political structures down to the present. In its five chapters, Under Representation investigates the aesthetic foundations of modern political subjectivity; race and the sublime; the logic of assimilation and the sterotype; the subaltern critique of representation; and the place of magic and the primitive in modernist concepts of art, aura, and representation.


Author(s):  
Andreja Zevnik ◽  
Moran Mandelbaum

Critical and poststructural theories were introduced to global politics in early to mid-1990s. Since then there has been a proliferation of critical thinking in global politics with Derridean and Foucauldian approaches being the most popular. While psychoanalysis made its appearance and gained in popularity alongside other critical approaches to international politics in mid-1995, it has never become one of the “go to” theories. However, since 2010 psychoanalysis has been slowly reemerging on the global politics scene. If initially psychoanalytic approaches focused on a number of different theorists such as Castoriadis, Jung, Freud, and Lacan, the most recent thinking draws most significantly on the contribution of Lacanian psychoanalysis and thinkers such as Žižek, Butler, or Kristeva, all of whom heavily rely on Lacan. In postcolonial studies a distinct psychoanalytic account was also developed by Frantz Fanon. This contribution provides an overview of psychoanalytic approaches in the study of global politics with a focus on Lacanian psychoanalytic theory and its derivatives (Žižek, Fanon, Butler, and Kristeva). The reason for the selected focus is simple—this has been the most popular approach since the introduction of this thinking to the discipline. Lacanian theory revolves around concepts such as desire, jouissance (radical/excess enjoyment), fantasy, and drive, and is concerned with explaining the social bond—that is how the subject comes to existence and what social factors determine the subject’s existence in society. Its distinct contribution to the field of global politics is its focus on conscious and unconscious factors. In other words, it focuses on that which can be represented and that which remains unrepresented but still impacts the world. Affects, symptoms, or unconscious material impact the way the subject (and society) behaves. While the theory’s foundations are in psychiatry (and many critiques of psychoanalysis point that out vehemently), psychoanalysis is not a theory of the individual and neither is it concerned with the individual psyche. It is a theory of society; Lacan even characterized it as antiphilosophy. Psychoanalysis has appeared in a number of different contexts in global politics. The presented selection is not exhaustive though the aim was to include the most significant contributions the theory has made to the discipline’s different subfields. Key areas include the state, sovereignty, ontology, Political Subjectivity, law and foreign policy; and subdisciplines such as postcolonialism (the theories of Frantz Fanon), racism, affect, Radical Politics and Cultural Criticism, and development and aid, as well as trauma, populism and nationalism.


Author(s):  
Lucille Cairns

While its perspective is mainly literary, this book may be of interest to scholars and students in a wide variety of fields: colonial and postcolonial studies, conflict studies, French/Francophone studies, history, identity studies, Israeli studies, Jewish studies and political science. The subject of the book is rare within some of these disciplines: autobiographies, memoirs and novels by French-language Jewish writers...


Author(s):  
S.A. Sherstyukov

This article examines the narratives of Muslim women in Central Asia about their experience of their emancipation. Gender issues occupy an important place in postcolonial studies which have progressed rapidly in recent decades. Can the analytical language and approaches develop within the framework of postcolonial studies be applied to the study of Soviet history? This issue continues to be the subject of discussion among Russian and Western authors. However, it is obvious that when studying some aspects of the life of Soviet society, it is impossible to ignore the experience of studying colonial and postcolonial societies. The author, repeating the question posed by postcolonial researchers about whether the Subaltern can speak, tries to answer it by focusing on the narratives of Muslim women in Central Asia about “liberation”. These narratives were an important part of the Soviet discourse on the emancipation of women. Muslim women's gaining a voice (individual and collective) was seen as an important indicator of the success of policies aimed at "liberating" women. Analysis of Muslim women's narratives about "liberation" provided an opportunity to see the similarity of their structure, as well as how the structure of narratives changed in the 1930s.


PMLA ◽  
1935 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 1320-1327
Author(s):  
Colbert Searles

THE germ of that which follows came into being many years ago in the days of my youth as a university instructor and assistant professor. It was generated by the then quite outspoken attitude of colleagues in the “exact sciences”; the sciences of which the subject-matter can be exactly weighed and measured and the force of its movements mathematically demonstrated. They assured us that the study of languages and literature had little or nothing scientific about it because: “It had no domain of concrete fact in which to work.” Ergo, the scientific spirit was theirs by a stroke of “efficacious grace” as it were. Ours was at best only a kind of “sufficient grace,” pleasant and even necessary to have, but which could, by no means ensure a reception among the elected.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document