November 22, 2024 - English Studies

“Theory, Philosophy, Literature” by Robert C. Young: Summary and Critique

“Theory, Philosophy, Literature” by Robert C. Young first appeared in 2019 in the anthology French Thought and Literary Theory in the UK, edited by Irving Goh and published by Taylor & Francis Group.

Introduction: “Theory, Philosophy, Literature” by Robert C. Young

“Theory, Philosophy, Literature” by Robert C. Young first appeared in 2019 in the anthology French Thought and Literary Theory in the UK, edited by Irving Goh and published by Taylor & Francis Group. This seminal essay examines the arrival and assimilation of French theory in British intellectual circles, particularly in the 1960s and 1970s, contextualizing it within the broader history of Anglo-French intellectual exchanges. Young highlights the allure of French theoretical texts, which offered a tantalizing complexity, linguistic richness, and a promise of intellectual transformation. He situates this movement within a historical trajectory of philosophical engagement dating back to the French Revolution and beyond, noting its ties to left-wing radicalism and the critique of neoliberal ideologies. The essay underscores the literary dimensions of theory, arguing that its enigmatic and rigorous nature parallels the evocative depth of modernist literature. By connecting the theoretical to the literary, Young illuminates the transformative potential of theory not only as a mode of critique but as a form of literature in its own right. This work challenges conventional boundaries between disciplines and continues to shape debates in literary and cultural studies, offering insights into the enduring impact of French theory on global intellectual traditions.

Summary of “Theory, Philosophy, Literature” by Robert C. Young

Introduction to French Theory in Britain: Initially a niche area in the 1960s and 1970s, French theory captivated British intellectuals with its linguistic intricacies, cultural alterity, and philosophical complexity. The allure stemmed from its resistance to easy comprehension and its promise of intellectual transformation (Young, 2019, pp. 2-3).
Historical Roots of French Influence: French theoretical traditions have influenced British thought since the 18th century, including during the French Revolution and the spread of republican ideals. The philosophical exchange also drew on European revolutionary and post-revolutionary intellectual movements (Young, 2019, pp. 4-5).

Resistance to Theory: Criticism of French theory emerged from empiricist British critics, Marxists wary of theorists like Louis Althusser, and academics concerned with its abstract nature. This reflects a broader skepticism toward “continental” intellectual traditions in Anglo-American contexts (Young, 2019, pp. 5-6).
Literature’s Role in Theory: French theory extended the modernist fascination with linguistic and conceptual impenetrability. The integration of literary elements into theory underscored its ability to evoke emotional and intellectual responses, akin to literature itself (Young, 2019, pp. 6-7).
Philosophical Exclusion and Impact: The analytic tradition’s dominance in Anglo-American philosophy excluded broader continental approaches, creating intellectual vacuums filled by literary critics engaging with French thinkers like Derrida and Foucault (Young, 2019, pp. 7-8).

Interdisciplinary Encounters: The arrival of French theory catalyzed cross-disciplinary collaborations, particularly within philosophy, language studies, and literary criticism, exploring themes like translation, alterity, and ethical inquiries (Young, 2019, pp. 8-9).
Global Influence and Decolonization: French theory’s global trajectory connected European traditions to postcolonial critiques. Writers like Fanon and Glissant reshaped theory by integrating anti-colonial perspectives, emphasizing self-critical traditions within European philosophy (Young, 2019, pp. 11-12).
Theoretical Writing as Literature: Young argues that the literary qualities of theorists, including Derrida, Adorno, and Cixous, elevate their works beyond mere philosophy into the realm of creative and reflective literature (Young, 2019, pp. 12-13).

Contemporary Relevance: Despite claims that theory is “over,” Young asserts its enduring importance. Theory persists as a self-reflective, critical tradition that engages with universal questions of existence, suffering, and knowledge (Young, 2019, pp. 13-14).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Theory, Philosophy, Literature” by Robert C. Young

Theoretical Term/Concept	Definition/Explanation	Reference/Context
Alterity	The state of being other or different; used in French theory to explore the unfamiliar and the foreign as intellectual stimuli.	Highlighted as central to the allure of French theory, offering new possibilities and challenges (Young, 2019, p. 2).
Continental Philosophy	A European tradition of philosophical thought, often emphasizing language, subjectivity, and existence.	Contrasted with Anglo-American analytic traditions, which sidelined it in the 20th century (Young, 2019, p. 7).
Delphic Obscurity	The characteristic complexity and opacity of French theory, making it resistant to straightforward interpretation.	Described as both a challenge and an attraction for readers (Young, 2019, p. 3).
Hermeneutics	The theory and methodology of interpretation, especially of texts.	Referenced in connection to Coleridge and German traditions influencing British criticism (Young, 2019, p. 5).
Literariness	The quality that makes a text “literary,” including its aesthetic, formal, and conceptual attributes.	Explored in the context of how theory overlaps with and enhances literature (Young, 2019, p. 7).
Self-Critical Thinking	A defining trait of European philosophical traditions, involving critique of their own assumptions and frameworks.	Illustrated in the works of thinkers like Derrida and Fanon (Young, 2019, p. 12).
Translation	The act of rendering a text from one language to another; a key theme in theory for examining language, meaning, and cultural exchange.	French theory’s focus on translation emphasized its role in understanding alterity and ethics (Young, 2019, p. 8).
Ethics of Otherness	An ethical framework that prioritizes the recognition and respect for the “Other” in all its forms.	Central to postcolonial critiques and French theoretical engagement with identity (Young, 2019, p. 9).
Narratology	The study of narrative structure and the mechanisms of storytelling.	Linked to structuralist traditions and Russian formalists, surviving in modern theory (Young, 2019, p. 9).
Jacobin Radicalism	A political association with radical leftist ideologies originating from the French Revolution.	Discussed in the context of British fears of French theory’s revolutionary potential (Young, 2019, p. 4).
Opacity as Value	The idea that the complexity and difficulty of a theoretical text contribute to its depth and intellectual worth.	Discussed regarding Derrida and other theorists’ influence (Young, 2019, pp. 9-10).
Decolonization of Theory	The process of broadening theoretical frameworks to include perspectives from non-European and colonized cultures.	Explored through figures like Fanon and Césaire, who challenged Eurocentric frameworks (Young, 2019, p. 12).
Philosophy as Literature	The convergence of philosophy and literature, where philosophical texts achieve literary resonance.	Illustrated by writers like Derrida, Adorno, and Benjamin (Young, 2019, p. 13).
Untranslatability	The idea that certain terms or concepts cannot be fully conveyed across languages, reflecting unique cultural or philosophical contexts.	Explored through Cassin’s Dictionary of Untranslatables (Young, 2019, p. 13).

Contribution of “Theory, Philosophy, Literature” by Robert C. Young to Literary Theory/Theories

1. French Theory and its Intellectual Appeal

French theory, arriving in the UK in the 1960s and 1970s, attracted British intellectuals for its intellectual intensity, and a sense of alterity (foreignness).

Key Concept: The complexity and opacity of French theory challenged readers, offering intellectual risks and rewards in a manner similar to the challenges posed by modernist texts.

2. Risk and Difficulty in Theory

The challenge of theory was compared to navigating an unknown, potentially dangerous city, where intellectual effort was required to understand complex concepts that often eluded simple comprehension.

Philosophical Implication: Theory’s resistance to easy interpretation aligned it with modernism’s evocative, though frustrating, ambiguities.

3. Historical Context of French Theory in Britain

French thought has a deep-rooted history in the UK, dating back to the French Revolution, and continuing with thinkers like Edmund Burke who opposed radical French ideology.

Political and Ideological Clash: French theory’s radical, left-wing associations influenced the intellectual climate of Britain, paralleling earlier historical debates on radical republicanism and conservatism.

4. Theoretical Influence in the 20th Century

French theory revived in the 1960s and 1970s, after political movements like May 1968, bringing with it a new wave of intellectual ferment, engaging with Marxist, structuralist, and post-structuralist ideas.

Impact: Thinkers such as Althusser, Derrida, and Foucault reshaped academic discourse, introducing new paradigms of ideology, deconstruction, and power dynamics.

5. Philosophy and Literature

French philosophy often converged with literary criticism, blurring the lines between the two fields. Figures like Nietzsche and Heidegger influenced both philosophy and literary theory.

Theoretical Contribution: Literary theory began to explore the epistemological and ontological status of literature, questioning its role in shaping knowledge and understanding.

6. The Role of Obscurity in Theory

The concept of obscurity in theory, particularly through Derrida and Barthes, was highlighted as a key element that made French theory appealing and enduring.

Theory as Literary Art: The complexity and opacity in theory contributed to its literary quality, making it an intellectually pleasurable, albeit difficult, pursuit.

7. Interdisciplinary Contributions

French theory influenced literary criticism by introducing philosophical thinking into literary analysis, with a focus on language, translation, and alterity (otherness).

Examples: Derrida’s deconstruction, Foucault’s studies on power, and Barthes’ cultural critique brought philosophical inquiry into the realm of literature, challenging traditional boundaries.

8. Self-Critique in Western Thought

Young discussed how the European tradition of self-reflection and critique, exemplified by thinkers like Derrida, Fanon, and Du Bois, formed a core aspect of the theoretical tradition.

Self-Critical Thinking: The theoretical tradition includes constant reflection on its own structures, leading to the inclusion of voices from outside Europe that critique the Eurocentric foundations of Western philosophy and theory.

9. Literary and Philosophical Crossover

Literary theory was understood as a form of philosophical writing, drawing from the work of philosophers who integrated literary qualities in their works.

Philosophical Fiction: Figures like Benjamin and Adorno showed that philosophy itself could be deeply intertwined with literature, allowing for a complex, reflective engagement with both disciplines.

10. Globalization and the Decline of French Theory

The globalization of intellectual discourse and the diversification of philosophical thought led to a broader, more international canon of theory, moving beyond the dominance of French theory.

Contemporary Shifts: Thinkers like Edward Said and Homi Bhabha, along with postcolonial critiques, demonstrated that theory could no longer be confined to Western, particularly European, paradigms but had to include voices from the global South.

Examples of Critiques Through “Theory, Philosophy, Literature” by Robert C. Young

Literary Work	Theoretical Approach	Critique	Key Philosophical and Literary Concepts
“1984” by George Orwell	Marxism and Ideology	Young suggests that Marxist theory, including Althusser’s concept of ideology, can be applied to 1984 to examine the role of state control over language and thought.	Ideology, State Control, Repressive Structures
“The Waste Land” by T.S. Eliot	Structuralism and Language	Young highlights how structuralist theory, particularly Roland Barthes’ poetics, can decode the dense allusions in The Waste Land to uncover the underlying cultural and social structures.	Language, Structuralism, Intertextuality
“Beloved” by Toni Morrison	Postcolonial Criticism and Alterity	Drawing on postcolonial theory, Young suggests that Beloved explores the trauma of slavery and the struggle for identity, using Fanon’s critique of colonialism and cultural erasure.	Trauma, Identity, Colonialism, Postcolonialism
“Heart of Darkness” by Joseph Conrad	Postcolonial Criticism and European Self-Critique	Using Derrida’s concept of deconstruction and Fanon’s work, Young critiques Conrad’s portrayal of Africa and colonialism, emphasizing how the narrative reflects Europe’s internal contradictions.	Postcolonialism, Self-Critique, Eurocentrism, Deconstruction

Explanation:

Marxism and Ideology in 1984 focuses on the way Orwell critiques capitalist societies by showing how totalitarian regimes manipulate ideology and control thought.
Structuralism and Language applied to The Waste Land emphasizes how its intricate allusions and literary techniques reveal deeper cultural and social systems.

Postcolonial Criticism and Alterity in Beloved examines the effects of slavery and colonialism, exploring how identity is shaped by historical trauma and oppression.
Postcolonial Criticism and European Self-Critique in Heart of Darkness critiques Conrad’s representation of Africa through the lens of European philosophical self-reflection, showing how it embodies colonial biases and contradictions.

Criticism Against “Theory, Philosophy, Literature” by Robert C. Young

Overemphasis on Complexity and Obscurity
- Critics argue that the work places excessive value on the difficult and opaque nature of French theory, making it inaccessible to a wider audience. This can alienate readers who prefer clearer, more accessible theoretical approaches.
Eurocentric Focus
- Despite Young’s acknowledgment of non-European contributions, his discussion still heavily centers on European intellectual traditions, particularly French theory. This can reinforce a Eurocentric perspective, sidelining critical voices from outside the Western canon.

Narrow Definition of Theory
- The article presents “theory” in a limited sense, often excluding non-Western or non-continental philosophical traditions. Some critics feel that theory, as presented, does not adequately consider global or indigenous intellectual traditions, limiting its scope.
Idealization of French Thought
- Young’s admiration for French thinkers like Derrida, Foucault, and Barthes has been critiqued as somewhat idealized. Some argue that the elevation of French theory over other intellectual traditions perpetuates a hierarchy that undermines the value of other schools of thought.
Dismissal of Practical Application
- Critics suggest that Young’s discussion on the abstract nature of theory and philosophy ignores the practical implications of these ideas in real-world contexts, such as in policy, activism, or societal change.

Overreliance on Obscure Language
- The use of complex jargon and theoretical abstraction in the text has been criticized for contributing to the idea that philosophy and theory must be elusive or difficult. This style can discourage engagement from readers who are unfamiliar with academic jargon or prefer more straightforward discourse.
Neglect of Political and Historical Context
- While Young mentions some historical moments like the French Revolution, critics argue that his focus on theoretical developments sometimes overlooks the broader political and historical contexts in which these ideas were formulated, which can reduce the practical relevance of the theories.
Conflation of Literary and Philosophical Writing
- Some critics take issue with Young’s tendency to blur the lines between literary criticism and philosophy, suggesting that this conflation can muddy the waters between the two disciplines, making it unclear what the distinct contributions of each are.

Representative Quotations from “Theory, Philosophy, Literature” by Robert C. Young with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“Much of their passion for French theory was driven by a desire for intellectual intensity, for the experience of alterity, by a tantalising taste for the foreign.”	Young highlights the allure of French theory for British intellectuals in the 1960s and 1970s, noting that their interest was motivated by a desire for intellectual challenge and engagement with the “foreign” ideas and complexities within French philosophical traditions.
“To make the leap into theory was full of risk and danger. It was like being suddenly transported to a far-away unknown city…”	This metaphor illustrates the perceived complexity and unpredictability of engaging with theory. It suggests that diving into intellectual thought is an adventurous and risky endeavor, requiring trust and a willingness to face the unknown.
“Theory’s intriguing refusal to yield to simple comprehension, its resistance to interpretation, its promise of secrets to be obtained…”	Young emphasizes theory’s inherent complexity and its refusal to offer clear or easy answers. It appeals to those who are drawn to its mysteries and its potential to offer transformative, albeit elusive, insights.
“The texts of modernism had been unpicked, their treasures laid out on display in the glass cases of reader’s guides…”	Here, Young critiques the way modernist works were deconstructed and oversimplified in academic discourse. The original allure of modernist literature—the complexity of its references and the promise of deeper meaning—was diluted by over-analysis and the desire to explain every allusion.
“Theory held out its precarious promise that its complexity was an altogether different intricacy of conception…”	Young describes theory as offering a type of intellectual complexity distinct from literary impressionism. Unlike the evocative yet fleeting qualities of modernist literature, theory presents challenges that push the boundaries of intellectual and philosophical understanding.
“French theory in the UK has a long history, going back to the eighteenth century at least.”	This statement situates French intellectual traditions as deeply embedded in British intellectual history. Young suggests that French theory has long been influential in shaping critical thought in the UK, even prior to its resurgence in the 1960s and 1970s.
“The war between Britain and France was not simply a conventional war between rival states – it was also an ideological war…”	Young frames the conflict between Britain and France as not just a political or military rivalry, but also as a clash of ideologies, particularly the radical republicanism of the French against the conservative monarchy of Britain. This historical backdrop helps explain the tension around French theory.
“The arrival of French theory in Britain in the late 1960s and 1970s falls within a clear historical pattern…”	Young contextualizes the rise of French theory in Britain within a broader historical framework, linking it to the political upheavals of the 1960s and 1970s, particularly post-May 1968, and illustrating how intellectual movements often emerge in response to political change.
“The very word ‘theory,’ in the context of the humanities or social sciences, has continued to bear these ancient associations…”	Young acknowledges the longstanding association of “theory” with radical thought, particularly in the context of left-wing political movements. He notes that the term has historical roots tied to revolution and ideological challenges, which persist in its contemporary academic usage.
“Theory does not just comprise some form of ‘critical thinking’: it is fundamentally self-critical thinking…”	Young differentiates theory from mere critical thinking by asserting that theory involves constant self-reflection and self-critique. It challenges established norms and assumptions, fostering intellectual growth by questioning the very foundations of knowledge and understanding.

“How Literary Can Literariness Be?” By Massimo Salgaro: Summary and Critique

“How Literary Can Literariness Be?” by Massimo Salgaro first appeared in Scientific Study of Literature, volume 5, issue 2, in 2015, spanning pages 229–249 (doi: 10.1075/ssol.5.2.06sal).

Introduction: “How Literary Can Literariness Be?” By Massimo Salgaro

“How Literary Can Literariness Be?” by Massimo Salgaro first appeared in Scientific Study of Literature, volume 5, issue 2, in 2015, spanning pages 229–249 (doi: 10.1075/ssol.5.2.06sal). The article explores the methodological complexities inherent in studying “literariness,” particularly through the lens of foregrounding and its impact on readers’ cognitive and aesthetic engagement. Drawing on Roman Jakobson’s foundational concept of “literariness,” Salgaro interrogates how foregrounded linguistic elements, such as rhetorical figures, influence text processing under different genre expectations. The study employs experimental methods to examine how readers interpret texts presented as literary versus non-literary, revealing that genre perception significantly affects reading dynamics, such as attention to rhetorical features and lexical difficulty. Salgaro’s work underscores the interplay of textual features, cognitive schemas, and reader expectations, contributing to debates in literary theory about the nature of aesthetic experience. The study holds significant implications for understanding the cognitive and emotional mechanisms underpinning literary reading and broadens the methodological frameworks used in empirical aesthetics and literary criticism.

Summary of “How Literary Can Literariness Be?” By Massimo Salgaro

1. Definition of Literariness and Foregrounding

Literariness is traditionally understood as a defining feature of literary texts, characterized by stylistic elements that distinguish them from everyday language (Jakobson, 1987; Shklovsky, 1917).

Foregrounding involves the use of rhetorical and linguistic deviations to elicit defamiliarization, challenging habitual patterns of perception (Mukarovský, 1932; Miall & Kuiken, 1994).

2. Debate on Literariness

Two contrasting approaches dominate: the “textual features” perspective (e.g., Jakobson, Shklovsky) and the “reader-response” perspective, focusing on cognitive and contextual factors influencing perception (Miall & Kuiken, 1998; Fish, 1980).

Recent studies emphasize that both textual elements and reader expectations shape the literary experience (Zwaan, 1991, 1994).

3. Experiment 1: Genre Expectations and Reading Times

Participants read sentences framed as either literary or journalistic, with varying degrees of foregrounding (rhetorical figures like oxymora, synesthesia).

Findings revealed that genre expectations affect reading times, with rhetorical figures slowing reading more in the “news” context than the “literary” context (Salgaro, 2015).
Foregrounding acts as a “lexical challenge,” especially for low-frequency or semantically complex words.

4. Experiment 2: Semantic Distance and Rhetorical Figures

Evaluated the semantic distance between paired terms in rhetorical figures (e.g., “black milk” vs. “white milk”).
Greater semantic distance (e.g., in synesthesia and personification) correlates with more significant cognitive challenges (Salgaro, 2015).
Conflicting results highlighted the limitations of isolating foregrounding effects without considering contextual “backgrounding.”

5. Critique of Foregrounding-Only Models

Literariness emerges from the interplay between foregrounding and backgrounding, balancing defamiliarization with narrative and emotional coherence (van Peer et al., 2007).
Cognitive processes involved in literary reading are influenced by both top-down (reader expectations) and bottom-up (textual features) mechanisms (Jacobs, 2013).

6. Methodological Innovations

Introduced micro-level analyses of lexical deviations, contrasting “determinate” and “statistical” deviations in foregrounding studies (Levin, 1963).
Highlighted the importance of naturalistic contexts in empirical studies of literariness, advocating for integrative neurocognitive models (Jacobs, 2013).

7. Implications for Literary Theory and Empirical Aesthetics

Literariness is a multifaceted phenomenon involving textual, contextual, and cognitive elements.
Further research should explore how backgrounding complements foregrounding in literary texts and how these dynamics affect the reader’s aesthetic and cognitive experience (Salgaro, 2015).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “How Literary Can Literariness Be?” By Massimo Salgaro

Term/Concept	Definition/Explanation	Key References
Literariness	The quality that makes a text distinctly “literary,” often linked to stylistic and rhetorical features.	Jakobson (1987), Shklovsky (1917), Mukarovský (1932)
Foregrounding	The use of stylistic and linguistic features to defamiliarize, making readers notice elements of a text.	Miall & Kuiken (1994), Mukarovský (1932)
Defamiliarization	A process by which habitual perceptions are disrupted through novel or unexpected uses of language.	Shklovsky (1917), Mukarovský (1932)
Backgrounding	Elements in a text that connect to familiar schemata, allowing for narrative coherence and emotional resonance.	Jacobs (2013), Kneepkens & Zwaan (1994)
Reader Response Theory	A framework focusing on the reader’s role in interpreting texts based on personal and contextual factors.	Fish (1980), Jauss (1967), Iser (1976)
Schema Theory	The idea that literature disrupts and refreshes mental schemata, enabling new experiences for readers.	Jauss (1967), Iser (1976), Stockwell (2002)
Genre Expectations	Readers’ preconceptions about a text’s genre, influencing how they process and interpret it.	Zwaan (1991, 1994), Hoffstaedter (1986)
Lexical Challenge	Cognitive effort required to process statistically rare or complex lexical items in a text.	Levin (1963), Miall & Kuiken (1994)
Cognitive Control Mechanisms	Processes guiding how textual features are interpreted, influenced by genre and reader expertise.	Zwaan (1994), Jacobs (2013)
Statistical Deviation	A linguistic feature that deviates statistically from the norm within a language or genre.	Levin (1963), van Peer (1986)
Determinate Deviation	A clear violation of grammatical, poetic, or cultural conventions within a given context.	Levin (1963), Salgaro (2015)
Neurocognitive Poetics	A model of literary reading that emphasizes dual-route processing: fast, automatic immersion and slower, aesthetic processing.	Jacobs (2013), Lüdtke et al. (2014)
Pragmatic Concept of Literature	An approach that considers literature as defined by its function and reception, rather than intrinsic features.	Winko, Jannidis, & Lauer (2009)
Ecological Validity	The need for experimental studies to mimic naturalistic reading conditions to capture genuine literary experiences.	Dimigen et al. (2011), Salgaro (2015)

Contribution of “How Literary Can Literariness Be?” By Massimo Salgaro to Literary Theory/Theories

Russian Formalism
- Reinforces the concept of literariness as a distinctive characteristic of literary texts, primarily defined through foregrounding and defamiliarization.
- Expands the Formalist idea that literary language disrupts conventional patterns to enable deeper engagement.
- References: Shklovsky (1917), Jakobson (1987), Levin (1963).
Reader Response Theory
- Emphasizes the dynamic interaction between reader expectations and textual features in shaping the perception of literariness.
- Demonstrates how genre expectations influence cognitive processing, supporting theories of reader-based interpretation.
- References: Iser (1976), Jauss (1967), Zwaan (1991, 1994).
Schema Theory
- Applies schema theory to literary reading, showing how literary texts disrupt and refresh cognitive frameworks through processes of defamiliarization and refamiliarization.
- Highlights the role of backgrounding in complementing foregrounding to create schema disruptions.
- References: Stockwell (2002), Miall & Kuiken (1998).

Empirical Aesthetics
- Introduces experimental methodologies to test cognitive and emotional responses to foregrounded textual features like rhetorical figures.
- Challenges earlier unitary conceptions of literariness, proposing that it emerges from a combination of textual and reader-based factors.
- References: Altmann et al. (2012), Miall & Kuiken (1994), van Peer (1986).
Neurocognitive Poetics
- Aligns with neurocognitive models of reading, highlighting dual processing routes—fast immersive processes for backgrounding and slower, aesthetic engagement with foregrounding.
- References: Jacobs (2011, 2013), Lüdtke et al. (2014).
Pragmatic Literary Theory
- Advocates for a pragmatic approach to literature that integrates both text-oriented and reader-oriented perspectives across diverse contexts.
- Supports the idea that literariness is a multifaceted phenomenon rather than a fixed textual property.
- References: Winko, Jannidis, & Lauer (2009).
Cognitive Linguistics and Deviation Theory
- Examines linguistic deviation at a micro-level (e.g., statistical rarity of words) to assess how foregrounding challenges lexical processing.
- Contributes to understanding how deviations at lexical and semantic levels impact literary cognition.
- References: Levin (1963), Sanford & Emmott (2012).

Experimental Stylistics
- Validates the role of rhetorical figures like oxymora and synaesthesia in slowing reading and increasing cognitive engagement.
- Explores the influence of micro-level textual elements on comprehension and memory.
- References: Miall & Kuiken (1994), van Peer & Hakemulder (2006).
Aesthetic and Emotional Engagement
- Discusses how foregrounding elicits aesthetic and emotional reactions, bridging defamiliarization (surprise) and refamiliarization (integration).
- References: Kneepkens & Zwaan (1994), Miall & Kuiken (1999).

Examples of Critiques Through “How Literary Can Literariness Be?” By Massimo Salgaro

Literary Work	Theory Applied	Critical Analysis
Ulysses by James Joyce	Foregrounding and Defamiliarization	Joyce’s use of complex narrative techniques and unconventional language creates foregrounding that disrupts conventional schemas, requiring readers to engage in defamiliarization and cognitive realignment (Miall & Kuiken, 1998).
The Old Man and the Sea by Hemingway	Backgrounding and Foregrounding Interaction	Hemingway’s minimalist style serves as backgrounding, while rare descriptive elements (e.g., “gaunt with deep wrinkles”) foreground key narrative moments, engaging both aesthetic and empathetic responses (Jacobs, 2013).
The Metamorphosis by Kafka	Schema Disruption and Refreshment	Kafka disrupts reader expectations through the absurd premise (Gregor’s transformation), leading to schema renewal and reflection on existential themes, consistent with schema theory (Stockwell, 2002).
A Streetcar Named Desire by Tennessee Williams	Lexical and Rhetorical Foregrounding	The play’s use of figurative language, such as Blanche’s poetic monologues, slows comprehension, enhancing emotional and aesthetic engagement through rhetorical foregrounding (van Peer, 1986).
Pale Fire by Vladimir Nabokov	Genre Expectations and Reader Response	Nabokov manipulates genre expectations by blending fictional commentary and poetry, prompting readers to shift cognitive frames and question literariness itself (Zwaan, 1994).
Paradise Lost by John Milton	Cognitive and Emotional Dual Processing	Milton’s epic evokes immersive backgrounding through its narrative structure and aesthetic foregrounding via rich rhetorical devices (e.g., epic similes), engaging both fast and slow cognitive routes (Jacobs, 2011).
Leaves of Grass by Walt Whitman	Statistical Deviation and Lexical Rarity	Whitman’s repetition of uncommon word patterns and distinctive typography foreground his free verse style, exemplifying statistical deviation in poetic language (Levin, 1963).
Beloved by Toni Morrison	Foregrounding Emotional and Cognitive Challenges	Morrison’s complex narrative structure and dense metaphorical language foreground emotional and psychological themes, demanding slower, deeper engagement from readers (Miall & Kuiken, 1994).
1984 by George Orwell	Defamiliarization of Political Language	Orwell’s use of Newspeak and dystopian settings defamiliarizes readers with political language, enhancing critical reflection on societal norms through linguistic and narrative deviation (van Peer, Hakemulder & Zygnier, 2007).

Criticism Against “How Literary Can Literariness Be?” By Massimo Salgaro

Limited Scope of Foregrounding Analysis
The study’s focus on isolated sentences in self-paced reading experiments neglects the holistic context of literary works, where foregrounding interacts with backgrounding to produce meaning. This narrow scope reduces ecological validity.
Overemphasis on Statistical Deviation
The reliance on statistical deviation as a measure of literariness may oversimplify the complexity of literary language and ignore the interplay of cultural, historical, and thematic contexts that influence literary appreciation.

Neglect of Macro-Level Literary Structures
The micro-level focus on lexical rarity and rhetorical figures does not address how larger narrative structures and themes contribute to the overall literariness of a text, limiting the applicability to comprehensive literary critique.
Inconsistent Experimental Findings
The conflicting results between Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 highlight methodological issues in replicating the effects of foregrounding, raising questions about the reliability of the study’s conclusions.
Reductionist Approach to Reader Response
The cognitive model of reader response focuses on measurable linguistic and lexical elements but overlooks the subjective, emotional, and cultural factors that significantly impact literary reading experiences.

Dependence on Laboratory Settings
The artificiality of laboratory-based, word-by-word reading procedures does not reflect natural reading habits, potentially distorting how literariness and foregrounding operate in real-world contexts.
Limited Exploration of Genre Diversity
The experiments predominantly focus on literary versus non-literary texts without addressing how different literary genres (e.g., poetry, drama, prose) may uniquely employ foregrounding and backgrounding.
Insufficient Integration of Historical Literary Theory
While the study references key theorists (e.g., Jakobson, Shklovsky), it does not thoroughly integrate historical insights into its empirical framework, potentially leading to a fragmented understanding of literariness.

Minimal Engagement with Reader Expertise
The study does not sufficiently account for how a reader’s literary expertise, cultural background, or reading habits influence their perception of foregrounding and genre expectations.

Representative Quotations from “How Literary Can Literariness Be?” By Massimo Salgaro with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“Literariness cannot be considered a textual feature only, but is rather the effect of a multifaceted process integrating textual features and cognitive operations.” (p. 245)	Highlights the complexity of literariness as a dynamic interplay between text characteristics and reader cognition, challenging the notion of a fixed definition for literariness.
“Foregrounding induces not only deeper language processing but also extended emotional and psychological change.” (p. 234)	Suggests that foregrounded elements in texts can enhance cognitive engagement and provoke profound emotional reactions, supporting their role in distinguishing literary texts from non-literary ones.
“The defamiliarization effect of foregrounding elements does not work in isolation; it requires the presence of backgrounding elements.” (p. 243)	Emphasizes that both foregrounding and backgrounding are essential for creating literary effects, as foregrounding gains significance only when contrasted against a norm or contextual background.
“Genre expectations influence how texts are processed, demonstrating that literariness also involves top-down cognitive processes.” (p. 237)	Indicates that readers’ preconceived notions about a text’s genre affect their reading strategies, further blurring the line between intrinsic textual features and reader perceptions in defining literariness.
“The attempt to study foregrounding statistically is a methodological challenge, as deviation depends on the specific context in which it is observed.” (p. 243)	Acknowledges the difficulty in quantifying foregrounding, as its effect is context-dependent, necessitating nuanced experimental approaches to study its role in literariness.
“Slowed reading times for foregrounded elements indicate cognitive challenge and heightened attention, characteristics of literary processing.” (p. 239)	Suggests that the slowed processing of foregrounded linguistic features signals the reader’s deeper engagement with literary texts, distinguishing them from mundane reading experiences.
“Statistical rarity of words contributes to the literary effect, but it must be analyzed within micro- and macro-contexts.” (p. 240)	Proposes that linguistic deviation contributes to literariness but insists on examining how these rare elements interact with broader textual and thematic structures.
“Literary language provides occasion for dehabituation, for contemplating alternative modes of experience.” (p. 230)	Echoes the Russian Formalist idea that literary texts disrupt habitual ways of thinking, offering readers opportunities for fresh perspectives and experiences.
“Refamiliarization is an integral part of literariness, as it integrates the defamiliarized text into the reader’s existing cognitive frameworks.” (p. 238)	Highlights the cyclical nature of literary reading, where readers process and reconcile unfamiliar elements within their pre-existing knowledge and expectations.
“Empirical studies show that foregrounded elements elicit surprise and require longer reading times, affirming their role in cognitive and aesthetic literary experiences.” (p. 233)	Validates the significance of foregrounding in eliciting cognitive and emotional engagement, substantiating its importance in empirical investigations of literariness.

“Diasporas old and new: Women in the transnational world” by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak: Summary and Critique

“Diasporas Old and New: Women in the Transnational World” by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak first appeared in the journal Textual Practice in 1996.

Introduction: “Diasporas old and new: Women in the transnational world” by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak

“Diasporas Old and New: Women in the Transnational World” by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak first appeared in the journal Textual Practice in 1996 and represents a seminal intervention in feminist literary theory and postcolonial studies. In this essay, originally delivered as a lecture at Rutgers University in 1994, Spivak explores the dynamics of women’s experiences within diasporic and transnational contexts. She critically examines the intersections of labor migrancy, population control, and indigenous women’s positions outside traditional diasporic frameworks. Spivak critiques the neoliberal restructuring of the global economy and its impact on decolonization, emphasizing how transnational capitalism exploits women disproportionately while eroding civil society in both developed and developing nations. She also interrogates the Eurocentric biases embedded in feminist and cultural studies, particularly the reductive treatment of diasporic women’s narratives. This work is pivotal for its nuanced critique of global feminism, its advocacy for a decolonized perspective on transnationality, and its challenge to homogenizing cultural and feminist frameworks, making it a cornerstone in debates about globalization, identity, and gendered labor.

Summary of “Diasporas old and new: Women in the transnational world” by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak

Transnationality and Economic Realities:
- Spivak critiques the shift from multinational to transnational frameworks of labor migration as a symptom of neoliberal globalization (Spivak, 1996, p. 245).
- This shift exacerbates inequalities in developing nations, damaging the potential for civil society and social redistribution (p. 248).
Old vs. New Diasporas:
- Old Diasporas: Rooted in religious oppression, war, slavery, indenture, and conquest, primarily within intra-European contexts or U.S. immigration (p. 245).
- New Diasporas: Emerging from economic migration, political asylum-seeking, and gendered labor export, predominantly impacting women (p. 246).
Women and Labor:
- Women’s labor, such as homeworking, often lacks institutional protection, reinforcing unpaid domestic labor’s undervaluation (p. 246).
- Transnational agencies impose population control policies targeting impoverished women, equating reproductive capacity with identity, which Spivak terms “gynocide” (p. 247).
Excluded Groups:
- Indigenous women and groups unable to migrate are excluded from both old and new diasporic narratives, reflecting a broader marginalization within transnational discourses (p. 247).

Civil Society and Feminist Interventions:
- Transnational processes undermine the formation of civil societies in developing nations, which Spivak links to a failure of decolonization (p. 248).
- Feminist critiques often neglect the complexities of transnationality, focusing instead on identity politics or Eurocentric frameworks (p. 250).

Culturalism and Multiculturalism:
- Spivak critiques the romanticization of cultural relativism and its limitations in addressing systemic transnational inequalities (p. 254).
- She emphasizes the need for nuanced feminist approaches that resist reductive cultural explanations (p. 256).

Challenges for Feminist Academics:
- Academics must navigate the ideological constraints of neoliberal frameworks while promoting transnational feminist literacy (p. 257).
- Spivak warns against the uncritical adoption of Western feminist paradigms, advocating for localized and intersectional analyses (p. 258).

The Role of Women in Transnational Narratives:
- Women are often positioned as victims or passive agents, ignoring their potential as active participants in resisting globalization’s exploitative structures (p. 259).
- Feminist translators and academics have a critical role in amplifying subaltern voices while resisting dominant culturalist narratives (p. 262).

Implications for the Future:
- Spivak calls for a rethinking of diasporic and global feminist frameworks to address economic inequalities, cultural marginalization, and the intersectionality of women’s experiences (p. 264).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Diasporas old and new: Women in the transnational world” by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak

Term/Concept	Explanation	Context/Significance
Transnationality	Refers to the globalized movement of labor and capital, eroding the autonomy of developing nations.	Highlights the exploitation of labor, especially women’s, under neoliberal globalization (Spivak, 1996, p. 245).
Diaspora (Old and New)	Old diasporas stemmed from war, slavery, and religious oppression; new ones are driven by economic migration and asylum-seeking.	Explains shifts in global labor migration and their gendered impact on women in First and Third World contexts (p. 246).
Civil Society	The arena in which individuals can demand service or redress from the state, ideally a space of equity.	Civil society’s weakening under transnationality limits avenues for social redistribution and justice (p. 248).
Population Control	Policies targeting women in developing nations to limit reproduction, often imposed by global agencies.	Criticized as “gynocide” that dehumanizes women and reduces them to reproductive agents (p. 247).
Homeworking	Women performing piecework labor at home without legal or wage protections.	Exemplifies how transnational capitalism exploits women while marginalizing their labor contributions (p. 246).
Subaltern	Borrowed from Gramsci, it refers to marginalized groups excluded from elite discourse.	Indigenous women and non-migrant groups exemplify subalternity in transnational frameworks (p. 247).
Multiculturalism	A superficial celebration of cultural diversity, often excluding the structural inequalities of labor and migration.	Criticized as insufficient for addressing systemic oppression in diasporic and transnational contexts (p. 254).
Global Feminism	Feminist frameworks attempting to address global issues.	Spivak critiques their tendency to universalize Western feminist ideologies, ignoring localized struggles (p. 256).
Gynocide	A term used to describe systemic violence against women, particularly through reproductive policies.	Shows how global institutions perpetuate violence under the guise of development (p. 247).
Economic Citizenship	Rights and access defined through economic participation, privileging elites.	Transnational capital fosters this form of citizenship, sidelining marginalized groups (p. 249).
Post-State Class System	Emerging global class systems detached from traditional nation-state frameworks.	Highlights the role of women in sustaining global capitalism through undervalued and exploited labor (p. 249).
Culturalism	Using cultural explanations to mask structural inequalities.	Critiqued as an inadequate lens for analyzing transnational gendered labor (p. 254).
Responsibility-Based Ethics	Ethical systems emphasizing accountability to all, especially marginalized groups.	Advocated as a feminist framework for navigating global inequalities (p. 259).
Decolonization of the Mind	The process of resisting cultural and ideological dominance from global and colonial powers.	Proposed as necessary for addressing the failures of civil society in decolonized nations (p. 258).
Hybridity and Migration	The blending of identities through migration and diaspora.	Spivak critiques the romanticization of hybridity in cultural studies for masking systemic exploitation (p. 262).
Economic Development	Often framed as progress, it is critiqued as a tool for furthering transnational exploitation.	Spivak critiques “Women in Development” policies for exacerbating global inequalities (p. 264).

Contribution of “Diasporas old and new: Women in the transnational world” by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak to Literary Theory/Theories

1. Postcolonial Theory

Contribution: Spivak critiques the legacy of colonialism in shaping global inequalities, particularly through the lens of diasporic labor, migration, and gendered exploitation. She expands postcolonial theory by addressing the intersections of economic globalization and gender.
Key Ideas:
- The “failure of decolonization” to establish civil societies capable of ensuring social redistribution (Spivak, p. 248).
- Transnationality as a continuation of imperialist exploitation under the guise of globalization (p. 249).
- The subaltern’s inability to engage fully in civil society or articulate their resistance (p. 259).
Significance: Spivak’s analysis adds depth to postcolonial studies by linking economic systems, global feminism, and cultural narratives, showing how postcolonial identities are commodified in transnational spaces.

2. Feminist Literary Theory

Contribution: Spivak critiques Eurocentric feminist universalism and advocates for a transnational feminist perspective sensitive to local and global contexts.
Key Ideas:
- The imposition of population control policies on women in developing nations as a form of “gynocide” (p. 247).
- The romanticization of cultural relativism by feminist cultural studies (p. 253).
- The dangers of transnational feminism reducing women’s experiences to reproductive and domestic labor (p. 254).

Significance: By exposing the limitations of global feminism, Spivak urges feminists to engage with localized struggles and the complexities of women’s roles in diasporic and transnational contexts.

3. Subaltern Studies

Contribution: Spivak builds on her seminal idea of the subaltern’s inability to speak by exploring how globalization has altered subaltern identities.

Key Ideas:
- Many indigenous and marginalized women cannot become “diasporic” and remain trapped in global systems of labor exploitation (p. 247).
- Spivak critiques the cultural and economic narratives that exclude subaltern groups from meaningful participation in civil society (p. 249).

Significance: Spivak’s emphasis on the “new subaltern” in transnational spaces extends Subaltern Studies to address contemporary forms of global economic and cultural domination.

4. Marxist Theory

Contribution: Spivak incorporates Marxist critiques of capitalism into her analysis of transnationality, focusing on how labor and capital exploitation disproportionately affect women in diasporic contexts.

Key Ideas:
- The commodification of women’s labor in the global economy (homeworking and export-processing zones) reflects new forms of capitalist exploitation (p. 246).
- The distinction between labor and labor-power in reproductive contexts (p. 264).
- The undermining of civil society in developing nations to prioritize global financialization (p. 249).
Significance: Spivak enriches Marxist theory by linking economic exploitation to gendered labor practices and transnational power dynamics.

5. Cultural Studies

Contribution: Spivak critiques Cultural Studies for romanticizing hybridity and diaspora while ignoring systemic economic exploitation and labor conditions.
Key Ideas:
- The fetishization of cultural hybridity and multiculturalism as solutions to systemic inequalities (p. 262).
- The “re-coding” of global capitalism as cultural phenomena, masking its exploitative nature (p. 245).
Significance: Spivak challenges Cultural Studies to address material conditions of labor and power, rather than focusing solely on cultural representations.

6. Critical Theory and Ethics

Contribution: Spivak interrogates notions of responsibility and ethical engagement in transnational and feminist contexts.
Key Ideas:
- Feminist universalism propagated by transnational agencies often fails to account for the ethical complexities of cultural and economic conditions (p. 256).
- Responsibility-based ethics should account for both the material and symbolic dimensions of women’s experiences in globalization (p. 259).
Significance: Spivak’s ethical framework offers a nuanced approach to analyzing global feminist practices and transnational activism.

7. Deconstruction

Contribution: Spivak applies deconstructive methods to challenge fixed binaries like local/global, private/public, and labor/capital, emphasizing their instability in transnational contexts.
Key Ideas:
- The inherent contradictions in feminist universalism and cultural relativism (p. 256).
- The destabilization of national and state boundaries in the era of globalization (p. 262).
Significance: Spivak’s application of deconstruction highlights the aporias and tensions within feminist and postcolonial theories, urging a rethinking of theoretical categories.

8. Development Studies

Contribution: Spivak critiques the ideology of “development” as a tool for perpetuating global inequalities, especially through its impact on women.
Key Ideas:
- “Women in Development” policies often exploit women’s labor under the guise of empowerment (p. 264).
- Development projects prioritize capital maximization over social redistribution (p. 249).
Significance: Spivak’s analysis provides a feminist critique of development paradigms, linking them to transnational systems of economic exploitation.

Examples of Critiques Through “Diasporas old and new: Women in the transnational world” by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak

Literary Work	Critique through Spivak’s Lens	Key Concepts from Spivak’s Article	Relevant Citation from Spivak
Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys	– Highlights the exploitation and silencing of subaltern women in colonial and postcolonial contexts. – Antoinette’s marginalization mirrors the diasporic woman’s struggle for agency within transnational systems.	Subalternity, cultural hybridity, gendered exploitation.	“The disenfranchised new or old diasporic woman cannot engage in the critical agency of civil society” (p. 259).
Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe	– Examines the impact of colonialism on indigenous structures of gender and power. – Women’s erasure parallels Spivak’s critique of transnationality silencing subaltern voices.	Subaltern women’s exclusion from diasporic narratives, intersection of colonial and gender oppression.	“Large groups within this space of difference subsist in transnationality without escaping into diaspora” (p. 247).
The God of Small Things by Arundhati Roy	– Analyzes caste and gender oppression alongside diasporic identity and labor. – Ammu’s struggles reflect the “in-place uprooting” of women in transnational spaces.	Intersection of caste, gender, and globalization in labor and identity.	“The haunting in-place uprooting of ‘comfort women’ in Asia and Africa” (p. 245).
Brick Lane by Monica Ali	– Critiques the romanticized hybridity of diasporic life in the West. – Focuses on the material struggles of migrant women excluded from civil society.	Romanticization of cultural hybridity, transnational exploitation of women’s labor, gendered subalternity.	“Feminists with a transnational consciousness will also be aware that the very civil structure… can provide alibis for global financialization” (p. 249).

Criticism Against “Diasporas old and new: Women in the transnational world” by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak

Dense and Esoteric Language:
- Spivak’s theoretical style often employs highly complex, jargon-heavy language that can alienate readers unfamiliar with poststructuralist discourse.
- Critics argue that the accessibility of her arguments is compromised, limiting engagement beyond academia.
Overemphasis on Theory Over Praxis:
- Spivak’s work is critiqued for prioritizing theoretical frameworks over actionable insights or practical solutions for the issues of diasporic women.
- The critique highlights a gap between her philosophical speculations and real-world applications for marginalized women.
Generalization of Diasporic Experiences:
- Critics suggest that Spivak’s framing of diasporas and transnationality does not adequately account for the nuanced differences in diasporic identities, especially across varied cultural and historical contexts.
Ambiguity in Subaltern Representation:
- Some scholars argue that Spivak’s portrayal of subaltern women is paradoxical, as she critiques their silencing while simultaneously speaking on their behalf, raising concerns of academic elitism.

Limited Focus on Specific Geographies:
- Spivak’s emphasis on the transnational often sidelines detailed discussions of specific regional or cultural contexts, such as the unique experiences of African, Caribbean, or Latin American diasporas.
Critique of Feminist Universalism:
- While Spivak critiques feminist universalism propagated through transnational agencies like the UN, some critics feel her stance underestimates the potential of global feminist solidarity.
Neglect of Male Perspectives in Diasporic Studies:
- Spivak’s work focuses heavily on women, often ignoring the intersecting roles of men in shaping diasporic and transnational experiences, which some view as an incomplete analysis.

Contradiction in Anti-Eurocentrism:
- Although Spivak critiques Eurocentric feminism, her reliance on European philosophers (e.g., Derrida, Marx) is seen as contradictory by some critics, questioning her theoretical consistency.
Abstract Approach to Civil Society:
- Critics argue that Spivak’s discussion on the erosion of civil society under transnationality lacks empirical grounding, making it difficult to apply to specific policy or grassroots activism.

Representative Quotations from “Diasporas old and new: Women in the transnational world” by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“Transnationality is becoming the name of the increased migrancy of labour.”	Spivak critiques the commodification of labor under global capitalism, where transnationality shifts from being a cultural phenomenon to a symptom of economic exploitation. This reframes migration not as voluntary movement but as a structural necessity driven by neoliberal agendas.
“The concept of a diasporic multiculturalism is irrelevant here.”	Addressing women engaged in homeworking, Spivak dismisses the romanticized notions of multiculturalism in diasporas, highlighting the harsh realities of unregulated labor markets that disproportionately exploit women.
“Population Control… is no less than gynocide and war on women.”	Spivak critiques global population control policies imposed on women in developing countries, arguing they perpetuate Western ideologies that reduce women to their reproductive capacities and enforce systemic violence masked as aid.
“Groups that cannot become diasporic… include most indigenous groups outside Euramerica.”	Spivak emphasizes that not all groups can access the diasporic experience. For indigenous populations, transnationality manifests as a form of systemic marginalization rather than mobility or hybridity, challenging common assumptions about the benefits of globalization.
“Women, with other disenfranchised groups, have never been full subjects of and agents in civil society.”	Spivak critiques the historical exclusion of women and marginalized groups from the frameworks of civil society, arguing that even within global feminist movements, women’s citizenship and agency remain precarious and conditional.
“Transnationality is shrinking the possibility of an operative civil society in developing nations.”	She identifies a destructive feedback loop where global financialization undermines local civil societies in the Global South, dismantling systems that could facilitate gender justice or equitable redistribution of resources.
“The new diaspora is determined by the increasing failure of a civil society in developing nations.”	Spivak connects the rise of new diasporas to systemic failures in nation-building and decolonization in developing nations, critiquing the role of global capital in exacerbating inequalities.
“The feminist universalism propagated through the United Nations… effaces the role of the state.”	She critiques the UN’s version of feminism as perpetuating neoliberal agendas that bypass state structures, rendering them irrelevant and redirecting power to international institutions and NGOs, which may not always serve grassroots needs.
“Women in transnationality are the super-dominated, the super-exploited, but not in the same way.”	Spivak highlights how women, while universally oppressed, face varying modes of domination depending on geographic, economic, and sociopolitical contexts, thereby challenging homogenous narratives of feminist struggle.
“The painstaking cultivation of such a contradictory, indeed aporetic, practical acknowledgment is the basis of a decolonization of the mind.”	Spivak argues for a nuanced and reflective approach to understanding transnational feminism, one that confronts contradictions without seeking easy solutions, thereby fostering intellectual resistance against hegemonic global structures.

Day: November 22, 2024