Thoughts on postcolonial theory

Ah yes, postcolonial theory. Whenever I think of that phrase I then think of that cartoon with Britain having its tentacles all over the rest of the world. I am pretty sure that was drawn in the early 1900s. I also think of the dark history of Belgian's King leopard II and his "Congo Free State." As much as I absolutely hate that way of thinking, it is interesting to think of it as a literary criticism. There is even quite a bit of this tied into Wilder`s "Long Christmas dinner." Since it takes place over 90 years, there is plenty of settler vs non settler and industrialization making its way into other countries. Like the aluminum business in China for instance. I didn't actually realize there was so much colonization/settler vs non settler until our director explained it to us.

Intertwined

This week the two theories we went over go rather well together. In "Shooting an Elephant" the main character is so obsesed with how he portrays himself infront of the crowd that he lowers himself into doing something he doesn't want to do. All because he doesn't want to be ridiculed any more than he already has. All throughout history there are accounts of people living in places where they are the outlier to live with people who do not want them there. Most of it being because of colonization or to 'tame the uncultured' because they think they're better than everyone else. I think Race theory coincides with this really well because different races have been oppressed throughout time, causing discord among people. The lack of recognition towards people left behind is slowly growing smaller, and I do think it has improved, but we are still a long way off from being completely unbiased between races.

I gave up on a picture

A Worldly Perspective

A quote that stood out to me from "Situating Race" is that

"critical race theorists emphasize the ways in which racism is normalized in US culture, such that the principles of liberalism are not adequate to address its distortions. In particular, critical race theorists question the view that color-blind or 'formal' conceptions of equality can actually remedy the effects of a pervasive and deeply rooted social racism" (Rivkin and Ryan, 5).

The majority of the information presented and studied from the articles on race theory have pursued perspectives of race from the US. However, what do you think race theory means to those in other countries, or what thier perspective on race would be? Does it differ from our social concept of race, or are their mostly similarities? How do you know?

Countries

http://digital.vpr.net/post/why-world-split-countries#stream/0  

In addition, a quote that also caught my attention is from "The Social Construction of Race," where Lopez states that "greater genetic variation exists within the populations typically labeled Black and White than between these populations" (10). Does this mean that different groups further box themselves into separate categories within the overarching group they identify with? Are there any examples you know of where this concept exists? 

♫ Don't wanna rule the world, just wanna run my life ♫

(I couldn't get Janet Jackson's Control out of my head while writing this, sorry for long title.)
((the worst part is it's not even the Janet Jackson version in my head, it's the Glee version.)

 From Culler, the quote/question that stood out to me most was "The question of the subject is 'what am "I"?' Am I made what I am by circumstances? What is the relation between the individuality of the individual and my identity as member of a group? And to what extent is the 'I' that I am, the 'subject', an agent who makes choices rather than has choices imposed on him or her?"

This quote immediately made me think of the little exercise we did in class where we wrote down things that we are. The part of this quote that caught my attention the most was the last part, about how many decisions we make on our own rather than have decisions forced on us. My personal opinion is that we give ourselves the illusion of being in control most of the time, that's what we want to think, but how in control are we actually of our own choices and, in turn, our identities?

Me being fine and totally in control of my life

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/140844/air-pollution-doesnt-kill-people-revelations-conservative-political-action-conference

The Center Within Us

      I think this quote by Culler works to describe both the issues and questions Postcolonial Theory and Critical Race Theory seek to answer and change: "If the possibilities of thought and action are determined by a series of systems which the subject does not control or even understand, then the subject is 'decentred' in the sense that it is not a source of center to which one refers to explain events" (110).
      So, how do these theories' focus on identity re-center a person/group/culture, both as a part of it but separate in its own right? Culler mentions how other theories like Psychoanalytic Criticism have reduced the core of a person to desires and circumstances, leaving the individual just a result of these parts (race, gender, sexuality, etc.), important only to showcase these things. How do these theories differ from this whittling down of center? Especially when its focus relies on these uncontrollable circumstances and society's conceptions and reactions to it?

https://www.fizzletop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/center-universe-696x392.jpg
Also:

I couldn't help but be reminded of "Angels with Dirty Faces", where the main character, Rocky Sullivan, becomes a target/representation of his kind, the gangster. A major theme throughout is that, had he been able to run faster at a pivotal moment, he wouldn't have turned out as a criminal. So, his identity, both of where he lives and the life he leads, becomes secondhand to the circumstances that led to his 'gangsterdom'.

https://m00ch.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/angelswithdirtyfaces-18.jpg 

Representation and Production from Culler

While reading Culler’s chapter on Race theory and writing a paper analyzing a story through the lens of both Post Colonialism and Race theory, I have come across an interesting quote. “Does discourse represent identities that already exist, or does it produce them?” What is true representation and what is the creation of a queer, race, or ability diverse character/story for the sake of fanfare? What is the line between equal true representation, and the act of writing in “hollow” diverse characters for the sake of diversity? Should these characters face adversity or be presented without it? If these characters are always written with struggles of adversity do we as a society perpetuate the oppression that they feel as a group? What is a piece of text that seems to have a diverse character without any real “characterization”.

 

Pictured: Something someone that says they "just don't see color" speaking on diversity

(Source: https://media1.giphy.com/media/3ogsjUeIUkMzM5qIta/giphy.gif)

Quotes & Questions post info

What makes certain lines from a text jump off the page and fill you with interest and curiosity? Why do some passages carry more meaning and significance than others?

For example, Roland Barthes tells us:

The modern writer (scriptor) is born simultaneously with his text; he is in no way supplied with a being which precedes or transcends his writing, he is in no way the subject of which his book is the predicate; there is no other time than that of the utterance, and every text is eternally written here and now.
― Roland Barthes, The Death of the Author

This idea, that there is no Great and Powerful Author behind every text that we read, that the writer of a text has no special authority (see how the word author works there?) over our reading of that text, was a little mind-blowing when Barthes first proposed it. But it's an awesome, liberating idea - one that acknowledges our power and freedom as readers to not just interpret but also create a text as we read and understand it. In short: there's a lot to discuss about this passage, isn't there?

Book and tablet photo by Engin_Akyurt on Pixabay.com

On the Fridays that you don't have paragraphs due, we'll have what I call Quotes and Questions. Your responsibility will be to post a quotation that seems to merit in-depth discussion OR a question that you think we all need to consider about our recent readings - one that will enrich our thinking or help us consider the texts we've discussed in a useful way.

As with the paragraphs, we will both post them here and read them aloud in class.

You are required to give your post two labels 1) the name of the theory for the day (they are listed below in my labels on this post), and 2) Quotes & Questions. If you are posting a quotation, you must give a correct citation for it (line numbers for poetry; page numbers for prose). You do not have to post anything other than your quote or question - no elaboration is required here unless you choose to offer some.

Although you are not required to post an image in your Quotes & Questions posts, you are highly encouraged to include one that illustrates the idea expressed (if you do, please be sure to credit the image source, as in your paragraph posts).