the third world academic in other places; or, the postcolonial intellectual revisited

8/9/2019 The Third World Academic in Other Places; Or, the Postcolonial Intellectual Revisited

1/22

The Third World Academic in Other Places; Or, the Postcolonial Intellectual RevisitedAuthor(s): Rajeswari Sunder RajanSource: Critical Inquiry, Vol. 23, No. 3, Front Lines/Border Posts (Spring, 1997), pp. 596-616Published by: The University of Chicago PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1344037

Accessed: 21/07/2010 19:34

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Critical

Inquiry.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1344037?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpresshttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpresshttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1344037?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/22

The Third WorldAcademic n OtherPlaces;or, the PostcolonialIntellectualRevisited

Rajeswari Sunder Rajan

In the contemporaryrisesof intellectual roductiont seems hatwe arecalled upon to attempta rethinking f the geographies f intellectuallabor, s several ecentdiscussionsf postcolonialheorymakeapparent.As a wayof entering nto the concerns ndicated ymy title(s), proposeto set up an exchangeamong texts and names. Generically ifferenttexts- the novel,the academic ssay, he critical nterview will be in-voked o this end, and therewillbe a mix of speciesnamesand propernames in the assembled ast of characters.Out of this colloquywillemerge, t is my hope, certainpreoccupationsnd equally ignificant e-pressionswithin he discourse.t willbe my contention hat t is not onlythe large events and overarchingonditions ethnic conflict,center-peripheryhierarchies,migrancy, lobalcapital butalso the lesserbutmore mmediatessues professionalewards nd penalties,nstitutionalsitesof pressures nd permissions,he disciplinaryspectsof "theory"thatgovern ntellectualabor.To identify iscriminationsmong he vari-ous practiceswithinpostcolonialwork,I turn to someof the conditions

An earlier version of this paper was presented at a GeorgeWashingtonUniversityEnglishdepartmentcolloquium.I am gratefulto the students n my graduateseminaronpostcolonial heoryfor the kindness hey showedto the visiting"ThirdWorldacademic"ntheir midst and their discussionswith me; these directed my thinkingon the issues raisedin this paper. My grateful and affectionate hanks also to Homi Bhabha for his patienceand for helpful editorial suggestions;You-me Park for her friendshipand criticism;DanMoshenberg or his carefuland collaborative eading of the draftversion and for permis-sion to borrowhis insights n the revised one; and Amit Rai forhis perceptivecomments,questions,and suggestions.Cntical Inuiry 23 (Spring1997)X)1997by The University f Chicago.0093-1896/97/2303-0009$01.00.ll rightsreserved.

596


3/22

CriticalInquiry SpXng1997 597operativen theacademytonameonlythe mostattenuatediteof the-ory)in Indiaas an exemplarynstance.And,finally, incea critiqueofthiskinddemandsa forfeitor stakebywayof the affirmativeesture,attempta conclusion,n effect,by suggestinghow our contemporarymoraldilemmasmay eedinto--a-ewntellectual iscipline-.

The firstof mytextsis ArifDirlik's ThePostcolonial ura,"whichexplores hephenomenon f postcolonialheoryat length, ocussing s-peciallyon the numberand influenceof intellectuals f Indianoriginteachingn prestigiousAmerican niversities. irlikmakes wosubstan-tialpoints n hisargument:ne, thattheconditionof the emergence fpostcolonialntellectualso prominences "globalapitalism';nd,two,thatpostcolonialitybegins"when"ThirdWorld ntellectuals avear-rivedin FirstWorldacademe" nd therebecome"pacesettersn cul-turalcriticism."Withthefirstproposition,heexplanation f conjuncture,ne canhaveno quarrel, utonlybecauseof itsstatusasa truism.Theoperationof globalcapitalism s causeis so pervasivehatit is only too easy toestablishhat ntellectualsn particularandof everypersuasion)reco-optedwithin tssystem.Whatwouldbe of considerablymore ntereststheidentificationfcategoriesf criticism rcriticswhocouldbeconsid-eredexempt romthe embrace f capitalism'seward ystem since n-deedthatappearsobe primarily hat s at stakehere.)I shall hereforeproceedwithout urtherado to the secondpoint,whichis clearly n-tended o be readas more hanan observation.Dirlik'speningargumentn theessay eflects notunusualnterestin thepostcolonialheoristasa component f postcolonialheory.ncom-monwithotherpostmodernisms,ostcolonialheory tselfrefuses heepistemologicalransparencyfthe theorizingubject.2nthistheoretical

1. ArifDirlik,"The PostcolonialAura:Third WorldCriticism n the Age of GlobalCapitalism," rzZacalnquiry20 (Winter1994):329;hereafterabbreviated Pk"2. The questionof whetherpostcolonial heorypartakesof postmodernismhasbeenteasedout withsubtletyand careby KwameAnthonyAppiah,"Is the Post- n Postmodern-ismthe Post- n Postcolonial?" rzttcalnquiry 17 (Winter1991):336-57.

Rajeswari underRajansa fellowat theNehruMemorialMuseumand Library,New Delhi,and visitingprofessorat GeorgeWashingtonUniversity.he is the authorofReal and ImaginedWomen:Gender,Culture,andPostcolonialism1993)andtheeditorofTheLieof theLand:EnglishLiter-ary Studies n India (1992).


4/22

598 RajeswariSunderRajan The Postcolonial ntellectualRevisitedmode, the preoccupation ithself-location ecomes ntegral o intellec-tual production admittedly,n more or less strenuousways). Morespecifically,n the contemporaryheoretical ebates hatI havebeen fol-lowing,postcolonialheoristshavebeen accusedby theircolleaguesofdifferent ins arising rom an imputedpositionof preeminence.Thisseems oderive n part rom heirperceivedmediating unction etweenThird Worldpeopleand issueson the one hand and Westernmperialandneoimperialowers n the other,as signaledby their dentity/affilia-tionwith he formerand thelanguage, nowledgetructures, ndconse-quentprivileges hey derive romthe latter.Tim Brennanhas accusedthemof exclusionaryactics, or instance, ndBenitaParry f an "exor-bitation" f their ownroles and a suppression f "native"oices.3Themorecritical ccusations, likeDirlik'sn thisessay,hatofdisengagementfrom the mostsignificantssuesof neocolonialismnd of retreat nto ararifiedpostmodernist bstraction.4n any event, "being" ostcolonial,in thesenseof havingan affiliationwiththeThirdWorld, s the insuffi-cientbut not irrelevantondition f"doing" ostcolonialheory.The lo-cationof the postcolonialntellectual,when or because he location sthe FirstWorld cademy, emains nissue n determininghepoliticsofpostcolonialism. his politicsmustbe, it seems,compulsorily elatedto "contemporaryroblems f social,political, nd culturaldomination"("PA,". 331; emphasismine).Theobservationhat (some)postcolonialintellectualsn theUnitedStates nsteadhold"highly aid,highlypresti-gious"positions t"Columbia,rinceton, r Duke" nd byvirtueof thiscommand reater"power"haneventheir"FirstWorld eighbors"s notgratuitousn thiscontext "PA,". 343).It is intriguingoone locatedoutside heseprofessionalquabblesnthe U.S. academy o discoverherself iguring fleetingly)n the discus-sion.Thespecificpassage n Dirlik'sssay hatpromptsmy engagementappears arly n theargument:

thetermpostcolonial,nderstoodn termsof its discursivehematics,excludes rom ts scopemostof thosewhoinhabitor hailfrompostcolonialocieties. t does not account or theattractions f modern-ization ndnationalismo vastnumbersnThirdWorld opulations,let alone to those marginalizedy national ncorporationn theglobaleconomy.... It excludes he manyethnicgroups n postcolo-nial societies amongothers)that, obviouslyunawareof their hy-bridity,go on massacring ne another.It also excludes radicalpostcolonials.ntellectualsn IndiahaveaskedGayatri pivak o ex-3. See Tim Brennan, "Rushdie, Islam, and Postcolonial Criticism," Social Text 31/32(Spring 1992): 271-76, and Benita Parry, "Problems in Current Theories of Colonial Dis-course," OxfordLiteraryReview 9, nos. 1-2 (1987): 27-58.4. See Anne McClintock, "The Angel of Progress: Pitfalls of the Term 'Post-Colonialism,"' Social Text31/32 (Spring 1992): 84-98.


5/22

Critical nquiry Spring997 599plain"questionshatariseoutofthewayyouperceive ourself'Thepost-colonial iasporic ndianwhoseeksto decolonizehe mind'),andthe wayyouconstituteus (forconvenience,native'ntellectu-als),"o whichSpivak'snswers:"yourdescriptionf howI consti-tuteyou doesnot seemquitecorrect. thoughtI constituted ou,equallywiththe diasporic ndian,asthe post-colonialntellectual!"["PA,". 337]

Dirlikgivestheinterrogatorshelastword,quotingotherexcerptsromthe interview etweenSpivak ndherinterlocutorsn India, o whichIshallreturn.Thegloss hatI shallprovidemayseemgratuitous. Gayatripivak"is here,clearly, epresentativef the postcolonialheoristswhoaretheessay'subject(s);5he"radicalostcolonials"n India,unnamed nd nci-dental,aremyselfandtwocolleagues, llof us womencollege eachers,at the time,at DelhiUniversity.6ordo I findanyneedto disavowheidentifications adebyDirlik in a trivial ensetheyaretrue.I interro-gateDirlik's scribing ollectivedentities o the interviewers-"radicalpostcolonials,"intellectualsn India"-notbecause fpiquebuttomakea point.7 t is that"intellectualsn India,"ikethe otherThirdWorldresidentsnvokedn theparagraphand dentified sthe"vast umbers"whoare"attract[edy]modernizationndnationalism"ndthe"ethnicgroups"who"goon massacringneanother"),reitemson a listwhosefuller heorizationught obe,Dirlikeels, hepostcolonialheorist'sur-den,but srefusedbyher.Theinvocationfthesepeople nthts rgumentis therefore nlygrist orthemillofthat xhortation. venasDirlikore-grounds heinterviewers'dentityas a guarantorf theirpolitics,he be-trayshis indifferenceotheirreality. shallwant o describehis"reality"at somewhat reaterength n anotherpartof thisessay. shallalsohavemoreto sayaboutthe stagingof a confrontationromthe structure ftheinterview,n thesolegroundsof locationpolitics:"us"here)versus"you"there).Elsewheren theinterview, ithatleastequal ength,sig-nificance, ndseriousness, eengageSpivak swomen,andspecifically

5. Elsewhere,however, he seemsto be exemptedfromsomeof Dirlik'snegativestric-tureson postcolonial heoristsbecauseof her firm groundingin Marxismand feminism;see"PA," p. 338-39.6. Forthe record:RashmiBhatnagar,LolaChatterjee,RajeswariSunder Rajan.SeeGayatriChakravorty pivak,"The Post-ColonialCritic," ookReview 11 (May-June1987):16-22; rpt. in Spivak,ThePost-ColonialCritic: nterviews,Strategies,Dialogues,ed. SarahHara-sym(NewYork,1990),pp. 67-74.7. In a brilliantcommentaryon AijazAhmad'sby now well-knowndismayat beingconstitutedasJameson'sThird Worldother,MadhavaPrasadhas drawnout the implica-tionsofwhathe termsthe "commonpostcolonialnightmare,"he self'sunexpectedencoun-terwithits (FirstWorld) epresentationMadhavaPrasad,"Onthe Questionof a Theoryof(ThirdWorld)Literature,"ocial Text31/32 [Spring1992]:58). I shallmerelyadd that, inacademicdiscourse, he collectivedesignationcanbe an estranging dentification.


6/22

600 RajeszlvariunderRajan ThePostcolonial ntellectualRevisitedas "womeneachers fEnglish,"ringing p issuesof genderandEnglishliterary tudies n Indiaalongsideand in connectionwith those of lo-cation.I shall eave"ThePostcolonial ura"though o return o it later)norder o moveon to (partof) another extthatconstellates similar etof charactersnd ssues.SalmanRushdie'sheSatanicVerses1989)framesthesewithina specific ime and place:Bombay uring he lateeighties.For thoseunfamiliarwiththe novel:The twoprotagonists reSaladinChamcha, n Indianmigrant n London,an actordoing "voices"or aBritishelevision eries ora (good) iving,andanIndia-hater ndAnglo-phile(identity:osmopolitan);nd GibreelFarishta, Bombayilmactorspecializingn "god" oles in FIindi"theologicals,"hois on a visit toEngland n pursuitof an Englishwomanhe has met in Indiaand fallenin lovewith identity:minority national").ellowravelersn anairplanethatdetonates, aladin nd Gibreel alldown rom hesky n eachother'sembraceand subsequentlyollowdifferentpaths of demonizationnd"archangelization"espectively,heirmetamorphosesespectivelyiteraland delusional.The specificdilemmasof the twocharacters re (Sal-adin's) eracinationnd dentity risisand(Gibreel's)oubtandreligiouscrisis.It is SaladinChamcha'sostcolonialmigrant ondition hat is ofinterest ormy fablehere,and the relevant assagesnthe bookdescribeSaladin'swovery different isits"home,"o Bombay,nd occur n twoplaces,at thetwoends of the book.In the firstvisit,at thebook's eginning,Rushdie ssemblesketchesand dialogue wiftly o introduceSaladin andwithhim, the reader) othe activist-intellectualcene n cosmopolitan ombay.8aladin s intro-ducedby hisgirlfriendZeenatVakil adoctor, n activist whohadgoneto Bhopal he moment he newsbrokeof the invisibleAmerican loudthat ate people's yes andlungs," nd an art criticwho is the authorofTheOnlyGoodndian) o twoother"radicalostcolonials":ayoungMarx-ist film-makeralledGeorgeMiranda . . and BhupenGandhi,poet andjournalist"SKpp. 52, 53).In thecoffieehouse hupenGandhi ecountsa newspapertoryabouta railway ccident;he twomen,soon oinedbyothers,go on to argueIndianpolitics. s it neocolonialismUnionCar-bide)ornativerapacity themassacren Assam) hatmustbe consideredresponsibleor India's roblems? ll this s excellentmimicry. hepointhowever s Zeenat'sdmiring omment: 'Iwas so proudof Bhupen o-night.... In how manycountries ouldyou go into somebar andstartup a debate ikethat?Thepassion, heseriousness,he respect.Youkeepyourcivilization, oadji; like this oneplenty ine"' SKp. 58). There sno authorialronyqualifyinghisthatI cansee. Saladin esponds othese

8. See SalmanRushdie,TheSatanic VersesLondon, 1989), pp. 51-58; hereafterabbre-viated SV.


7/22

CriticalInquiry Spring1997 601experiences-constitutingIndia'seality" by passing ut. Zeenatooksat himwith satisfaction:'I'll ell youwhathappenedo you tonight....Youcouldsaywe cracked ourshell"'Sl;; . 57). But at this point n thenarrative-before heFall-Saladinwantsno furthernvolvementn theIndianscene,wantsonly to return o doingvoices n hisLondon elevi-sionstudio.Rushdie tageshere,fairlyexplicitly,hecrisisof existentialauthenticityintheThird World even if onlyasurbanradical alk) nconfrontation ithand nthe attemptedonversionf inauthenticityab-surd"work"n the FirstWorldmetropolis).Dowe findin Dirlik'srgumentchoesof a similar taging?s Bhu-pen Gandhi'swenty-nine-minutealkon theAssamkillingsherejoinderto the postcolonialritic's ilenceon 4'ethnicroups . . massacringneanother"?s Saladin'smimicry f"alien" oices obe read n Dirlik's is-appointmenthat"the anguageof postcolonial iscourse"s merely he"languagef FirstWorldpost-structuralism""PA,". 341 ?Butto go on withTheSatanicVerses. t theend of thebook,Saladinreturns o India,sadderand wiserafterhis demonaicalxperiencesnracistEngland,o berestoredo a dying athern a spiritof reconciliation(see SKpp. 512-47).Whenhe meetsZeenatVakilandher crowdagain(this imewith he addition f Swatilekha,Miranda'sirlfriend),e allowshimselfo be reassimilatedntohisBombaymilieu.Rushdie utstogethera littleseminar s before,a verycleverpastiche f debaten Indian ntel-lectual ircles: iscussionangesaroundShahbano;oemsaboutGagari,a"'little. . town"';ndSwatilekha'stheory"bout he "grand arrative"of religious aith.The narrativeone is moreundecidable ow,andtalkis followedup by action,with theorganizationf a "human hain" s agestureof communal olidarity. his timethe commentarys Saladin'sown,a measureof his self-realization:'Me, akingpa7t n a CP(M)event.Wonderslvill ever ease; reallymustbe nlove"' SKpp.536,537, 538).9Thefigureof woman tandsn interestingelation o the trajectoriesof the narratives f the male protagonists.f forGibreelhis mistresses,dead andcurrent,are nothingbut trouble,Saladin'smistressunctions,in contrast, s savior.ZeenatVakil asesSaladin'sre)entryntoa certainIndia.Rightpoliticalaction n the postcolonial renabecomes or himhappily oincidental ithbeing n love;butevenmoreconvenientlyoththe (liberal)hetoric f andthe (sexuallymancipated, nglish-speaking,elite)participantsn thatpoliticsare as"Westernized"s he, theirhybridgenealogy neof "historicallyalidatedclecticism,"n the termsof Zee-

9. The CP(M) s the Marxistgroup of the CommunistPartyof India. Following hewar between India and China (1962), the CommunistPartyof India split into the CPI,whichwasSovietoriented,and the CPI-M,alignedwithChina.But evenbeforethis precipi-tatingsplittherehad been internalconflictswithinthe partyarising romthe issueof coop-erationwithor oppositionto "bourgeoisnationalist" arties ikethe CongressParty.


8/22

ThePostcolonial ntellectualRevisited02 Rajes7l)ari underRajannat's"TheOnlyGood ndsn" "('meaning,s a dead')": wasnotthe entirenational ulturebased on the principleof borrowingwhatever lothesseemed o fit, Aryan,Mughal,British,ake-the-best-and-leave-the-rest?"(SK p. 52).1The findingof this social pace or Saladins as mucha componentof his returnandreconciliationo Indiaas is hisforgivenessfandby hisfather.Gibreel'seturn,on the other hand,changesnothing;Rushdie,deprecatinglyt seems,representshe endingof his story-the killings fhis Englishmistress nd thefilmproducer isodia-throughnewspaperheadlines whose"inch-highetters" ontrastwith the "small-print"e-port of the anticommunal human hain" SKp. 542]).llThe registers,sentimental nd sensationalespectively,ntowhichRushdiediverts heparallel arratives-from he earliermixofcomic, atirical,abulous, nddreammodes-produce triteclosures.My hird ext s a commentaryn, andresponse o,The atanic Verses:Gayatri pivak's Reading heSatanic Verses."pivak ets out to provide,first,a "straight"ritical eading f the novel, hen a senseof thecontextof its receptionthe infamous"controversy"),nd finallyan"intellectualhistory"ssembledrom hesevarious indings.l2In her reading,Spivakpayssomeattentiono the worldof Saladin'sBombay riends "the opicalcaricature f the Bombay rbanworldsofthe popular ilm ndustry, f rhapsodicleft'politics, f Muslim ighsoci-ety,of thegeneral tmospheref communalism,arries nidiomatic on-viction" "R," . 221]). But her entry nto it is via a largerdiscussion fRushdie'sepresentationf women n this novel: he noteshisanxiety o"writewomen nto the narrative f history" ndrecordshis "honorablefailure" t this.Parentheticallyhe discovers erself o be a "part f Rush-die's ext"byidentifying erselfwithSwatilekha"R," . 223).l3

10. It is, of course,relevant hatRushdiehas sought the rationalization f his (righttothe) representation f the subcontinent's olitics n precisely hese terms. See his ImagznaryHomelands:Essaysand Criticism1981-1991 (London, 1991).11. Though Saladin's postcolonial"eturn nscribes he postmodernistmoment, t isstill traditionallyhigh modernist n form and as trope. KalpanaSeshadri-Crooksuggeststhat "the nativewho returns is a recurrent igure . . . in colonial and postcolonial ictionand biographyand functions as the most individualizedand therefore a strangelyrivensubject"and adduces Saladin Chamchaas an example (KalpanaSeshadri-Crooks, ThePrimitiveas Analyst:PostcolonialFeminism'sAccess o Psychoanalysis,"ulturalCritique27[Fall 1994]: 202). Gibreel's tory of religiousand psychicalienationhas a less recognizableliteraryor cognitiveframe; n a sense this is reflected in and reflects the cautionary urnit takes.12. Spivak,"ReadingThe Satanic Verses,"Outside n the TeachingMachine (New York,1993), p. 219;hereafterabbreviated R."13. Spivak's arenthesis eads:

(As,a postcolonialmigrant, "atall, thin Bengaliwoman with croppedhair" [SK p.536], like Swatilekha the "real"name of the womanplayingthe lead character n


9/22

Critical nquiry Sp7sing997 603Butthis straight eadingof a postcolonialext is afterall an "impos-sible" hing.In order to completea properreadingof the postcolonial

text,Spivakasserts,he "cultural olitics" f its "(mis)reading"ustbeunderstood"R,"p. 219,228).To thisend sheexamineshe forcesoper-ative n the three geopolitical laceswhere heban on TheSatanicVerseswasdemandedor imposed: ubcontinentalndia,Britain'sMuslimmi-grant ommunity,nd IranandotherIslamic tates n WestAsia. n Indiashe invokesheShahbanossue,a disputeoverpayment f alimonyo adivorcedMuslimwoman,whichin 1986 only a fewyearsbefore theIndiangovernmentssuedthe banon TheSatanicVersesnd similarlynresponse o the Muslim ommunity'semands had sparkedoS a na-tionwide ontroversynd the eventualnstitution fMuslim ersonalawin such cases.She citesAsgharAli Engineer,BhikhuParekh,WoleSoy-inka,andZakiaPathak ndmyself, uthorsof anarticleon Shahbano.l4It is noticeablehat the singulardominance f the"postcolonialritic"'sauthoritativeeadingof the text,characteristicf thepreviousection,sreplacedby hercarefully ickingher way hrough he pronouncements,information,nd positionsderived rom thosewriting n theseplaces.This is an exemplarynstanceof a postcolonialriticismhatdoes nothide itsplaceof origin theFirstWorld cademy)r scant he complexityof issueson accountof thatremoval,but insteadenters ntoa carefulcollaborativeharting f thatterritory,ngaging oncerns,t is true,thataretheoreticalBarthes ersusDerridaon the deathof the author, orexample)butnot "illegitimately"o, thatis to say not at the expenseofissuesof domination. he exhortationt the essay'sonclusionmakests

Ray's ilm versionof Tagore'sTheHomeand theWorld an "actress" cting out thescriptof femaleAnglicization reademancipation bymale planning n the colonialdispensation, am part of Rushdie'sext, after all.) ["R," . 223]Spivakfinds the most explicit identificationwith herselfin Swatilekha'sxplanationthatreligiousfundamentalisms a displacementof the grandnarrativesof "history, conomics,ethics.In India, the developmentof a corruptand closedstateapparatushad 'excluded hemassesof people from the ethicalproject.'As a result, they sought ethicalsatisfactionsnthe oldestof the grandnarratives,hat is, religious aith," n echo fromher subalternhisto-riographyessay (SV,p. 537;quotedin "R,"p. 227). See Spivak,"Subaltern tudies:Decon-structingHistoriography,"n OtherWorlds:ssaysn Cultural tudiesNew York,1987), pp.197-221.She picksup thisborrowed entencefromSwatilekha nd extendsit (whileclarify-ing at the same time the differencebetween the colonial and postcolonialmoments)toconcludeher "reading" f TheSatanicVerses.n "the postcolonialLebenswelt,"he book is"wrenched .. into rumor,"and "the metropolitanmigrant heterogeneity ... [is ableto] forge a collectivitywhich they could stage as a strike or the Imamagainst he West"("R," . 228).14. The text doesn't dentifythese sourcesexplicitlybeyond a referenceto "peoplewho are diverselyconnectedto this event";we figure in the conventional ormsof citationand attributionof authorship n the notes ("R,"p. 241). See ZakiaPathakand RajeswariSunderRajan,"'Shahbano"' igns14 (Spring1989):558-82.


10/22

604 RajeswariSunderRajan ThePostcolonial ntellectualRevisitedpolitics ransparent:wheneverheybringout theAyatollah,ememberthe face hatdoesnot come ogether n thescreen, emember hahbano.She is quitediscontinuous ithSalmanRushdie'sateasit is beingorga-nizedon many evels.... Womann difference, utside n the machine"("R," . 241).To whomcould thisreminderbe addressed xcepta per-ceivedAnglo-Americaneadership?The insistent ocusofSpivak'sssayon "womann difference"igh-lights the incrementalttentionpaid to gender in my orderingof thethree exts.FromDirlik's eglectof genderas an aspectof the identity fpostcolonialntellectualsnd of their ocations,Rushdie'sepresentationof women n TheSatanicVersess a step forward.Rushdie s perceptiveabout hesocialconstruction f womenasintellectualsn a certainpost-colonialspace here the urbanupper-classmilieu of Bombay eventhoughhe reduces heir unction o a familiarmediatoryne,secondaryto andserving hedevelopment f the maleego. Spivak'self-definedoleas critic,as is wellknown, s to makeanexplicit ommitmento theinter-estsof the "sexed ubaltern"venat theriskof appearing exorbitant"othemby thisrepresentation.endermust igurenot only n (ourunder-standing f) postcolonialssuesbut also n the identity f theintellectualoffering hatanalysis.But s thereapostcolonial lind potafterall? catchRushdie utonthe ShahbanofEair. e istellingus aboutGeorgeMiranda'sontroversialdocumentaryilm aboutcommunalism, hichawaitsa SupremeCourtjudgementafter undamentalistsf bothreligionshavesoughta banonits release.Mirandas"pessimistic"bout he udgement:

"This s the SupremeCourtof ShahBano ame," e cried,referringto the notorious ase nwhich,underpressureromIslamic xtrem-ists, heCourthadruled hatalimony aymentswerecontraryothewill of Allah, hus making ndia's awseven morereactionaryhan,forexample,Pakistan's.SoI don'thavemuchhope." SKp. 536]Now,even a passingacquaintance ith the caseshouldhave indi-cated o Rushdie hat theSupremeCourt,on thecontrary, ad not onlyordered healimony o be paid to Shahbano ndertheCriminal roce-dure Codebut had madederogatory emarks n thejudgementaboutMuslim ersonalaw n general hathadseemed o many o be gratuitous

and,arguably,ad contributedo thecontroversyhat ollowed; nd thatit was RajivGandhi's overnment hathad overturnedhe judgementand passedthe law in ParliamenthatrestoredMuslimpersonalaw'sapplicabilityn the caseofalimony.t willnot wash orRushdie oexplainaway"errata"ere as he did withMidnight'shildren;eorgeMirandasa characteroo rooted n the situation e speaksof to be a victimof thedistance n time or placethat wouldaccount orvagueness, istortion,


11/22

C7siticalnquiry Spring1997 605or forgetting.l5 o, this mustbe regarded implyas an instance,andasymptomaticne,of authorialgnorance rcarelessness.

Butwhatof the postcolonialriticwhowithsuchacuityhaspursuedtheintricaciesnd ramificationsf theShahbanossue n her essay;whoin an endnoteon Rushdie's metropolitan"riticshaspickedout theirerrorsandinsisted hatfactual orrectnessmatters n critical eadings fthepostcolonialext;whohasevendiagnosed ndpronouncedRushdie'srepresentationf contemporaryndia n this novela "failure"ut marksthedeficiency n a different errain, hatof"rural ndia" "R," p. 223,222);but whodoes not light uponthisspecificerroras an exampleofsucha "failure"eitherfromoversight r froma dismissal f its signifi-cance?Suchacollusion etween riticandwriterrom hesharedmetro-politanspaceof the FirstWorldndicatesanother et of alignments.stherea structurallindness, determinedense nwhichher readingwillmissa particularutcrucial xampleof theauthor'sarelessness?s thisrelated o the address o anAnglo-Americancademic eadership,r tothe theoretical reoccupationiththedeathof the author?l6I haveranged hrough hesetextsprimarilyo establish recurrentpreoccupationn contemporaryostcolonial iscoursewith the politicsof its practitionersasedupontheirresidencen oneof twopostcolonialspaces, heFirstorThirdWorld.Dirlik indsthis investigationeducibleto an inquiryntopostcolonialheorists'dentity,he instabilityf whichhe finds scandalousand attributes o their shift to a location(theFirstWorldacademy) therthan thatof theirorigin(theThirdWorld)andto their consolidationhere"under hebannerof postcolonial is-course."This "discursive"as opposed o "structural")dentitys juxta-posed againsta contrasting ategoryof stable,"fixed"Third Worldintellectualdentity("PA," . 332). Spivak,of course,refusessuchanopposition nd,as I haveshown,markshe sameness-with-differencehatobtains mong heorists y delineatinghe cultural oliticsof thepostco-lonial iteraryext as the sphereof a sharedostcolonialritical ndeavor.Rushdieeeds ntobothDirlik's ndSpivak'srguments,maintainingon the onehandanoppositional ifference n the authentic/inauthenticpoleand invoking n the othera transposablediomof theory hatren-derstheoristsndistinguishablecompare otonlySwatilekhand Spivakbut also,probably, eenatVakil nd HomiBhabha).My nterests inthe wayallthreeof thesewriters ttend oandmarkthe identityand functionof the intellectual in India"as partof their

15. See Rushdie, "'Errata':Unreliable Narrationin Midnight's hildren,"maginaryHomelands,p. 22-25.16. I am grateful o Amit Raifor pushingmy thinking owards hesespeculativeques-tions. I amof coursefarfrom suggestingthat residence n postcolonialnationalspacepro-videsguaranteesof"correctness,"actualor political as I hope the discussion n the nextsectionwillmakeclear.


12/22

606 RajeswariSunderRajan ThePostcolonial ntellectualRevisitedrespective rojects. n response o Dirlik see the need to deflectsomeattention way rom heAmerican niversity, herepostcolonialntellec-tuals have arrived, o the place where their Indiancounterpartsavestayed andto inflectboth the question f residence nd the identity fintellectuals ith the marksof classandgender. n response o Rushdieand Spivak shalldevelopan argument boutaccountabilityn(postcolo-nial) ntellectual ork.2

Atthe outset t isimportantoacknowledge, ithSpivak, hatpostco-lonial ntellectualsn the two placesof residence re not constitutederydiSerently;hat is, the class and intellectual ormation f the English-speaking, niversity-educatedntelligentsiaromwhichuniversityeach-ers here as well as thereare drawn s likely o be fairlyhomogeneous.Who staysand who goes fromamongthose who havecompletedheirtertiary-levelducation n India wouldbe decided argelyby personalfactors.l7 he otheruniversalizingnd affiliativeactoruniting he twosites is the institutionalpaceof the university, hich mposes he con-ditionsof the professionuniformly verywhere nd also institutes x-changes of knowledge thoughadmittedlyunequally) hroughsuchmeansaspublication,onferences,ollaboration,nd so on.Beyond his, however,t is worthwhileo explore he specificitiesfintellectual orkplaces. oreiterate hepointwe made n ourdiscussionwithSpivak: Perhapshe relationshipfdistance ndproximity etweenyou and us is thatwhatwe writeand teachhas political nd otheractualconsequencesor us thatarein a sensedifferent rom heconsequences,or lackof consequences,oryou."8 Somesenseof the localconditions fthe reception f academicworkmayhelp to clarify his ssueof account-ability. shallmention hree such areaswherewhatwe mighttermtheconsequencesperate.The first s visible n the classroomn the Indianuniversity.Whilethe influenceof the intellectual s teachermaynot be specifiable, eingoperative o a greateror lesserdegreeaccording o individual ualitiesof rhetorical ersuasion, er work s at leastinterrogated ndbroughtto the test in the contextof teaching n more mmediate ermsthanindisembodied ublication.The second area of receptions outsidetheacademy, heremuch"radical"riticism esonateswithactivism roundissueswithingrassrootsmovements nd n political roups, houghagain

17. This is not to say thatsuch factors whichin fact are fairlyevidentlygovernedbygender and class/caste eatures are ungeneralizable nd contingent,only that no claimsto ethical and politicalpriority hould be based upon the choices madeto go or stay.18. Quotedin Spivak,"ThePost-ColonialCritic," . 68.


13/22

C7siticalnquiry sp7sing1997 607toa greater r lesserdegree.Arld, inally, otto rarifyntellectualroduc-tion, there s theuniversitys employero consider.The effectsof theirwork ouchacademicsmostcloselyn termsof acceptancer rejection sthese arereflectedn professionalewards nd punishments and it isworthrememberinghat the academic stablishmenthat handstheseout is invariablyostile o innovation.Alsoobservablen the contemporaryndianacademiccene, houghas yet as a meresymptom f possiblymoresignificantuturedevelop-ments, s the intriguingact thata significant umberof change-makersoriginaterom departmentsf English.'9n India,whilethe phenome-nonofbraindrainto the West romthepool of scientists nd technolo-gists is a familiarone and whilein the socialsciencesand humanitiestherehasbeena traditionalivision flabor hatallowedndianacadem-icsto assertproprietorshipverIndianhistory, nthropology,r philoso-phywithsome measureof authority,here has not been a comparabledisciplineof Indian iterature, or haveteachersof Englishbeen any-thingbut at a disadvantagen theirchosen ields.Today, owever,sonereviewernotedwithrelish,we are witnessinghe "savagelymarvellousparadox"f the "best xponents"f culturaltudiesn Indiacoming rom"thatmostcolonialof sections the Englishiterature nd languagede-partments."20f wereview he workof someof these "English"cadem-ics MeenakshiMukherjee,Kumkum angari nd SudeshVaid,SusieJ.Tharuand K.Lalita,Tejaswini iranjana, ndSvati oshi, orinstance-we findthat t relateso history, ender,ranslation,ndcomparativendIndian iterature ndpoetics,butnot to the canonicalBritishiteraturethathastraditionallyeendescribed sEnglish.2'his turntowards ewobjects f study s, arguably,heresultas muchof a theoryderived romthe protocols f language nd iterarytudieshatprivilegeextualityndreadingas it isof theperceivedrrelevancef traditional nglishiterarystudiesn Indiatoday.It is not entirelya coincidencehat all the titlesI have istedabovearethe workof women eachersof English thoughof course he list-likeall lists also reflectsbias).But thereis a generalconclusiono be

19.This is not to slightthe work of disciplinaryhistory, ociology,or politicalscience,to name onlysomeof the otherareasof significantntellectualproduction.It is to note thatthe spaceof"English" s being appropriatedn unexpectedways.20. AshleyTellis,TheTimes f Induz,17 July 1994.21. See MeenakshiMukherjee,RealismndReality: heNovelandSocietynIndia Delhi,1985);RecastingWomen:ssaysn IndianColonialHistory, d. KumkumSangariand SudeshVaid(1986; New Brunswick,NJ., 1990);WomenWritingn Induz: 00 B.C. to thePresent,d.SusieJ. Tharu and K. Lalita,2 vols. (Delhi, 1991-93);TejaswiniNiranjana,SitingTransla-tion:History, ost-Structuralism,ndthe ColonialContextBerkeley,1992);and Rethinking n-glish:Essaysn Literature,anguage,History,d. SvatiJoshi (New Delhi, 1991). See also thebooks referredto by Tellis:TheLie of theLand:EnglishLiterarytudiesn India,ed. SunderRajan Delhi,1992),and SunderRajan,RealandImaginedWomen:ender, ulture,ndPostco-lonialismNewYork,1993).


14/22

608 RajeswariSunderRajan ThePostcolonial ntellectualRevisitedderived rom he observation havemade,a pointelaborated efore nour discussionwithSpivak:he profession f teaching including niver-sity teaching), he study of English,urban middle-class rofessionalwomen,and a certain eminismand the women'smovement re to bearticulatedwitheach other n the contemporaryndiancontext or rea-sonsthatarebothhistorically etermined nd contingent. shallhave oleave he elaboration f thisconjunctureor later.I shallmakeone further bservationbout he Indianacademic itu-ationthat might ntroduce omefurthernuance nto identifyinghe na-ture of intellectual roductionn this space; his is to extend the modelof the metropolis nd province eyond he FirstWorld nd ThirdWorlduniversities'elationship. orwithin ndia there are to be found Presi-dencyuniversities t the four metropolitanenters,whichappearat thetop of a hierarchy t the lowest nd of whicharethe collegesof themofus-sils(districts) nd small owns, ecipients f the former's eglectand con-descension. he former particularlyn the nation's apital) ossessgoodlibraries, xtended eaves, onferences, ccess o award-givingodiesanduniversity ublishing ouses,academic lout,and intimate elationswithAnglo-Americanniversities;he lack of these benefitskeepsthe lesseruniversitiesn otherregions n a stateof provincial backwardness."hisregional mbalance,whichalso reflectsa classdivide,has consequencesfor the kindof work hatbecomeshegemonicn the Indianacademy.I havecircumscribedhis account f the consequences nd contextsof academicworkwithina verysmallarea,primarily ecause he questionthat s begged that s, the influence f the intellectualn contemporaryIndiansocietyand politics mustbe judged, finally, o be undecidable.It is the paradoxicalase that ntellectuals ffiliatedwiththe rulingclassas bureaucrats,echnocrats, olitical-partydeologues,ournalists, nd soon have a disproportionatelyargeshare n nation-state fEairsuch asdevelopment nd planning, egaland socialreform,media,culture,andpartypolicy;but in the roleof universityeachers hey mpinge elativelylittle upon the shapingof events.The reasons or this have to do, nodoubt,withthe smallness f theirnumbers s wellas the university'sm-bivalent ocationand functioning mongthe institutions f postcoloni-ality.22do not even speakhereof questions f populism the alienationof universityntellectualsrom he masses, ftendiagnosed s a functionof theirWesternization,omes n for periodic riticismromvarious ec-torsof the intelligentsia, oth progressive nd reactionary. ut it is alsothe case thatacademicsn Indiahave atelybegun to seek out larger o-rums or theirwork;majordebates n topicalas wellas theoreticalssueshavebeen foughtout in the mediaamong hose belonging o differentpersuasions. here is also an increasing endency or the media n its

22. On this, see my "Fixing English: Nation, Language, Subject," in The Lie of the Land,Pp 7-28.


15/22

CriticalInquiry Spring1997 609turnto seekthemout as expertson currentssuesof a controversiala-ture,mostnoticeably,n recentyears,on the historyandarcheology ftheBabriMasjid ndthe sociology f casteandcommunityn thecontro-versyovercaste-basedeservations.23conomistsnd political cientists,housed n university epartmentsnd thinktanks,have of coursehadlong-standingies withgovernment lanningn development, efense,and foreignaffairsnpostindependencendia.Theirsphereof influenceis in thiswayconsiderablyroadened, ut it would tillbehard o decideabout tsscopeor impact,much ess pronounce pon itsprogressivenessor otherwise, iven, n particular,he ideologicalomplicitiesf a "com-pradorntelligentsia"inked o theruling tate.24Mydescriptionf these ocalconditions f thefunction,production,and receptionof intellectualwork n the Indiancontext s intended oilluminatehe largerquestionof residential ifferences.Let me clarifythatthesearenot matters ntirely educibleo "local"ealities.Thecon-sciousnessf readershipsn the West,particularlyn theAnglo-Americanacademy,s anever-presentressure ponIndianacademicntellectuals.How,andwhy,do weaddress heWest?ForSartre,writing boutFanoWswork, he ThirdWorldntellectual'speechcouldonly proceed romapowerful nti-imperialistmperative;aid's"good" ostcolonialntellec-tualshavea similaragenda.25 utin decolonizedpaceor, morespecifi-cally, he postindependenceontext,the politicsof intellectualwork slikely o be morediffusive as wellas compromised.hough,asI shallbesuggesting,ritiques f theWest ontinue o animatentellectuals,ecentnation-statehoodringsup issues thatrequireattentionon theirownterms.Within he limited rameof academic iscourse,hepoliticalmay,of course, indno purchase t all.Theimputationhatacademics,n thepursuitof professional ains,produceworkthat is imitative f Anglo-Americanrends scynicalbut reductivelyorrect.

23. The BabriMasjid s a mosquethat wasbuilt overwhatHindusclaimis the birth-placeof the god Rama. In December1992the mosquewas demolishedby largecrowds edby Hindutvaorganizations.24. "Compradorntelligentsia"s the phraseused byAppiahto describethe "Western-style. . . writersand thinkers,whomediatethe trade n culturalcommoditiesof worldcapi-talismat the periphery" Appiah,"Is the Post- n Postmodernismhe Post- n Postcolonial?"p. 348). I use it more specifically o indicatethose who are alliedwiththe statein formingpolicy.I amnot blindto the existenceof movements hatoppose he state.Ecologicalmove-ments (especiallyprotestsagainstdams);leftist peasantorganizations; aste-basedagita-tions; the women'smovement;and, of course,variouscommunal, inguistic,and regionaldemandsfor autonomyaresignificantoppositionalaspectsof the political ife of the postco-lonialIndiannation.Withoutarguingthattheyare simply"spontaneous,"r thattheylacktheir ideologues,I am doubtfulabout the extent to whichthey have found their theorists.I therefore eavethe questionunattendedand unresolved n this note.25. SeeJean-PaulSartre,preface o FrantzFanon,The Wretchedf theEarth, trans.Con-stanceFarrington NewYork,1963),pp. 7-31, and EdwardSaid,"Intellectualsn the Post-ColonialWorld," almaguruii70-71 (Spring-Summer 986):44-64.


16/22

The Postcolonial ntellectualRevisited10 RajeswariSunderRajanThe dependenceupon the West,reflected n Indian ntellectuals'derivative ategories nd protocols f thought,as wellas in theirsearch

for validation nd endorsementrom he intellectual entersof the West,has traditionallyroduced arious ormsof introspection,ngst,and res-olution.Someof theseconcerns rereviewed y U. R.AnanthaMurthynan essay alled"TheSearch or Identity:A KannadaWriter's iewpoint,"whichshallserveas my fourth llustrativeext. AnanthaMurthywritesabout a conferenceof Indian intellectuals hat he attended,at whichthe majorpreoccupation, redictably, as "why s the Westernmode ofthoughtand writing he model for us?"26 n "internationally-famous"painterpresent here told them a storyabouta simpleIndianpeasantand his worship f a stone:"Whatmatteredwashis faith,not the stone."The painterpointedout the moral:"Ifwe don'tunderstandhe structureandmodeof thispeasant'shinking,we can't ecome rueIndianwriters"("S," p. 67, 71). AnanthaMurthys movedbut unconvinced: Isn't heauthentic ndianpeasant,whose maginations mythical nd whorelatesto natureorganically,lso an imported ult figureof the Western adi-cals?"Further, I do not thinkthat the childrenof that peasantwillbe-lieve n the magicof transferringhe stone nto God,nor did the painterworkon his canvasn thatway . . . he couldn'tgnore he experimenta-tions n Western ainting""S," . 72).And yet, thoughhe is unable o "idealisehe simplepeasant," e isconscious hathe mightas a consequenceoo easilyoverlookhim, since"the underlying ssumption f the literary ulture n which I write ispotentially apable f making he peasant'smodeof existence nd think-ing irrelevanto me."And such neglectwouldbe fatalbecause"a argepartof the realityof my country s still him, and he is there n my lan-guage" "S," p. 73, 74).AnanthaMurthymoveshis discussiono one of readerships whichis firstof all a matterof literacy. Thepeasantat the foot of the hill can'treadme" likethe restof more hanhalfthe country's opulation. Hisconsciounessmayentermyworkas an 'object'or others ikeme to read,whichwillbe verydifferent romwhatwouldhavebeen if I wereawarein my creative rocess hathe wasalso my potential eader" "S," . 77).Thisshift n his discussiono the contextof literacy nd the readingpub-lic allowshim to be harshly ealistic.He too is nostalgic or the past butit is the pastof the "radical"welfth-centuryhakti oets n Kannada,orwhom he illiteratemasseswerean "immediate"udience:"[They]werevery mpatientwiththe naiveacquiescence nd resignation f the tradi-tionalIndianmind.They didn't mulate he peasant,but triedto rouse

26. U. R. AnanthaMurthy,"The Search or Identity:A KannadaWriter'sViewpoint,"in Asian and WesternWriters n Dialogue: New Cultural Identities,ed. Guy Amirthanayagam(London, 1982), p. 67; hereafterabbreviated S."


17/22

Critical nquiry Springl997 611himinto an awarenessf his innerpotential""S," . 73). Lacking uchan oral traditionn whichto work, he modernIndianwritercanonlywaitandhopefor an expansion f his readingpublicwhentheprocessesof modernizationnd ndustrializationroduce new iteratemass andthese,when nsertednto themiddleclass,"maynot [afterall]create orthewriters qualitativelyifferentwriting ituation""S," . 78).In thinking hroughthe predicament f the intellectual,AnanthaMurthy efuses o recuperatehepast bydefinition closedavenue-andenvisagesnlyadeterminateuture hat ollowshepathof modern-ization,so thatno resolution n termsof any voluntaristic,ndividualchoice srealistic orthe writer.His reflectionsre extraordinarilyubtle,avoiding he pitfallsof both revivalisthinking quiteexplicitly) ndofpragmaticeconciliationo hegemonicWestern hought.Buthe keepsclosetoboth theseresolutionsf the dilemma,hus argely etainingheproblematicf the binaryrame.27In contrast, greatmanyotherdiscussionsn thesubject ontinueto viewIndiancreative swellascriticalwritingn termsof lossof auton-omyandoriginality,mentalcolonization,elatedness,ndmimicry. hesolutionto this servitude s invariablyormulatedn termsof"indi-genism," recovery f traditionalormsof Indian hinking-Sanskrit o-etics,Ayurveda,Gandhism,ndso on,as the casemaybe- orof critiquesof the modernWest.These endeavors,however, ave not so far beenpursuedstrenuouslynoughto emergeas strongalternativemodesofthinking.Where heyhavebeendeployed heyhave nvariablyeenputin the serviceof regressive auses ikesupportof sati (widowmmola-tion).28 he revived hetoric f aggressive ationalismakes he formofthemilitantHindutvamovementhathasaccompaniedhe recentgrowthof the economic ndmilitary owerof the Indiannation-state.f globalcapitalism'smpacton FirstWorldpostcolonialheoretical roductionsto be seenin thattheory'somplicity ithpostmodernism,s Dirlik ug-gests,in postcolonialitytself its effectsare moregrossand palpable.ThoughHinducommunal oliticalpartieshaveborrowedhe Gandhian

27. Dan Moshenberghas suggestedto me thatinAnanthaMurthy's rgument, iteracyis representedboth as a "kindof mysticalprimummob7lend as a simpletechnicalskill"andis then figured nto"thenew so-calleddevelopmentagenda." n spite of all the "furious ndfascinating ounterhegemonicworkof Indianleft intellectuals," e goes on, "thedefinition,as distinctfrom the status,of writingand of literacyseemsto remainfairlyuntouched"-and no radicalreconceptualizationf the subaltern s undertaken DanMoshenberg, mailto author,15 Mar.1995).The unpackingand questioningof AnanthaMurthy's leftmod-ernist"premises hatareinitiatedhere,especially n relation o the subalternand to postco-lonial"progress,"ave recentlybeen deftlyperformedby VivekDhareshwar, Postcolonialin the Postmodern;or, the Politicalafter Modernity," conomicnd PoliticalWeekly,9 July1995,pp. PE-104-12.28. See Sangari,"Introduction:Representationsn History,"ournal fArtsandIdeas,nos. 17-18 (June 1989):3-7, esp. pp. 3-4.


18/22

612 RajeswariSunderRajan The Postcolonial ntellectualRevisitedrhetoric f swadeshihomemanufacture) and even preempted he left'sopposition o the entryof multinationalapital the agendaof economicreform s not placedunderanyserious hreat.The assertion f autonomyis shifted o otherspheres: ulture, eligion, ducation.The preoccupation ith the issue of writing"underWestern yes"draws orth a more focussedand politically ifferentagon from otherquarters,a critique distinct from the broad, nationalist,anti-West-ernization, ntimodern ositionof the indigenists.Unlike ndigenism,thiscritique'substance erives or the mostpart roman explicitlynter-nationalistMarxist osition.One significantargetof Indian eft critics,for instance,has been the anti-Enlightenmentritiques aunched romthe nationalist erspective whichare echoedby or find support rompostmodernismn the West. t is thereforepostmodernism'sostulates,withtheirperceived onnections ot simplywiththe West n a looseop-positional ense but with globalcapitalismhat are perceivedas eitherirrelevant r dangerous n the Indian ntellectual ontext.It is via thecircuitsof capitaland its attendantpostmodern egitimationshat theWest's egemony s perfected.A majorendeavor f the intellectualefthas therefore een to counterwhat heyperceive s the influence f post-modern rames f thought n analyses f Indianhistory, ulture, ndpoli-tics and to restore he paradigms f class, he socialhistory radition fBritishMarxisthistorians, nd the methodologieshat are analyticallyspecific o SouthAsian olonial ontexts.29This s a carefully egotiated osition,and yet suchclassicalMarxisttheoreticalmodelshavebegun to seem increasinglynadequate or un-derstandinghe complexities f caste,community, nd gender ssues npostindependencendia.30 he recourse o variouspoststructuralismsnIndianacademicwork, ncluding eministappropriationsf them,musttherefore e understood s a reactivemoveprompted y this perceivedinadequacy ut also by the preemptive nnexation f nationalism s apretext or religious undamentalismy the political ight.To theoreti-cally displace or problematizehe categoriesof class and nation is,predictably,o run the riskof criticism romboth the left and right,re-spectively. ll the same,theoryas a cognitivemove and an explanatoryframemaypotentially ffera useful akeon complex ssues; omecarefuldiscriminationsbout ts "usesand limits" avealready egunto appear

29. See Sumit Sarkar,"OrientalismRevisited:Saidian Frameworksn the WritingofModernIndian History,"OxfordLiteraryReview 16, nos. 1-2 (1994): 205-24.30. For criticismof the inadequaciesof Marxistclass analysis n the Indian context,see PurushottamAgrawal,"'KanKan Mein VyapeHein Ram':The Slogan as a Metaphorof Cultural Interrogation,"Oxford LiteraryReview 16, nos. 1-2 (1994): 245-64; Tharu,"Thinking he Nation Out: Some Reflectionson Nationalismand Theory,"ourrzalof Artsand Ideas, nos. 17-18 (June 1989): 81-89; and Dhareshwar, Casteand the Secular Self,"Journal of Arts and Ideas, nos. 25-26 (Dec. 1993): 115-26.


19/22

CriticalInquiry Spring1997 613in ournalsandother orumsn India.3lThismustalsoserveassufficientapologyorthekindofwork do.32I havebeenat somepains n the foregoingdiscussiono stress hatmydescription f intellectual roductionn India s limited o academicwork,writtenn English, enteredorthemostpart n themetropolitancities,and concernedwithhistory, ultural tudies,and the socialsci-ences.33n thisI havebeenguidedbyconsiderationsf spaceandby theneedforspecificityn an inquiry f thissort,butalsobythelimitsof myknowledge. offerthe lastreason essas a modestor preemptive is-claimerhanas asignifier f thatwhichs notknown nd/orofsanctionedignorance.While hereareasignificantumber fbiculturalntellectualswho,precisely,mediatecultures the translators I ama fairly ypicalrepresentativef the majorityrainedsolely n an "English"ducationwhocan makeno claimto speakof anyIndianculturewithauthority.Given, herefore,myownmodern, ecular,ationalistnowledgend g-norance,herhetoric f the invocation f other ntellectualraditions-by other ntellectualsikemyself carriesormelittleconvictionf genu-ine alternative r progressive ositions,as I haveindicatedearlier. twouldbe presumptuousndarroganto denyvalueto thesetraditionsthemselves;oris thisto denythe legitimacyf theinevitable uestion,Whoexiststo challenge hiscoterie, histransnationalntellectualom-munity? havementioned ther anguages ndother ntellectualentersof academicwork thoughnotwiththebeliefthattheyaresubstantiallydifferentrommetropolitan nglish-languageriticism.The moderniz-ing imperative f the central tateas wellas of the apparatusesf civilsociety education, mployment,he culture ndustry securethe he-gemonyof English. Other"modesof thinking high-culturalanskriticaswellas "small"raditions,uchas localandfolkor tribalknowledges(in,say,agriculture,usbandry,orestry,cology,medicine) haveanau-thenticexistence, ometimesn thevisibleandcontestatorytructure ftradition ersusmodernity. uttraditionaVothernowledgesannotbeviewed odaynanyclear eparationrom hemodern and t isunlikelythatanything anbe considered nmediated ythe protocols f knowl-edgeweworkwith,exceptby idealization. hisis thepointof AnanthaMurthy'seflectionsn thepeasant.34

31. Forexample,see Bhatnagar, Usesand Limitsof Foucault:A Studyof the Themeof Origins n EdwardSaid's Orientalism,"'ocialScientist16 (July1986):1-15, and NiveditaMenon,"Orientalism ndAfter," conomicand PoliticalWeekly, 6 Sept. 1992,pp. 2133-36.32. Someof thisworkhasbeen mentioned n thisessay. addthisso asnot to stakemypositionsomewhereoutsideof this sceneand alsobecauseif my workwerenot, somehow,illustrative,he challengeof whyit wasnot wouldhaveto be met.33. I clarify his to exempt frommy purviewworkin, say, he sciences,whichwouldundoubtedlyhavea differentgenealogy.34. See also Dipesh Chakrabarty, Postcolonialitynd the Artificeof History:WhoSpeaksfor 'Indian'Pasts?" epresentations, o. 37 (Winter1992):1-26.


20/22

614 RajeswariSunderRajan ThePostcolonial ntellectualRevisited3

Finally,he matterof intellectualwork n Indiacalls or a briefnoteon the socialbeingof ThirdWorld ntellectuals. urrentlyhe phenome-non of communalismwhich s the preferred erm for conflictbetweendifferent asteand religious ommunities) oses the major hallenge ointellectualsn India.Someof the major ommunal ontroversiesn post-independence ndia havefound briefmentionearlier n this essay: heAssamkillings,Shahbano, he ban on The Satanic Verses, he destructionof the BabriMasjid, nd the killings nd riotsarising ut of theseevents.The perception hat nternecine onflict s the definingproblem f post-coloniality,pecificallyts nation-statehood,s reflected n muchcurrentIndian ntellectual iscussion see also Dirlik'sweeping esture owards"ethnic roupswho . . . go on massacring ne another"n ThirdWorldcountries) t the expenseof whatused to be a preoccupation ithques-tionsof development entering n the processes f modernization.35But there s an "unassimilated"tory n The Satanic Verses,one that snot a communalssue.It findsno explanation, alls orthno discussion,and is quickly epressed y ZeenatVakil. refer o the newspaper eportof the railway ccident: Afterhe accident, BhupenGandhi] aid, thesurvivingpassengers wamto the shore (the train had plunged off abridge)and weremetby localvillagers,whopushed hemunder he wa-ter untiltheydrowned nd then ootedtheirbodies." eenat's eaction sone of shameand, becauseSaladin s present, ndignation t Bhupen:"'Shut our face,'Zeeny houtedat him. 'Whyare you tellinghim suchthings?Alreadyhe thinkswe'resavages, lower orm"' SKp. 55). Theevent is represented s a markof civilizationaltherness;Zeenat's e-sponse o the perceivedpressure f the West's aze here, Saladin's isa familiar ne amongus.I shallmatch his withanothernewspaper tory,my last illustrativetext. It is datelined10 February 995,New Delhi:

Threeresidents f a shantytown erekilledwhenpoliceopenedfireon a 4000-strongmobprotestinghe allegedbeating o deathbypoliceof a teen-ager aughtdefecatingn a park.The mobshoutedanti-policelogans nd surged owardsAshokVihar, middle-class eighbourhood hoseresidentshad obtaineda courtorderprohibitinghe shantytown wellers romfouling hepark acing heirhomes.35. For example, see "On India: Writing,History,Culture, Post-Coloniality,"pecialissue of OxfordLiteraryReview 16, nos. 1-2 (1994). Six out of these nine articleson India inthe post-Independenceperiod focus on communal ssues, in spite of the editors'emphasison the impactof IMF-and WorldBank-directedeconomicpolicies in their introduction.


21/22

Critical nquiry Spring1997 615Police aid heyopened ireafter obbingeargascanisterswhichfailed o dispersehe agitated rowd.36

Mypoint s easyto mistake. do not offercivilizationaltherness, r an"irreducible,"suntheorizable,"ThirdWorld"sreality"n invoking hisevent,asmy abundancefscarequotes hould ndicate.On thecontrary,there are only too manyexplanations,esponses,and analyses eadilyavailable, ot leastwithin he report tself.The AdditionalPoliceCom-missioners quotedas saying, latly, hadwe not takenrecourseo firing,the houseswouldsurelyhavebeenransackednd set on fire.We couldnot afford o wait urther""P,". 10).There s also a simpleexpressionof humananguish roma Gandhianocialworker,Bindeshwar athak(Pathakas nstitutednnovativeanitationmethodsnationwide,he pro-visionof whichshouldeasethe existenceof slum-dwellersonsiderably,thoughof course t willalso entrenchhem n cityspacesmore irmlyasa consequence). urther nalyses,histimein termsof classconflict,n-clude:"It'sa classicexampleof a socialconflictbetween woclassesofpeople,bothclamoring orbasicrights"; nd "whatwas neededwas achangein the attitudeof people towards he unfortunatedwellersofshantytowns.... Everyone ants o exploit heir abor, ut no one wantsto live nextto them,'Singh[the citygovernment'slumdirector] oldanewspaper""P,". 10).It is viewedasan urbannightmare:'With eoplecoming romvillages verydaytothe city n searchof workandtrying ofinda shelterwhereverheycan, it isjust impossibleo implementheban,'one official aid" "P,". 10). Thereare sociologicalxplanationssupportedwithstatistics:Accordingoofficial stimates,ust a littlemorethantwopercentof India's uralpopulation ad access o proper anita-tionat theend of 1990,while n urbanareas hefigurewas ess than50percent""P,". 10).Wecannotgnore hese rames, ven f theybe wrongSisingenuous,partial,or simply nadequate,inceit is these thatstructure ur livedexperience.Butthe issues hatthe eventsexposehavenames poverty,resource istribution,tateviolence,human-rightsiolations, rban ani-tation,development and there s thereforeno reasonwhytheyshouldbe left outsideof the explanatoryramesof academicdiscourse r rele-gated o the realmof theunmentionable. nthe contrary,hereportonthe deathspublished y a civilrightsorganization,he People'sUnion orDemocratic ights, ffersa filll and detailedanalysis.37ut it is precisely36. "PoliceFiring Kills 3 ShantytownDwellers," ndtaAbroad, 10 Feb. 1995, p. 10;hereafterabbreviated"P."rldiaAbroad s a weeklypaper publishedin the U.S. mainlyforimmigrant ndians.(Thequestionof"shame:' n line withZeenatVakil'seelings, s a recur-rentone in the reportingof Indiannewsabroad.)The report s datelined10 February1995,but the shootingtook placeon 30 January.37. See "Custodial)eath and PoliceFiring:A Taleof TwoCities," conomic nd PoliticalWeekly,2 Apr. 1995,pp. 862-65, an articlebasedupon the report.


22/22

616 Rajeszuari underRajan ThePostcolonial nteUectualRevisitedmy point hatthe workof suchreports, s of investigativeournalismndof povertyand development tudies n economics, oesnot sufficientlyfigure n, orinform,"postcolonial"tudiesn the academy.38It is alsomy point thatin the internationalivisionof intellectuallabor,making enseof thisworld s not a task hatmustnecessarilyalltothe shareonly of some(thosewho areproximate o this reality)whileothersareexempt rom tspressures.MichaelTaussig nticipatesheob-jection:"Ofcourse, hat's lsewhere, lways lsewhere, ou'llwant o say,not the rulebutthe exception, xisting nAn-Other lace."He offers hisargument ywayof rejoinder:

Are they[that s, "the Histories f Success"]o removed romthisviolentworldwhoseonly measure s what t absorbs ndconceals?In talking error'salkare we ourselvesnot tempted o absorb ndconceal he violence nour own mmediateife-worlds.... Betweenthe orderof [the]stateand thearbitrarinessf itsemergency, hatthen of the center and whatof itstalk?39

38. As an example of investigative ournalismof this kind but invested with morethan illustrative tatus I adducethe work of P.Sainath,especially he series of articlesonruralpoverty hat he wrote for TheTimesof Indzabetween 1993 and 1994. Another ournal-ist, K. A. Abbas,describeshim as "not a 'ThirdWorld' ournalist"but a "journalist f andfor the FourthWorld, he worldof the poorestof the poor,of the dispossessedand exploitedeverywhere."ome of thesearticles,Abbas's ommendation,and otherdescriptionsof Sai-nath'swork are included in the monographpublished by the Raja-Lakshmi oundation,Journalzsm f theFourth World Madras,1994), p. 20.39. MichaelTaussig,TheNervous System New York,1992), pp. 11, 12, 13.

the third world academic in other places; or, the postcolonial intellectual revisited

Documents