scholarly journals Anti-Colonial Discourse in Lesia Ukrainka’s Dramas

Author(s):  
Vira Ageyeva
Keyword(s):  
Metahumaniora ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 411
Author(s):  
Abu Bakar Ramadhan Muhamad

AbstrakHegemoni kolonialisme dalam budaya poskolonial merupakan alasan penelitian inikemudian mengkaji wacana kolonial dalam novel Max Havellar (MH) khususnya dampakditimbulkannya. Dampak dimaksud adalah posisi keberpihakan pemikiran tersirat darikarya tersebut. Hasil pembahasan menunjukkan, secara temporal maupun permanen MHmenyuarakan ketidakadilan dalam kondisi-kondisi kolonial menyangkut penindasan sangpenjajah terhadap terjajah. Hanya saja, upaya mengatasnamakan atau mewakili suarakaum terjajah terbukti mengimplikasikan ciri ideologis statis kerangka kolonialisme(orientalisme); yakni cara pandang Eropasentris, di mana “Barat” sebagai self adalah superior,dan “Timur” sebagai other adalah inferior. Dalam konteks poskolonialisme, MH dengan sifatkritisnya yang berupaya “menyuarakan” nasib pribumi terjajah, justru menampilkan stigmapenguatan kolonialitas itu sendiri secara hegemonik. Artinya, “menyuarakan” nasib pribumidimaknai sebagai keberpihankan kolonial yang kontradiktif, di mana stigma penguatankolonialitas justru lebih terasa, ujung-ujungnya melanggengkan hegemoni kolonial. Tidakmembela yang terjajah, tetapi memperhalus cara kerja mesin kolonial.AbstractThe hegemony of colonialism in the culture of postcolonial society is the reason this studythen examines the colonial discourse in the novel Max Havellar (MH) in particular the impactit brings. The impact in question is the implied position of thought in the work. The resultsof the discussion show that, temporarily or permanently, MH voiced injustice in the colonialconditions regarding the oppression of the colonist against the colonized. However, the effort toname or represent the voice of the colonized has proven to imply a static ideological characterin the framework of colonialism (orientalism); ie Eropacentric point of view, in which “West” asself is superior, and “East” as the other is the inferior. In the context of postcolonialism, MH withits critical nature that seeks to “voice” the fate of the colonized natives, actually presents thestigma of strengthening coloniality itself hegemonicly. That is, “voicing” the fate of the pribumiis interpreted as a contradictory colonial flare, where the stigma of strengthening colonialityis more pronounced, which ultimately perpetuates the hegemony of colonialism. No longerdefending the colonized, but refining the workings of the colonial machinery.


The colonization policies of Ancient Rome followed a range of legal arrangements concerning property distribution and state formation, documented in fragmented textual and epigraphic sources. Once antiquarian scholars rediscovered and scrutinized these sources in the Renaissance, their analysis of the Roman colonial model formed the intellectual background for modern visions of empire. What does it mean to exercise power at and over distance? This book foregrounds the pioneering contribution to this debate of the great Italian Renaissance scholar Carlo Sigonio (1522/3–84). His comprehensive legal interpretation of Roman society and Roman colonization, which for more than two centuries remained the leading account of Roman history, has been of immense (but long disregarded) significance for the modern understanding of Roman colonial practices and of the legal organization and implications of empire. Bringing together experts on Roman history, the history of classical scholarship, and the history of international law, this book analyses the context, making, and impact of Sigonio’s reconstruction of the Roman colonial model. It shows how his legal interpretation of Roman colonization originated and how it informed the development of legal colonial discourse, from visions of imperial reform and colonial independence in the nascent United States of America, to Enlightenment accounts of property distribution, culminating in a specific juridical strand in twentieth-century Roman historiography. Through a detailed analysis of scholarly and political visions of Roman colonization from the Renaissance until today, this book shows the enduring relevance of legal interpretations of the Roman colonial model for modern experiences of empire.


2009 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 563-589 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raf Gelders

In the aftermath of Edward Said's Orientalism (1978), European representations of Eastern cultures have returned to preoccupy the Western academy. Much of this work reiterates the point that nineteenth-century Orientalist scholarship was a corpus of knowledge that was implicated in and reinforced colonial state formation in India. The pivotal role of native informants in the production of colonial discourse and its subsequent use in servicing the material adjuncts of the colonial state notwithstanding, there has been some recognition in South Asian scholarship of the moot point that the colonial constructs themselves built upon an existing, precolonial European discourse on India and its indigenous culture. However, there is as yet little scholarly consensus or indeed literature on the core issues of how and when these edifices came to be formed, or the intellectual and cultural axes they drew from. This genealogy of colonial discourse is the subject of this essay. Its principal concerns are the formalization of a conceptual unit in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, called “Hinduism” today, and the larger reality of European culture and religion that shaped the contours of representation.


1995 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 168
Author(s):  
David Chioni Moore ◽  
Patrick Williams ◽  
Laura Chrisman ◽  
Bill Ashcroft ◽  
Gareth Griffiths ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document