38. Theories Lecture: Gayatri Spivak's "Can the Subaltern Speak?"

[photosfromjay]

Good explanation of a undergraduate level liberal democratic interpretation of Spivak's essay... too bad it completely misses the point! The whole exercise in deconstruction and her attention to language (i.e. to the translation of Marx's German original) is that there is a huge difference between not being able to speak and the inability to make oneself heard. THAT was the point... not some lame politically correct anthropological practice of asking the sati what she wanted to do! Gag!

[drjasonjcampbell]

@photosfromjay ...HAHA...I suck!! :-)

[photosfromjay]

@drjasonjcampbell No... you don't suck! Your presentation is a particularly US American way of reading Spivak's essay. This binary of the "british colonizer" and "the indigenous" you are setting up doesn't exist in Spivak's essay. The idea of "indigeneity" is a term related to settler colonialism (of the Americas and Australia); it doesn't obtain in Asia. The essay is not about essentialism, nor is it about the lack of consultation, and certainly not about dislocated identity.

[photosfromjay]

@drjasonjcampbell My point is that you're trying to push Spivak into a mode of identity politics that is unfair. Her critique of philosophical post-representationalism (i.e. her argument against Foucault) is the more interesting theme to be pursued. In stead of reading Spivak as a philosopher, the peculiarly US obsession with "giving voice" and "speaking" makes her sound like a whiny political activist demanding to have a say. Why is it hard for us to engage the woman's philosophical work?

[vivie211]

correction: an act of "moral love" is what Spivak suggests, not just a moral act!

[vivie211]

Thank you very much for this very good introduction! In her Critique, Spivak she states that the subaltern woman--eg Bhubaneswari--does try to "speak", but there was no one to hear in fact. So, she urges her readers to a kind of ethical "responsibility", a "moral act" that involves also, as you hinted, "unlearning one's privilege as one's loss" and thus being alble to here other voices. There are some readings that change your life, Spivak was certainly on of them for me! Thanks again!

[drjasonjcampbell]

@vivie211 ...Spivak changed my life as well. She is in a league of her own :-)

[lugasue]

What a good explanation!!!!!!!!

Thanks for that.

Luis from sweden

[VictoriaPakeahna]

Also probably worth noting the example of the young girl who self-immolates, and how her "voice" has been acquired through that action.

[lordlevo]

P.S. I love hip hop. In the UK we got a rapper called Akala. His Fire in the Booth:

and his SBTV F64:

are both incredible and real. I wonder what he and Spivak would have to say about each other... hmmm.. haha :) thanks once again for a great lecture

[lordlevo]

Great lecture, from the UK. I thought I understood clearly, but I have a question. What is to stop the woman from speaking up herself and simply demanding to be heard? Does Spivak not accomadate for that, or is it to use the Wal-Mart analogy, that as a individual the woman has no power. Which makes me think, what is the difference between the individual woman, or the individual hegemonistic man? Legitimisation?

[drjasonjcampbell]

@lordlevo good point. The subaltern isn't a reserved position. Any group, containing any demographic identifiers could potentially be subaltern. spivak would acknowledge that.

[lordlevo]

@drjasonjcampbell ok many thanks. is there somewhere you could reference me where i could get more info on the opposing side of the argument, with thats books or videos? i know she refutes Foucault and Deleuze...

[z00z00b]

It's exciting to see how much more accessible education/thoughts/ideas are becoming through the internet. Thanks so much for taking the time to do this.

[drjasonjcampbell]

@z00z00b no problem. thanks for watching.

[nhungvn07]

Thank you so much.

[gkh2606]

Thank you so much for this! I'm an undergraduate and I've been forced to read Spivak, hahaha. Wished that I had seen this when I was doing Spivak's reading response paper.

[dthai90]

Thank you, this has been a great help. Also easy on the eyes ;)

[lionelyau]

‎A clear explanation of how Spivak concludes that the subaltern cannot speak: "The hegemonic discourse, the British colonial masters, and the indigenous population has all essentialize the voice of the woman [who commits or could potentially commits sati] and no one has allowed her to speck for herself, more so ... there is no structure in which she would has the ability to speak for herself."

[JavierPabon]

Thanks Dr. Campbell, a very useful companion for a great text.

[AmeenCorner]

one of the few people worth watching on youtube, thank you

[drjasonjcampbell]

@AmeenCorner Thanks for watching. :-)