Whence and Whither Postcolonial Theory?
Whence and Whither Postcolonial Theory?
复制标题
后殖民理论从何而来、向何处去？
DOI：
10.1353/nlh.2012.0010
复制
发表时间：
2012
影响因子：
0.9
通讯作者：
Ella Shohat
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Stam;Ella Shohat
斯塔姆/肖哈特的文章探讨了后殖民批评的“从何而来”和“往何处去”。在与杨和查克拉瓦蒂论文的对话中，他们主张采用去中心化的多向叙事来促进思想的传播。将后殖民批评提出的问题追溯到“各个 1492 年代”——收复失地运动、宗教裁判所、驱逐法令和“新”世界的征服运动——他们认为后殖民理论有多个起点、地点和轨迹。欧洲与原住民之间的“相遇”在欧洲引发了一场有益的认识论危机。他们认为，“本土性”困扰了后殖民理论的一些基本公理，同时也开辟了政治可能性的新视野。通过提出有关文化、财产、权力、能源、财富和平等的探索性问题，土著人民及其非土著对话者挑战了现代主义、后现代主义和后殖民主义的假设。
The Stam/Shohat essay addresses the “whence” and the “whither” of postcolonial critique. In their dialogue with the Young and Chakravarty essays, they argue for a decentered multidirectional narrative for the circulation of ideas. Tracing the issues raised by postcolonial critique back to “the various 1492s”—the Reconquista, the Inquisition, the Edicts of Expulsion, and the Conquista of the “new” world—they argue that postcolonial theory has multiple beginnings, locations, and trajectories. The “encounter” between Europe and the indigene provoked a salutary epistemological crisis in Europe. “indigeneity,” they argue, troubles some of the basic axioms of postcolonial theory, while also opening up new horizons of the politically possible. By posing probing questions about culture, property, power, energy, wealth, and equality, indigenous people and their non-indigenous interlocutors have challenged the assumptions of modernism, postmodernism, and postcolonialism.