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

http://jasonjcampbell.org/uploads/Theories.pdf

Category:

Education

Tags:

• 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!! :-)

[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 :-)

[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.

[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?

[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.

[vivie211]

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

[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]

@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...