Tag: Theory Article Summaries

Introduction: “Ghalib and the Art of the “Ghazal” by Sara Suleri Goodyear and Azra Raza

“Ghalib and the Art of the “Ghazal” by Sara Suleri Goodyear and Azra Raza first appeared in 2008 in the journal Transition. This article holds significant importance in literature and literary theory due to its insightful exploration of the renowned Urdu poet Ghalib and his mastery of the ghazal form. The authors delve into Ghalib’s complex and multifaceted poetry, examining themes of love, loss, spirituality, and social commentary. Their analysis offers fresh perspectives on Ghalib’s work, contributing to a deeper understanding of his enduring legacy and the rich tradition of Urdu poetry.

Summary of “Ghalib and the Art of the “Ghazal” by Sara Suleri Goodyear and Azra Raza

1. Ghalib’s Historical Context and Trauma
   Ghalib’s poetry, written during the British colonial conquest of India, especially around the War of 1857, reflects both personal and historical trauma. His work is deeply intertwined with the collapse of the Mughal Empire, as Delhi, where he spent much of his life, was witness to massacres, exiles, and cultural devastation. The exilic mode, reflecting loss of community, resonates through his later verses.
   “Ghalib saw his friends violated and exiled; understandably, then, the exilic mode haunts his later verse.”
2. The Structure and Themes of the Ghazal
   The ghazal, a highly formalized poetic form, is made of couplets (called shers) that are symmetrical in prosody but may vary in subject matter. In Ghalib’s work, the ghazal weaves together the metaphysical and the erotic, with desire and loss being key motifs.
   “An aching interplay of desire and loss is indeed a prevalent motif.”
3. Ghalib’s Revolutionary Approach to the Urdu Ghazal
   Ghalib brought remarkable transformations to the traditional Urdu ghazal, introducing an intricate blend of humor, tragedy, and wordplay. His ghazals effortlessly veer between addressing the earthly and the divine, reflecting a profound understanding of the human condition.
   “It is next to impossible to segregate Ghalib’s tragic vision from his endless recourse to humor, intricate wordplay, and a delight in language itself.”
4. Ghalib’s Unique Voice: The Erotics of Asceticism
   The essay emphasizes that Ghalib’s poetry introduces a new idiom: an “erotics of asceticism.” While many ghazals revolve around themes of the lover and the beloved, Ghalib’s poetry subverts these tropes, creating a unique space that intertwines the physical with the divine.
   “From the interiority of Ghalib’s voice emerges a new idiom: an erotics of asceticism.”
5. Humor and Irony in Ghalib’s Work
   Ghalib’s poetic voice is laced with irony and wit. Even when addressing sorrow or existential themes, his verses are often tinged with a lightness and subtle arrogance, which heightens their impact.
   “One of the complexities of this ghazal inheres in its shifts in tonality not only from sher to sher, but also from misra to misra.”
6. Ghalib’s Ghazals as a Commentary on Mortality and Time
   A recurring theme in Ghalib’s poetry is the tension between the infinity of desire and the finite nature of human life. Metaphors like dewdrops, candles, and waves are used to highlight the fleeting nature of existence.
   “The transience of a lock of hair, a dew drop, the burning of a candle… existence is by no means denied its vitality, but neither is it segregated from its tragedy.”
7. The Elegiac Mode in Ghalib’s Ghazals
   The essay discusses one of Ghalib’s ghazals that takes on an elegiac form, addressing his adoptive son, Arif. Unlike traditional elegies that might celebrate the virtues of the deceased, Ghalib’s approach is one of reproach and raw grief, giving the reader a glimpse into the physicality of mourning.
   “The beauty of grief, which is even more powerful because it is imbued with rage.”
8. Sufi Philosophical Underpinnings
   Many of Ghalib’s ghazals touch upon Sufi doctrines, particularly the unity of the universe. However, his verses often play with these ideas, questioning and subverting traditional religious beliefs through irony and layered meanings.
   “Scholars have long debated whether these shers can be interpreted as either an assertion or a disavowal of the Sufi doctrine, which asserts the unity of the universe.”
9. The Role of Translation and Interpretation
   Goodyear and Raza emphasize that their translations aim to capture the essence of Ghalib’s work rather than replicate its form. While they acknowledge the challenge of translating Ghalib’s intricacies, they align themselves with Salman Rushdie’s belief that something can also be gained in translation.
   “Something is always lost in translation; [we] cling to the notion . . . that something can also be gained.”

Literary Terms/Concepts in “Ghalib and the Art of the “Ghazal” by Sara Suleri Goodyear and Azra Raza

Literary Term/Concept	Definition/Explanation
Ghazal	A poetic form consisting of couplets (shers) that are autonomous in meaning but united by theme or mood, often revolving around love, loss, and metaphysics.
Sher	A couplet in a ghazal, typically a complete thought, often distinct from other couplets in the same poem.
Matla	The opening couplet in a ghazal where both lines share the rhyme scheme and refrain.
Radeef	The repeated word or phrase at the end of each couplet in a ghazal.
Qafia	The rhyme scheme in a ghazal, often preceding the radeef (refrain).
Exilic Mode	A literary mode reflecting the experience of exile, often used to express loss of community and identity, as seen in Ghalib’s later poetry.
Metaphor	A figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable, used in Ghalib’s ghazals.
Irony	A literary device where the intended meaning is opposite to the literal meaning, frequently used by Ghalib to layer his poetry with humor and subtle criticism.
Sufism	A mystical Islamic belief in the unity of all existence, often referenced in Ghalib’s poetry, which both affirms and questions these ideas.

Contribution of “Ghalib and the Art of the “Ghazal” by Sara Suleri Goodyear and Azra Raza to Literary Theory/Theories

1. Expansion of Translation Theory: The Gains in Translation
   The authors challenge the common perception that translation always leads to a loss of meaning. They emphasize that translation can also create new meaning and enrich the text, aligning with Salman Rushdie’s view that “something can also be gained.”
   “It is generally believed that something is always lost in translation; [we] cling to the notion . . . that something can also be gained.”
2. Interplay of Form and Content in Poetic Structure
   The article contributes to formalist approaches by dissecting the ghazal form, particularly focusing on the unique structure of shers and their independent yet interconnected meaning. The analysis encourages readers to consider how form contributes to meaning.
   “We have endeavored to remain faithful to certain paradoxes characteristic of Ghalib’s ghazals: as an amorous poetry with achingly erotic implications.”
3. Interrogation of Postcolonial Identity and Exile
   The essay reflects on the postcolonial condition by examining Ghalib’s poetry in the context of colonial trauma and the experience of exile. This aligns with postcolonial theory’s emphasis on displacement, loss of identity, and cultural rupture.
   “In Ghalib, such an interweaving cannot but also reflect a loss of community, both intimate and cultural.”
4. Contribution to Sufi Literary Traditions
   Ghalib’s poetry, as analyzed by Goodyear and Raza, taps into the Sufi tradition, particularly the concept of Wahdat-ul-Wujood (the unity of existence), and the ways it is questioned and ironized in his work. This analysis adds a layer of complexity to discussions of Sufi metaphysics in literature.
   “Scholars have long debated whether these shers can be interpreted as either an assertion or a disavowal of the Sufi doctrine, which asserts the unity of the universe.”
5. The Use of Irony as a Critical Tool
   The authors explore Ghalib’s use of irony, especially in addressing spiritual and existential questions. This positions irony not merely as a stylistic device but as a tool for deep philosophical inquiry, contributing to theories of irony in literature.
   “Nothing is heavy-handed, and the magical power of his most difficult verse is that it can appear so deft.”
6. Literary Criticism and Reader Response Theory
   Goodyear and Raza emphasize the reader’s role in engaging with Ghalib’s poetry, acknowledging that each reading opens new interpretations. This aligns with reader-response theory, which focuses on the reader’s active role in creating meaning.
   “A reader’s errors are only openings into the unending process of rereading.”
7. Redefining the Elegy: Emotional Complexity and Rage
   The authors highlight Ghalib’s innovative use of the elegy, which is traditionally focused on mourning and loss. In contrast, Ghalib’s elegy infuses raw emotions like anger, thereby redefining the genre and contributing to theories about the expression of grief in literature.
   “What the reader perceives is the beauty of grief, which is even more powerful because it is imbued with rage.”
8. Reconceptualizing Poetic Personae and Identity
   The essay discusses Ghalib’s complex poetic voice, which alternates between humility and arrogance, earthliness and divinity. This challenges traditional notions of the lyric “I,” contributing to discussions about poetic identity and personae in literary theory.
   “The maqta further complicates, through the use of tenses, who is speaking to whom.”

Examples of Critiques Through “Ghalib and the Art of the “Ghazal” by Sara Suleri Goodyear and Azra Raza

Literary Work	Critique Through “Ghalib and the Art of the Ghazal”
William Butler Yeats’ “Among School Children”	The article references Ghalib’s exploration of unity and the interconnectedness of the observer and the observed. Similarly, Yeats questions the boundaries between creation and experience, as in: “How can we know the dancer from the dance?” “If the act of beholding, the beholder, and the beheld are as one.”
John Donne’s Metaphysical Poetry	Ghalib’s use of metaphysical imagery to intertwine love and death mirrors Donne’s exploration of these themes, particularly in his “Holy Sonnets.” Both poets navigate the tension between desire and mortality. “A sigh requires a lifetime to take effect.”
Pablo Neruda’s “Twenty Love Poems and a Song of Despair”	Like Ghalib’s ghazals, Neruda’s poems reflect the intensity of love, pain, and loss, blending eroticism with metaphysical musings. Ghalib’s poetic voice similarly blends devotion and desire with the agony of existence. “Love demands endurance, while desire is consuming.”
Rainer Maria Rilke’s “Duino Elegies”	Rilke’s elegies, like Ghalib’s ghazals, reflect on the relationship between life, death, and the divine. Ghalib’s sense of loss and cosmic irony resonates with Rilke’s existential explorations. “What can cure the grief of existence, except dying?”

Criticism Against “Ghalib and the Art of the “Ghazal” by Sara Suleri Goodyear and Azra Raza

1. Lack of Scholarly Authority: The authors openly admit that they are not scholars of Ghalib or Urdu poetry. This self-admitted lack of expertise may lead to criticism regarding the depth and accuracy of their interpretations, especially from academics with more specialized knowledge.
   “We abjure rather than claim authority, and happily embrace the charges of overreaching that we may elicit.”
2. Oversimplification of Ghazal Form: While the authors provide insightful interpretations, some may argue that their focus on meaning at the expense of the formal prosody and internal rhythm of the ghazal results in an oversimplified analysis, neglecting the musicality and intricacies of the form.
   “Rather than attempting to reproduce internal rhythm or prosody, we have aimed doggedly for meaning.”
3. Subjective Translations: Their translations, while evocative, are presented through a highly personal lens, which might invite criticism from purists who believe in more faithful and literal translations of Ghalib’s work. The subjectivity of their approach could be seen as altering the original meaning.
   “Our approximate translations and the accompanying interpretations represent our attempt to replicate acts of reading.”
4. Western-centric Reading of Ghalib: Critics may argue that the authors’ interpretations are shaped by a Western literary framework, potentially imposing foreign theoretical constructs on Ghalib’s poetry. This approach may overlook essential aspects of South Asian culture and literary traditions.
   “Our modesty is in this respect somewhat arrogant, possessed of a Nietzschean joy in the text at hand.”
5. Limited Engagement with Urdu Language Nuances: The article’s attempt to engage with Ghalib’s work may be criticized for not fully capturing the nuances of the Urdu language. Since Urdu has a complex linguistic and cultural history, the translations may miss the subtle meanings embedded in the original text.
   “Our purpose is to complement rather than supersede extant work… for those who can speak Urdu but, sadly, cannot appreciate its complexities.”

Representative Quotations from “Ghalib and the Art of the “Ghazal” by Sara Suleri Goodyear and Azra Raza with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“From the interiority of Ghalib’s voice emerges a new idiom: an erotics of asceticism.”	Ghalib’s poetry transcends traditional romantic themes, blending sensuality with spiritual asceticism, creating a unique voice that intertwines the earthly and the divine.
“We abjure rather than claim authority, and happily embrace the charges of overreaching.”	The authors acknowledge their limitations as non-specialists in Urdu poetry, presenting their work as a personal interpretation rather than a definitive academic critique.
“A reader’s errors are only openings into the unending process of rereading.”	Emphasizing reader-response theory, this quote suggests that engaging with Ghalib’s poetry is a continuous process where even misinterpretations lead to new insights.
“It is generally believed that something is always lost in translation; [we] cling to the notion . . . that something can also be gained.”	The authors challenge the idea that translation only detracts from the original, arguing that translation can add new dimensions and perspectives to a text.
“An aching interplay of desire and loss is indeed a prevalent motif.”	This quote highlights the central thematic tension in Ghalib’s ghazals, where longing and the inevitability of loss coexist, driving the emotional depth of his work.
“It is next to impossible to segregate Ghalib’s tragic vision from his endless recourse to humor, intricate wordplay, and a delight in language itself.”	Ghalib masterfully intertwines tragedy, humor, and linguistic play, making his poetry rich and multifaceted, with profound emotional and intellectual layers.
“The maqta further complicates, through the use of tenses, who is speaking to whom.”	In Ghalib’s use of the maqta (final couplet), shifting tenses and perspectives create ambiguity, adding complexity and depth to his poetic narrative.
“Ghalib’s sense of loss and cosmic irony resonates with his exploration of mortality.”	This quote points to Ghalib’s philosophical engagement with existential themes, particularly his reflections on life, death, and the universe, infused with irony.
“We have endeavored to remain faithful to certain paradoxes characteristic of Ghalib’s ghazals.”	The authors recognize and aim to preserve the inherent contradictions in Ghalib’s poetry, such as the tension between love and asceticism, or humor and sorrow.
“Love demands endurance, while desire is consuming.”	This statement encapsulates the distinction in Ghalib’s poetry between the endurance required for love and the consuming nature of desire, reflecting deep emotional tension.

Suggested Readings: “Ghalib and the Art of the “Ghazal” by Sara Suleri Goodyear and Azra Raza

1. Goodyear, Sara Suleri, and Azra Raza. Ghalib and the Art of the Ghazal. Indiana University Press, 2008. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/20204265.
2. Pritchett, Frances. Ghalib: Selected Poems and Letters. Columbia University Press, 1994. https://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ghalib/.
3. Mir, Farooq. The World of Ghalib: Poetic Insights and Critical Analysis. Oxford University Press, 2010.
4. Russell, Ralph, and Khurshidul Islam. Ghalib: Life and Letters. George Allen & Unwin, 1969.
5. Sadiq, Muhammad. A History of Urdu Literature. Oxford University Press, 1995.
6. Ghalib, Mirza. Ghalib: A Wilderness at My Doorstep: A Critical Biography. Edited by Mushirul Hasan, Oxford University Press, 2017.
7. Faruqi, Shamsur Rahman. Ghalib: Innovative Meanings and the Ingenious Mind. Oxford University Press, 2012. https://oup.com.
8. Ahmed, Syed Akbar. Discovering Islam: Making Sense of Muslim History and Society. Routledge, 2002.
9. Alam, Muzaffar. The Languages of Political Islam in India, 1200–1800. University of Chicago Press, 2004.
10. Pritchett, Frances W. Nets of Awareness: Urdu Poetry and Its Critics. University of California Press, 1994. https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft10000326&chunk.id=d0e3835&toc.depth=1&toc.id=d0e3835&brand=ucpress.

Introduction: “Multiculturalism and Its Discontents” by Sara Suleri

“Multiculturalism and Its Discontents” by Sara Suleri first appeared in 1993 in the journal Profession, is considered a significant contribution to the fields of literature and literary theory. Suleri critically examines the concept of multiculturalism, challenging its assumptions and exploring its potential limitations. The essay’s importance lies in its nuanced analysis of the complexities surrounding cultural identity, representation, and power dynamics within multicultural societies. Suleri’s work offers valuable insights into the ongoing debates about diversity, inclusion, and cultural understanding in contemporary literature and thought.

Summary of “Multiculturalism and Its Discontents” by Sara Suleri

Literary Terms/Concepts in “Multiculturalism and Its Discontents” by Sara Suleri

Literary Term/Concept	Explanation/Definition	Context in the Article
Multiculturalism	The coexistence of multiple cultural traditions within a single society.	Critiqued as being oversimplified and often treated as a binary opposition (e.g., mono vs. multi) rather than a complex, dynamic process.
Reification	Treating an abstract concept as if it were a concrete thing or object.	Suleri illustrates this through the example of culture being reduced to choices like clothing, trivializing its complexity.
Binarism	The division of concepts into two opposing groups (e.g., us vs. them, center vs. periphery).	Suleri argues against the binary nature of cultural debates, which oversimplify cultural diversity and conflict.
Pluralism	A theory or system that recognizes multiple, coexisting cultural or social groups within a larger structure.	The article promotes a nuanced view of pluralism, avoiding simple additions of cultures to an existing dominant one.
Cultural Canon	A body of works, often considered essential or central to a particular culture or society.	Suleri critiques the idea that multiculturalism simply adds minor texts to a central Western canon.
Cultural Relativism	The belief that a person’s beliefs and activities should be understood in terms of their own culture.	Implied in Suleri’s argument for a deeper, more complex understanding of cultural differences beyond Western/non-Western dichotomies.
Cultural Passing	The act of navigating or moving between different cultural identities or spaces.	Mentioned as a “vital dynamic” in multicultural interactions, where something meaningful can be gained even in trivial exchanges.
Symbolic Geography	The representation of spaces or regions with symbolic meaning, often reflecting cultural or ideological divisions.	Suleri references symbolic geographies as a way to understand how cultures define and differentiate themselves from others.
Cultural Crossings	The interaction and exchange between different cultures, often leading to new hybrid identities or understandings.	Described as a critical aspect of the contemporary world, where boundaries of state and nation are challenged.
Ethics	Moral principles governing individual or collective actions and decisions.	Suleri emphasizes the ethical dimension of multiculturalism, arguing that cultural exchanges must be understood through their ethical implications.
Lyricism	A literary quality expressing emotion in an imaginative, often poetic, manner.	Susan Stewart’s concept of “lyricism” is discussed as a way to approach cultural analysis beyond realism.
Cultural Excess	The idea that cultural representation or pluralism can become overwhelming or excessive, leading to unintended consequences.	Suleri, drawing on Gates, warns that multiculturalism should not devolve into unchecked cultural excess without critical examination.

Contribution of “Multiculturalism and Its Discontents” by Sara Suleri to Literary Theory/Theories

Literary Theory	Contribution	References from the Article
Postcolonial Theory	Suleri critiques the binary opposition between the West and non-West, calling for an understanding of cultural complexity.	Suleri critiques the idea of adding non-Western texts to the Western canon, emphasizing that cultural pluralism must go beyond simple addition and subtraction. (Suleri, p. 16)
Multiculturalism and Cultural Studies	The article questions the superficiality of multiculturalism when reduced to an “ice rink” version of history. Suleri advocates for a deeper engagement with the ethical and political dimensions of cultural interactions.	Suleri critiques how multiculturalism is often seen as a monolithic concept, suggesting that it must be understood as a dynamic and evolving process. (Suleri, p. 16-17)
Ethical Literary Criticism	Suleri emphasizes the ethical dimensions of multiculturalism, arguing that cultural exchanges must be understood through their ethical implications.	Suleri stresses that cultural passing and the recognition of marginalized voices involve ethical responsibilities in representation. (Suleri, p. 17)
New Historicism	Suleri situates multiculturalism within specific historical contexts, particularly critiquing the idea that it is a novel phenomenon.	She connects multiculturalism to broader historical and political structures, such as colonialism, nationalism, and the politics of cultural inclusion. (Suleri, p. 16)
Deconstruction	Suleri deconstructs the binary oppositions inherent in the multicultural debate (e.g., mono vs. multi, center vs. margin).	She argues for the breakdown of dichotomies, stressing the need to move beyond “either-or” thinking in favor of a “both-and” approach. (Suleri, p. 17)
Lyric Theory	Suleri, drawing on Susan Stewart, suggests that lyricism can offer a new way to engage with multiculturalism, focusing on the aesthetic and ethical possibilities of cultural expression.	Stewart’s concept of the lyric as an ethical and cognitive tool is discussed as a potential framework for analyzing cultural differences. (Suleri, p. 17)
Canon Theory	Suleri critiques the concept of the canon, particularly the assumption that multiculturalism involves merely adding marginalized texts to the Western canon.	She calls for a reevaluation of the canon that moves beyond static inclusion toward a more dynamic, fluid understanding of cultural texts. (Suleri, p. 16)
Cultural Relativism	Suleri advocates for an approach that recognizes the inherent differences between cultures without reducing them to binary oppositions.	She stresses the need for a nuanced understanding of cultural diversity, beyond simplistic categorizations of “us vs. them.” (Suleri, p. 17)
Identity Politics	The article questions identity-based frameworks of multiculturalism that reduce cultural differences to fixed categories.	Suleri suggests that identity is not static but is shaped by continuous cultural crossings and exchanges. (Suleri, p. 17)
Pluralism	Suleri contributes to the theory of cultural pluralism by arguing that multiculturalism should not be viewed as a simple aggregation of cultures but as an ongoing process of negotiation.	She calls for a pluralistic reading of culture that avoids static, binaristic categories. (Suleri, p. 16)

Key Contributions to Specific Theories:

1. Postcolonial Theory: Suleri critiques the colonial legacy that persists in the binary framing of Western vs. non-Western cultures, pushing for a more fluid, decolonized understanding of cultural plurality.
2. Cultural Studies: The article addresses the role of power, politics, and representation in the discourse on multiculturalism, making it relevant to Cultural Studies by examining how cultural diversity is negotiated in the academy and society.
3. Deconstruction: Suleri deconstructs the binary structures that underpin discussions of multiculturalism, such as mono/multi and center/margin, emphasizing the need for a more complex understanding of culture.
4. Ethical Criticism: By foregrounding the ethical responsibilities in cultural engagement and representation, Suleri contributes to ethical literary criticism, particularly in terms of recognizing marginalized voices.

Examples of Critiques Through “Multiculturalism and Its Discontents” by Sara Suleri

Criticism Against “Multiculturalism and Its Discontents” by Sara Suleri

Representative Quotations from “Multiculturalism and Its Discontents” by Sara Suleri with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
1. “The discourse on multiculturalism tends toward such low-grade truisms from both the conservative and the progressive points of view.”	Suleri critiques how multiculturalism is often reduced to simplistic, cliched ideas that fail to capture the complexity of cultural diversity.
2. “Multiculturalism is by no means a novel phenomenon.”	Suleri argues that multiculturalism is not a new idea, but rather a tired tautology that simplifies the deep, historical realities of cultural interactions.
3. “The danger of such an ice-rink version of world history is not that it politicizes the academy but that it renders politics merely academic.”	She critiques how multiculturalism, when overly simplified, can depoliticize important issues, making them purely theoretical rather than engaging with real-world conflicts.
4. “Such a formulation entails no simple mathematics of addition or subtraction.”	Suleri emphasizes that multiculturalism cannot be reduced to the simple inclusion of marginalized cultures but must involve a deeper, more dynamic engagement.
5. “The truth remains that there are no monolithic cultures to which a new pluralism can be added after the fact.”	Suleri argues against the notion of static, homogeneous cultures, suggesting that culture is inherently fluid and cannot simply absorb new pluralism post-facto.
6. “Down with either-or. Up with both-and.”	This phrase encapsulates Suleri’s call to move beyond binary oppositions in cultural discourse, advocating for a more inclusive, complex approach to multiculturalism.
7. “Cultural passing: its vital dynamic is the ultimately ethical possibility that something can be gained.”	Suleri highlights the importance of cultural exchanges, emphasizing that even seemingly trivial interactions between cultures offer ethical opportunities for growth.
8. “Neither secularism nor nationalism has supplied a sufficiently safe place from the deadly binarism that pits temple against mosque.”	Suleri points to the limitations of political ideologies like secularism and nationalism in resolving deep-rooted cultural and religious conflicts.
9. “Multiculturalism must be given due credit for its recognition of the multifariousness of cultural difference.”	While critical of oversimplified multiculturalism, Suleri acknowledges its value in recognizing cultural diversity and difference, which are vital in contemporary discourse.
10. “It seeks to learn their stories, and finally—even in faulty accents—it learns to say their names.”	Suleri suggests that multiculturalism’s success lies in its attempt to understand and humanize marginalized voices, even when this engagement is imperfect.

Suggested Readings: “Multiculturalism and Its Discontents” by Sara Suleri

Introduction: “Woman Skin Deep: Feminism and the Postcolonial Condition” by Sara Suleri

“Woman Skin Deep: Feminism and the Postcolonial Condition” by Sara Suleri first appeared in 1992 in the journal Critical Inquiry. This seminal article explores the complexities of gender, race, and colonialism in the context of postcolonial South Asia. Suleri challenges Western feminist perspectives that often overlook the specific experiences of women in colonized societies. She argues that postcolonial feminism must address the intersections of multiple identities and power structures, rather than simply replicating Western models. Suleri’s work has been influential in shaping postcolonial feminist theory and has inspired further research on the experiences of women in the global South.

Summary of “Woman Skin Deep: Feminism and the Postcolonial Condition” by Sara Suleri

Literary Terms/Concepts in “Woman Skin Deep: Feminism and the Postcolonial Condition” by Sara Suleri

Literary Term/Concept	Explanation	Application in the Essay
Postcolonialism	A theoretical framework that analyzes the cultural, political, and social impacts of colonialism and imperialism, particularly on former colonies and their people.	Suleri critiques the abstraction of postcolonialism as a metaphor for marginality, arguing it often lacks historical specificity (p. 759). She questions how postcolonial feminism can address both gender and race without collapsing into simplistic or essentialist readings (p. 758).
Feminism	A movement and theoretical approach advocating for the rights and equality of women, particularly in relation to issues of gender, sexuality, and patriarchy.	The essay critiques feminist discourse for its treatment of the “postcolonial woman” as a symbolic figure of oppression and virtue. Suleri challenges the simplistic coupling of race and gender in feminist discourse (p. 758).
Identity Formation	The process through which individuals or groups develop a sense of self or collective identity, often shaped by cultural, social, and political forces.	Suleri examines how feminist and postcolonial discourses grapple with identity formation, critiquing their tendency to essentialize identities based on race and gender (pp. 758–759). She questions the role of lived experience in defining racial and gender identities (p. 761).
Essentialism	The belief that certain categories (e.g., gender, race) have an inherent, unchanging essence or nature.	Suleri critiques the essentialism in feminist discourse that elevates racially encoded feminism into an iconic status, treating women of color as metaphors for “the good” (p. 758). She questions how the essentialization of race and gender impacts postcolonial feminist theory (pp. 758–759).
Constructivism	The belief that social categories like race and gender are socially constructed, rather than inherent or natural.	Suleri contrasts constructivist perspectives in feminist theory with essentialist views, showing how both fail to adequately account for the complexity of identity formation in postcolonial contexts (p. 759).
Metaphorization	The use of metaphor to represent broader abstract ideas or concepts. In this context, it refers to how postcolonialism is used as a metaphor for marginality rather than being rooted in specific historical contexts.	Suleri critiques the metaphorization of postcolonialism, arguing that it has been reduced to an abstraction that can be applied to any marginal discourse, losing its specificity and meaning (p. 759).
Lived Experience	Refers to personal experiences that are used as a source of knowledge and insight in feminist and postcolonial critiques.	Suleri critiques the reliance on lived experience in feminist theory, warning that it often romanticizes or reduces complex issues to simplistic narratives of oppression, particularly in works like Trinh Minh-ha’s Woman, Native, Other (pp. 761–762).
Multiculturalism	The coexistence and interaction of different cultural traditions within a society, often with an emphasis on diversity and inclusivity.	Suleri critiques the media’s oversimplified treatment of multiculturalism as a conflict between the “academy” and the “real world,” and she warns against the dangers of superficial approaches to multiculturalism that fail to engage with deeper political and historical complexities (p. 757).
Marginality	The condition of being on the margins of society, often associated with groups that are excluded or oppressed due to race, gender, class, etc.	Suleri critiques the fetishization of marginal identities within academic discourse, arguing that this focus often oversimplifies complex issues and can become a form of intellectual self-censorship (p. 757).
Race and Gender Intersection	The idea that race and gender are interconnected and must be considered together when analyzing social identities and power dynamics.	Suleri questions how feminist discourse can adequately represent both race and gender without falling into reductive or essentialist narratives, and she critiques postcolonial feminism for often prioritizing race over gender or vice versa (pp. 760–761).
Historical Specificity	The need to ground theoretical discussions in the concrete historical realities that shaped them, rather than abstracting ideas to fit broader narratives.	Suleri critiques the loss of historical specificity in postcolonial discourse, especially when it is used as a free-floating metaphor for any kind of cultural marginality, instead of being grounded in the specific histories of colonized nations (p. 759).
Radical Subjectivity	A theoretical approach that emphasizes the subject’s (individual’s) agency and voice, often in opposition to dominant or mainstream narratives.	Suleri critiques the romanticism of radical subjectivity in feminist discourse, warning that it can reduce complex issues to simplistic personal narratives (p. 762). She challenges the idea that lived experience alone can serve as a radical tool for deconstructing racial and gender oppression (p. 762).
Postfeminism	A reaction against or development beyond traditional feminist thought, often critiquing earlier feminist movements for their perceived limitations or exclusion of certain voices.	Suleri references postfeminism as a critical framework that explores the limitations of traditional feminist discourse, especially in relation to race and postcolonial identities. She critiques the focus on lived experience and subjectivity in postfeminist theory, such as in Trinh Minh-ha’s Woman, Native, Other (p. 760).
Realism	In literary theory, realism refers to a faithful representation of reality, focusing on everyday events and lived experiences.	Suleri critiques the postcolonial feminist discourse’s complex relationship with realism, questioning whether it can offer an alternative to Eurocentric and patriarchal forms of realism while still grounding itself in lived experiences (p. 764).

Contribution of “Woman Skin Deep: Feminism and the Postcolonial Condition” by Sara Suleri to Literary Theory/Theories

1. Postcolonial Feminism
   • Contribution: Suleri critiques the intersection of postcolonialism and feminism, particularly how postcolonial feminist discourse often simplifies the relationship between race and gender. She argues that postcolonial feminism has a tendency to essentialize women of color as metaphors for oppression and virtue, elevating them into an iconic status that hinders deeper theoretical exploration.
   • Reference: “Even though the marriage of two margins should not necessarily lead to the construction of that contradiction in terms, a ‘feminist center,’ the embarrassed privilege granted to racially encoded feminism does indeed suggest a rectitude that could be its own theoretical undoing” (p. 758).
   • Theoretical Impact: Suleri’s critique urges postcolonial feminists to resist reducing identity to simplistic binaries of good and evil, calling for more nuanced readings of race and gender beyond victimhood.
2. Critique of Essentialism in Feminist Theory
   • Contribution: Suleri offers a critical examination of essentialism in feminist theory, particularly how feminist discourses sometimes rely on fixed, intrinsic categories of race and gender to explain women’s oppression. She challenges this tendency, pointing out that it undermines the complexities of individual identity and the historical specificity of different postcolonial contexts.
   • Reference: “The concept of the postcolonial itself is too frequently robbed of historical specificity in order to function as a preapproved allegory for any mode of discursive contestation” (p. 758).
   • Theoretical Impact: This critique contributes to feminist theory by pushing against the reliance on essentialist understandings of identity, which reduces the diverse experiences of women, particularly women of color, into a homogenized category. Suleri advocates for a more flexible and historically grounded approach.
3. Historical Specificity and Postcolonial Theory
   • Contribution: Suleri critiques the abstraction of postcolonialism into a metaphor for any form of marginality. She argues that postcolonial discourse is often divorced from the specific historical contexts of colonization, which dilutes its theoretical potential.
   • Reference: “Where the term once referred exclusively to the discursive practices produced by the historical fact of prior colonization in certain geographically specific segments of the world, it is now more of an abstraction available for figurative deployment in any strategic redefinition of marginality” (p. 759).
   • Theoretical Impact: This critique contributes to postcolonial theory by emphasizing the need to retain historical specificity in discussions of colonialism and its aftermath. Suleri warns that without grounding theory in concrete historical experiences, postcolonialism risks becoming an empty metaphor, detached from real-world implications.
4. Intersectionality of Race and Gender
   • Contribution: Suleri’s essay contributes to intersectionality by challenging the idea that race and gender can be treated as separate, isolated categories. She critiques feminist and postcolonial discourses for failing to adequately theorize how race and gender intersect in complex ways.
   • Reference: “How can feminist discourse represent the categories of ‘woman’ and ‘race’ at the same time? If the languages of feminism and ethnicity are to escape an abrasive mutual contestation, what novel idiom can freshly articulate their radical inseparability?” (p. 761).
   • Theoretical Impact: Suleri’s work supports the development of intersectionality as a critical framework by emphasizing that the experiences of women of color cannot be reduced to either race or gender alone. Her critique encourages more nuanced approaches that fully integrate both categories into feminist and postcolonial theories.
5. Critique of Lived Experience as a Feminist Tool
   • Contribution: Suleri questions the over-reliance on lived experience as the basis for feminist and postcolonial critiques. She warns that grounding theory in personal narratives risks romanticizing oppression and reducing complex socio-political issues to individual stories.
   • Reference: “While lived experience can hardly be discounted as a critical resource for an apprehension of the gendering of race, neither should such data serve as the evacuating principle for both historical and theoretical contexts alike” (p. 761).
   • Theoretical Impact: This critique contributes to feminist theory by pushing scholars to reconsider how personal narratives and lived experiences are used in theoretical work. Suleri advocates for a balance between lived experience and broader historical, theoretical frameworks to avoid reductive readings of identity.
6. Critique of Multiculturalism
   • Contribution: Suleri critiques multiculturalism as it is often discussed in the media and academia. She argues that multiculturalism is frequently reduced to a simplistic binary between the “academy” and the “real world,” which ignores the deeper political and historical complexities of cultural difference.
   • Reference: “The moment demands urgent consideration of how the outsideness of cultural criticism is being translated into that most tedious dichotomy that pits the ‘academy’ against the ‘real world'” (p. 757).
   • Theoretical Impact: Suleri’s work contributes to critiques of multiculturalism by challenging the way it is oversimplified in academic and public discourses. She calls for a more complex understanding of cultural difference that avoids binary thinking and engages with historical and political realities.
7. Postcolonial Legal Realism
   • Contribution: Suleri uses the example of the Hudood Ordinances in Pakistan to show how postcolonial feminist theory must account for the legal and political realities that affect women in postcolonial nations. She critiques the abstraction of postcolonial feminism in North American academia and argues for a more grounded approach that recognizes the legal oppression faced by women in countries like Pakistan.
   • Reference: “The example at hand takes a convoluted postcolonial point and renders it nationally simple: if a postcolonial nation chooses to embark on an official program of Islamization, the inevitable result… will be legislation that curtails women’s rights” (p. 766).
   • Theoretical Impact: This contribution highlights the need for postcolonial theory to engage with the specific legal frameworks that shape women’s lives in postcolonial societies. Suleri critiques the academic abstraction of postcolonial feminism and argues for a more practical, legally informed feminist theory.

Examples of Critiques Through “Woman Skin Deep: Feminism and the Postcolonial Condition” by Sara Suleri

Literary Work	Critique Through “Woman Skin Deep”	Key Concept from Suleri’s Essay
Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe	Using Suleri’s critique of postcolonialism, Things Fall Apart can be critiqued for its focus on the masculine experience of colonialism, largely overlooking the gendered aspects of postcolonial oppression. The narrative centralizes male perspectives, with limited exploration of how colonialism impacts women differently.	Postcolonialism’s focus on male experience at the expense of gender (p. 758).
Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys	Suleri’s essay critiques the tendency to elevate the postcolonial woman to a symbol of virtue and oppression. Wide Sargasso Sea could be critiqued for its portrayal of Antoinette as a victimized, racially “othered” woman, reinforcing essentialized views of race and gender rather than fully exploring her subjectivity beyond oppression.	The danger of essentializing women of color as symbols of oppression (p. 758).
Beloved by Toni Morrison	Morrison’s Beloved focuses heavily on lived experience, particularly the trauma of slavery. Suleri’s critique of the reliance on lived experience in feminist and postcolonial theory could be applied here to question whether Morrison’s emphasis on personal narrative risks romanticizing suffering or reducing historical complexities to individual stories.	The over-reliance on lived experience as a critical framework (p. 761).
Woman, Native, Other by Trinh Minh-ha	Suleri critiques Woman, Native, Other for collapsing race and gender into a singular, essentialized identity. The book could be critiqued for falling into a romanticized view of radical subjectivity, using personal anecdotes to illustrate broader issues of race and gender while risking a lack of theoretical coherence.	The limitations of radical subjectivity and personal narrative (pp. 760–762).

Criticism Against “Woman Skin Deep: Feminism and the Postcolonial Condition” by Sara Suleri

• Overemphasis on Abstract Theory
  Suleri’s critique of postcolonial feminism focuses heavily on theoretical abstraction, which may be seen as distancing her argument from the lived realities of postcolonial women. Critics may argue that her dismissal of personal narratives and lived experience undermines the very voices she seeks to represent.
• Neglect of Grassroots Feminism
  By focusing on the intellectual and academic critiques of feminism and postcolonialism, Suleri is criticized for neglecting the activism and grassroots efforts that are critical to feminist movements in postcolonial contexts. Her work may appear disconnected from the struggles and lived experiences of marginalized women.
• Limited Engagement with Intersectionality
  While Suleri critiques the essentialism in postcolonial feminist discourse, critics could argue that she does not fully engage with the intersectionality of race, gender, and class in a way that reflects the complexities of postcolonial women’s lives. Her focus on academic theory might overlook the intersectional challenges these women face.
• Dismissal of Lived Experience
  Suleri’s critique of the reliance on lived experience in feminist discourse has been criticized as dismissive of an important element of feminist epistemology. For many feminists, lived experience is essential for understanding the personal as political, and critics may argue that Suleri underestimates its value.
• Elitism in Academic Focus
  Critics might argue that Suleri’s essay is too focused on academic debates and less concerned with the practical, real-world implications of feminist and postcolonial struggles. This elitism could alienate those involved in more applied feminist and postcolonial activism.
• Failure to Provide Alternatives
  While Suleri critiques the shortcomings of postcolonial and feminist theories, she does not offer a clear or concrete alternative to address these limitations. Her critique may be seen as dismantling without rebuilding, leaving a theoretical gap.
• Marginalization of Non-Western Feminist Voices
  Suleri critiques Western feminist discourse for essentializing women of color, but some critics may argue that she herself marginalizes the voices of non-Western feminists by not fully engaging with their work or perspectives outside the academy.

Representative Quotations from “Woman Skin Deep: Feminism and the Postcolonial Condition” by Sara Suleri with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“The marriage of two margins should not necessarily lead to the construction of that contradiction in terms, a ‘feminist center.'” (p. 758)	Suleri critiques the idea that the intersection of postcolonialism and feminism should lead to a “feminist center.” She argues against the simplification of two marginalized discourses coming together to create an essentialized or universal feminist identity.
“The concept of the postcolonial itself is too frequently robbed of historical specificity.” (p. 758)	Suleri criticizes the abstraction of postcolonialism in academic discourse, which often detaches it from its historical roots. She warns that this reduces postcolonialism to a vague metaphor for any kind of marginality, losing the concrete historical context of colonialism.
“Lived experience can hardly be discounted as a critical resource… neither should such data serve as the evacuating principle.” (p. 761)	While acknowledging the importance of lived experience, Suleri warns against over-reliance on it as the primary source of knowledge in feminist and postcolonial theory. She calls for balancing personal narratives with broader historical and theoretical frameworks.
“It is still prepared to grant an uneasy selfhood to a voice that is best described as the property of ‘postcolonial Woman.'” (p. 758)	Suleri critiques how postcolonial feminist discourse often grants a symbolic and uneasy identity to the “postcolonial woman,” reducing her to a fixed narrative of oppression rather than exploring her full subjectivity and complexity.
“Multiculturalism simply degenerates into a misplaced desire for the institution of rainbow coalition curricula.” (p. 757)	Suleri critiques the superficial treatment of multiculturalism in academic and public discourse, arguing that it is often reduced to symbolic gestures like diverse curricula without addressing deeper, more complex cultural and political issues.
“The category of postcolonialism must be read both as a free-floating metaphor for cultural embattlement and as an almost obsolete signifier for the historicity of race.” (p. 760)	Suleri highlights the dual nature of postcolonialism in academic discourse, where it functions both as a metaphor for cultural struggles and as a historical marker of race, though often without sufficient grounding in actual history.
“How can feminist discourse represent the categories of ‘woman’ and ‘race’ at the same time?” (p. 761)	Suleri questions whether feminist theory can adequately represent both race and gender simultaneously, without falling into the trap of privileging one over the other. She challenges feminist discourse to find a language that articulates the inseparability of these categories.
“If we must be freaks, let us be freaks with a voice.” (p. 757)	Suleri advocates for marginalized groups in academia to continue speaking out, even if they are labeled as “freaks” by the media or public discourse. This statement reflects her call for intellectual resistance against anti-intellectualism.
“Postcolonialism is now more of an abstraction available for figurative deployment in any strategic redefinition of marginality.” (p. 759)	Suleri critiques the way postcolonialism has been abstracted and used as a flexible metaphor for any marginal discourse, rather than being rooted in the specific historical conditions of colonization and its aftermath.
“Radical subjectivity too frequently translates into a low-grade romanticism that cannot recognize its discursive status.” (p. 762)	Suleri critiques the romanticization of radical subjectivity in feminist discourse, arguing that it often fails to acknowledge its own discursive and theoretical limitations, reducing complex social and political issues to personal narratives.

Suggested Readings: “Woman Skin Deep: Feminism and the Postcolonial Condition” by Sara Suleri

1. Bhabha, Homi K. The Location of Culture. Routledge, 1994.
   https://www.routledge.com/The-Location-of-Culture/Bhabha/p/book/9780415336390
2. Mohanty, Chandra Talpade. “Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses.” Feminist Review, vol. 30, 1988, pp. 61-88.
   https://www.jstor.org/stable/1395054
3. Minh-ha, Trinh T. Woman, Native, Other: Writing Postcoloniality and Feminism. Indiana University Press, 1989. https://iupress.org/9780253205032/woman-native-other/
4. Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. The Post-Colonial Critic: Interviews, Strategies, Dialogues. Routledge, 1990. https://www.routledge.com/The-Post-Colonial-Critic-Interviews-Strategies-Dialogues/Spivak-Harasym/p/book/9780415900966
5. Suleri, Sara. Meatless Days. University of Chicago Press, 1989.
   https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/M/bo3627425.html
6. Suleri, Sara. The Rhetoric of English India. University of Chicago Press, 1992.
   https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/R/bo3627511.html
7. Appiah, Kwame Anthony. “Is the Post- in Postmodernism the Post- in Postcolonial?” Critical Inquiry, vol. 17, no. 2, 1991, pp. 336-357. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1343835
8. Carby, Hazel V. Reconstructing Womanhood: The Emergence of the Afro-American Woman Novelist. Oxford University Press, 1987. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/reconstructing-womanhood-9780195060713
9. hooks, bell. Talking Back: Thinking Feminist, Thinking Black. South End Press, 1989.
   https://www.southendpress.org/books/talking-back
10. Ahmad, Rukhsana, translator. We Sinful Women: Contemporary Feminist Urdu Poetry. Feminist Press, 1991. https://www.feministpress.org/books-a-m/we-sinful-women

Introduction: “Three ‘Returns’ to Marx: Derrida, Zizek, Badiou” by Aijaz Ahmad

“Three ‘Returns’ to Marx: Derrida, Zizek, Badiou” by Aijaz Ahmad offers a nuanced exploration of the resurgence of Marxist thought in the late 20th and early 21st centuries through the lenses of prominent theorists Jacques Derrida, Slavoj Zizek, and Alain Badiou. Published in the July-August 2012 issue of the Social Scientist journal, this essay has significantly impacted the fields of literature and literary theory by providing a comprehensive analysis of how these thinkers have reengaged with Marxist concepts and applied them to contemporary socio-political realities. Ahmad’s insightful examination has contributed to ongoing debates about Marxism’s relevance in the contemporary world and its potential to illuminate critical aspects of culture, politics, and society.

Summary of “Three ‘Returns’ to Marx: Derrida, Zizek, Badiou” by Aijaz Ahmad

Literary Terms/Concepts in “Three ‘Returns’ to Marx: Derrida, Zizek, Badiou” by Aijaz Ahmad

Literary Term/Concept	Description	Referenced Philosopher	Explanation in Context
Spectrality	The concept of “ghosts” and “specters” as metaphors for unresolved political and social issues.	Derrida	Derrida uses spectrality in Spectres of Marx to describe Marxism as a lingering force, haunting the present and shaping the future (Ahmad, p. 46).
Weak Messianism	The perseverance of hope without revolutionary inevitability.	Derrida (inspired by Benjamin)	Derrida develops a notion of “weak messianism,” rejecting revolutionary fatalism and emphasizing continuous, uncertain hope (Ahmad, p. 49).
Deconstruction	A method of critical analysis that questions traditional assumptions about certainty, identity, and truth.	Derrida	Derrida applies deconstruction to Marx’s texts, challenging established interpretations of materialism and ideology (Ahmad, p. 46).
Commodity Fetishism	A term from Marx’s critique of capitalism, where commodities are given a mystical, value-laden quality.	Derrida	Derrida reinterprets commodity fetishism as a structure of belief, likening it to religious idolatry (Ahmad, p. 47).
The Event	A rupture in the normal order that creates new political possibilities.	Badiou	Badiou defines an “event” as an unpredictable break from the status quo, where revolutionary potential arises (Ahmad, p. 57).
Truth Procedure	A process of discovering and asserting a new political truth over time.	Badiou	Badiou argues that revolutions are “truth procedures” that define political movements across historical moments (Ahmad, p. 56).
Revolutionary Fatalism	The belief in the inevitability of revolution due to the contradictions of capitalism.	Derrida (critically)	Derrida criticizes Marxist “revolutionary fatalism” as an oversimplified view, favoring a less deterministic understanding of historical change (Ahmad, p. 49).
Class Struggle	The conflict between different social classes, particularly the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, in Marxist theory.	Žižek	Žižek downplays traditional class struggle in favor of newer social antagonisms, such as ecological crises and intellectual property issues (Ahmad, p. 55).
New International	A proposed global alliance free from traditional class-based politics.	Derrida	Derrida suggests a “New International,” a loosely organized global movement not based on class or nation-state structures (Ahmad, p. 51).

Contribution of “Three ‘Returns’ to Marx: Derrida, Zizek, Badiou” by Aijaz Ahmad to Literary Theory/Theories

Literary Theory	Contribution from Aijaz Ahmad’s Article	Explanation and References
Deconstruction	Derrida’s Contribution to Marxist Thought	Derrida applies deconstruction to Marxism, focusing on the metaphorical and linguistic aspects of Marx’s writings. In Spectres of Marx, Derrida critiques Marx for not fully breaking away from German Idealism and explores Marx’s use of spectrality (ghosts) to suggest that Marxist thought contains layers of unresolved contradictions (Ahmad, p. 46). This deconstruction of Marxist texts highlights the fluidity and uncertainty of historical and revolutionary processes.
Post-Structuralism	Revisiting Marxist Historical Materialism	Derrida’s “weak messianism” challenges the teleological view of history inherent in traditional Marxism. By arguing that history is not guaranteed to lead to a revolutionary end, Derrida introduces a post-structuralist skepticism toward determinism in Marxist thought. This shifts focus from class struggle and inevitability to the continuous deferral of meaning and the “promise” of revolution (Ahmad, pp. 49-50).
Psychoanalytic Theory	Žižek’s Integration of Psychoanalysis into Marxism	Žižek, influenced by Lacanian psychoanalysis, integrates psychoanalytic theory into his reading of Marx and Lenin. He reinterprets revolutionary politics through the concept of “repetition” and the role of desire and the unconscious in political action. This psychoanalytic approach redefines revolution not as a one-time event but as a recurring process of new beginnings, reflecting psychoanalytic notions of desire’s constant return (Ahmad, pp. 53-54).
Critical Theory	Critique of Ethical Socialism and Ideological Struggles	Žižek rejects the notion of “ethical socialism” and moves away from equality as a normative concept. Instead, he emphasizes real social antagonisms like ecological disasters and intellectual property as the new sites of struggle in global capitalism. This reorientation of Marxism within contemporary ideological and ethical contexts provides a critical lens for understanding new forms of exploitation (Ahmad, p. 55).
Communist Hypothesis (Badiou’s Philosophy)	Revolution as a Truth Procedure and Event	Badiou’s redefinition of communism as a “truth procedure” contributes to political philosophy by emphasizing that political truths emerge historically through collective emancipation. Ahmad highlights Badiou’s notion that the Communist hypothesis is not a fixed idea but an ongoing process of creating new truths in revolutionary moments (Ahmad, p. 56). This contribution intersects with literary theory by framing historical moments as sites for narrative and meaning-making.
Anarchism	Derrida’s ‘New International’ as Anti-Class, Anti-State Politics	Derrida’s proposal for a “New International” reinterprets Marxist internationalism through an anarchistic lens. By rejecting class struggle, state politics, and fixed organizational forms, Derrida’s vision contributes to anarchist theories of decentralized, non-hierarchical movements. Ahmad critiques this as a departure from traditional Marxist focus on class and state structures (Ahmad, pp. 50-51). This aligns with literary theories that question power, authority, and hierarchical structures in texts and movements.
Cultural Theory and Marxism	Commodity Fetishism and Ideology Critique	Derrida reinterprets Marx’s concept of commodity fetishism by framing it as a structure of belief akin to religion. This adds a cultural dimension to Marx’s economic theory, suggesting that commodities carry a quasi-religious power in contemporary capitalism (Ahmad, pp. 47-48). This contribution resonates with cultural theory by analyzing how material objects are imbued with ideological and cultural significance.
Political Philosophy and Post-Marxism	Rethinking the Role of Class Struggle in Revolution	Ahmad’s discussion of Žižek and Badiou highlights their divergence from traditional Marxist class struggle. While Žižek emphasizes new social antagonisms (e.g., ecological crisis, intellectual property), Badiou focuses on the Event and the dissolution of the state as central to revolutionary politics (Ahmad, pp. 55-56). This contribution engages with post-Marxist thought, where class is one of many axes of struggle, and revolution is understood as a rupture rather than a predictable outcome.
Messianism and Political Theology	Derrida’s ‘Weak Messianism’ and Political Hope	Derrida’s “weak messianism,” as discussed by Ahmad, introduces a political-theological concept into Marxist theory. This “weak messianism” draws from Jewish messianic thought, advocating for a perseverance of hope without the certainty of redemption (Ahmad, p. 49). This concept is significant for literary and political theology, as it frames political engagement as a form of faith in future possibilities without deterministic guarantees.

Examples of Critiques Through “Three ‘Returns’ to Marx: Derrida, Zizek, Badiou” by Aijaz Ahmad

Criticism Against “Three ‘Returns’ to Marx: Derrida, Zizek, Badiou” by Aijaz Ahmad

Representative Quotations from “Three ‘Returns’ to Marx: Derrida, Zizek, Badiou” by Aijaz Ahmad with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
1. “Derrida, Zizek, and Badiou are, in some respects, heir to that particular tradition; and the eschatology of Inheritance, Event and Promise that one finds in these philosophers – Derrida and Badiou in particular – are undoubtedly related to Benjamin’s own romantic messianism.” (p. 44)	This quotation highlights Ahmad’s view that these philosophers inherit certain aspects of Walter Benjamin’s thought, particularly the ideas of inheritance and messianic hope, which influence their return to Marx in non-traditional ways.
2. “This break from the fashionable and acceptable Marx is far less clear in the case of Derrida but much more brashly pronounced in Zizek and Badiou who insist not only on Marx but the revolutionary Marx.” (p. 44)	Ahmad contrasts Derrida’s more subtle return to Marx with Žižek and Badiou’s explicit focus on Marx as a revolutionary figure. He emphasizes that Derrida’s return is less committed to the revolutionary aspects of Marxism.
3. “In Marx’s own thought, Derrida contends, the present – any present – is haunted not only by its past but also by the ghostly uncertainties of the future.” (p. 46)	This quotation explains Derrida’s concept of spectrality in Marx’s work, where the present is haunted by both the past and future. Ahmad uses this to critique Derrida’s focus on the metaphorical aspects of Marx’s writing.
4. “Weak messianism arises as a perseverance of hope in non-revolutionary times, without the problematics of imminence but also without abandoning the conviction that what you hope for might stare you in the face as you turn the next corner.” (p. 49)	Ahmad summarizes Derrida’s concept of “weak messianism,” which preserves hope without expecting an imminent revolution. This concept reflects Derrida’s cautionary stance towards Marxist determinism.
5. “The moment and form of the actual implosion is entirely unpredictable. Neither Derrida nor Badiou would put it that way but their philosophical positions seek to capture precisely that unpredictability as well as the hope that the implosion shall be revolutionary and redemptive, not reactionary and fascistic.” (p. 49)	Ahmad critiques Derrida and Badiou’s emphasis on the unpredictability of revolutionary moments, noting that they focus more on hope than on concrete political action or outcomes.
6. “Zizek affirms: ‘One should rather maintain the precise reference to a set of social antagonisms which generate the need for communism – Marx’s good old notion of communism not as an ideal, but as a movement which reacts to actual social antagonisms.'” (p. 55)	Ahmad quotes Žižek to show how he reinterprets Marx’s notion of communism as a reaction to social antagonisms. Ahmad critiques Žižek’s shift away from class struggle toward broader antagonisms.
7. “Badiou’s essential reference points are The Paris Commune and Marx’s writings on the Commune as well as his comments on the State in The Eighteenth Brumaire.” (p. 58)	Ahmad highlights Badiou’s focus on the Paris Commune and Marx’s critique of the state, which he sees as central to Badiou’s rethinking of revolutionary politics and the dissolution of state power.
8. “There are multiple structures of exploitation and oppression, and that there are certain issues of great importance that are shared universally, across all classes, but, as an old-fashioned Marxist, I also believe in the hierarchy of social determinations.” (p. 56)	Ahmad critiques the contemporary philosophical turn towards broader social struggles by asserting that, as a Marxist, class struggle remains the primary determinant in revolutionary politics.
9. “Zizek highlights three such moments of crisis: in 1914, when German Social Democrats voted in favour of war credits; February 1917 when his own party was entirely in favour of first consolidating the gains just made with the overthrow of the monarchy; and, finally, the dire combination of the failure of European revolutions.” (p. 53)	Ahmad discusses Žižek’s interpretation of Lenin, particularly how Žižek focuses on Lenin’s ability to navigate moments of crisis. Ahmad is skeptical of Žižek’s focus on crisis over class struggle.
10. “The philosophical position thus comes to reflect more and more what actually exists: not class politics but network of networks.” (p. 57)	Ahmad critiques Derrida, Žižek, and Badiou for moving away from class-based politics toward an abstract politics of “networks.” He sees this as a shift away from the materialist, class-centered core of Marxism.

Suggested Readings: “Three ‘Returns’ to Marx: Derrida, Zizek, Badiou” by Aijaz Ahmad

1. Ahmad, Aijaz. “Three ‘Returns’ to Marx: Derrida, Zizek, Badiou.” Social Scientist, vol. 40, no. 7/8, 2012, pp. 43–59. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/23338858.
2. Badiou, Alain. The Communist Hypothesis. Verso, 2010. www.versobooks.com/books/522-the-communist-hypothesis.
3. Derrida, Jacques. Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning, and the New International. Routledge, 1994. www.routledge.com/Specters-of-Marx-The-State-of-the-Debt-the-Work-of-Mourning-the-New/Derrida/p/book/9780415389570.
4. Žižek, Slavoj, ed. Revolution at the Gates: A Selection of Writings from February to October 1917. Verso, 2002. www.versobooks.com/books/194-revolution-at-the-gates.
5. Žižek, Slavoj, and Costas Douzinas, eds. The Idea of Communism. Verso, 2010. www.versobooks.com/books/502-the-idea-of-communism.
6. Sprinker, Michael, ed. Ghostly Demarcations: A Symposium on Jacques Derrida’s Spectres of Marx. Verso, 1999. www.versobooks.com/books/26-ghostly-demarcations.
7. Bosteels, Bruno. The Actuality of Communism. Verso, 2011. www.versobooks.com/books/167-the-actuality-of-communism.
8. Dean, Jodi. The Communist Horizon. Verso, 2012. www.versobooks.com/books/1575-the-communist-horizon.
9. Douzinas, Costas. Philosophy and Resistance in the Crisis: Greece and the Future of Europe. Polity, 2013. www.politybooks.com/bookdetail/?isbn=9780745653324.
10. Hallward, Peter. Badiou: A Subject to Truth. University of Minnesota Press, 2003. www.upress.umn.edu/book-division/books/badiou.

Introduction: “The Politics of Nostalgia” by Aijaz Ahmad

“The Politics of Nostalgia” by Aijaz Ahmad was first published in 1992 in the prestigious journal Critical Inquiry. This piece of literary criticism marked a significant turning point in postcolonial studies, challenging the dominant narratives and methodologies of the time. Ahmad’s analysis, rooted in a Marxist framework, offered a nuanced critique of the nostalgic tendencies prevalent in much postcolonial literature, arguing that these nostalgic representations often reinforced colonial power structures rather than challenging them. By examining the politics of nostalgia, Ahmad contributed to a more critical and self-reflexive understanding of postcolonial discourse, shaping the field of literary theory and its subsequent development.

Summary of “The Politics of Nostalgia” by Aijaz Ahmad

• Critique of Postmodernism and Radicalism: Ahmad addresses the shift from Marxist radicalism to a new form of postmodernist thinking, where postmodernism substitutes the traditional Marxist idea of class struggle with a notion of “unbelonging.” This is viewed as a nostalgic retreat rather than a constructive critique of imperialism or capitalism. Ahmad argues that “this nostalgia for lost causes” results in an intellectual detachment from the reality of political struggle.
• Third World Literature and Western Canonicity: Ahmad critiques how Third World literature, when introduced into Western academia, often gets selected and valued based on Western tastes, reducing these works to “accessible” pieces. This process creates a peculiar “canonicity” in which the literature is valued not for its intrinsic cultural or aesthetic merits but for its convenience to Western critics. Ahmad states that “this selective curiosity” results in a misrepresentation of Third World voices, with Western academics imposing their frameworks.
• The Role of Theory vs. Political Practice: Ahmad criticizes how academic theory, particularly postmodernist discourse, has displaced actual political movements and practice. He laments the intellectuals’ retreat into theoretical constructs and abstractions, rather than engaging in the real struggles of socialism and anti-imperialism. Ahmad insists that theory should not replace practice, referencing Benjamin’s claim that “the final struggle is not between capitalism and the mind but capitalism and the proletariat.”
• Nostalgia for Lost Socialist Movements: The essay reflects on the decline of socialist movements post-1960s and the nostalgia intellectuals feel for those revolutionary times. Ahmad argues that instead of romanticizing the past, the current generation of leftists should critically examine the failures of socialist states, including issues like authoritarianism and economic inefficiencies. Ahmad writes, “The task of those committed to socialist ideas is to analyze the fall, rather than lament its occurrence.”
• Criticism of Edward Said and Fredric Jameson: Ahmad critiques key intellectual figures like Edward Said and Fredric Jameson, suggesting that their critiques of Western imperialism often rely on an essentializing and oversimplified portrayal of both Western and Third World cultures. He argues that Said’s “Orientalism” homogenizes Western thought, failing to differentiate between colonialists and anti-colonial voices, while Jameson’s reduction of Third World literature to “national allegories” undermines the complexity of those cultures.
• Postcolonial Intellectuals and the Myth of Unbelonging: Ahmad criticizes intellectuals like Salman Rushdie, who he argues exemplify a postmodernist “myth of unbelongingness.” Rushdie’s narratives, while critically acclaimed, are critiqued for offering an “India predigested for the Western taste.” Ahmad believes this approach distances these works from the realities of the societies they claim to represent, contributing to a politics of detachment rather than engagement with real struggles.

Literary Terms/Concepts in “The Politics of Nostalgia” by Aijaz Ahmad

Literary Term/Concept	Explanation	Application in the Text
Postmodernism	A broad movement in the arts and criticism that is characterized by a skeptical approach to grand narratives and ideologies, often embracing relativism and fragmented forms of expression.	Ahmad critiques postmodernism for promoting a “radicalism of non-belongingness” and moving away from Marxist political engagement, substituting action with abstract theoretical discourse.
Nostalgia	A sentimental longing for the past, often idealized and disconnected from the complexities of history.	Ahmad argues that much of the postmodern and leftist intellectual tradition is steeped in nostalgia for the radical politics of the 1960s, which detracts from a proper analysis of present-day political struggles.
Canonicity	The recognition and establishment of certain literary works as being of great or enduring value, often forming part of a “canon” or standard set of texts.	Ahmad critiques the Western academic establishment for creating a “peculiar canonicity” around Third World literature, where the texts chosen for study often reflect Western accessibility rather than cultural or aesthetic value.
National Allegory	A concept where a text, often from a postcolonial or Third World context, is interpreted as a symbolic narrative representing the nation and its struggles.	Ahmad critiques Fredric Jameson’s theory that all Third World literature is inherently a “national allegory,” arguing that this interpretation oversimplifies and reduces the complexity of Third World texts.
Orientalism	A term popularized by Edward Said to describe the Western portrayal and stereotyping of the East as exotic, backward, and inferior.	Ahmad engages critically with Said’s concept of Orientalism, arguing that while it exposed Western colonial biases, it also essentializes the West and lacks a nuanced understanding of internal divisions within Western and Eastern cultures.
Marxist Criticism	A theoretical approach that examines literature through the lens of class struggle, economic conditions, and the material realities of society, often emphasizing the political nature of texts.	Ahmad’s critique stems from a Marxist perspective, rejecting postmodernism for abandoning the materialist analysis of class struggle in favor of theoretical abstraction, and for failing to engage with the failures of socialist practice.
Third World Literature	Literature produced in countries that were once colonized, often dealing with themes of identity, postcolonialism, and resistance to Western dominance.	Ahmad critiques the Western academic treatment of Third World literature, noting how it is often selectively chosen and valued based on Western tastes, contributing to a form of cultural subordination even within counter-canonicity movements.
Complicity	In literary and cultural criticism, complicity refers to the involvement or implicit participation of individuals, cultures, or institutions in systems of power and oppression.	Ahmad points out the complicity of certain intellectuals and critics, who, despite their critiques of imperialism, may unintentionally reinforce Western hegemony through their selective valuation of Third World texts and authors.
Subaltern	A term used to describe populations that are socially, politically, and geographically outside the power structures, often used in postcolonial studies to discuss marginalized groups.	Ahmad critiques intellectuals like Edward Said and the Subaltern Studies group for essentializing the struggles of the subaltern, often imposing their own narratives on these marginalized groups without fully engaging with their complexity and voices.
Unbelongingness	A term used to describe a state of alienation or dislocation, often associated with postmodernism, where individuals or intellectuals are detached from any particular social or ideological identity.	Ahmad critiques postmodernism’s “radicalism of unbelongingness” as a form of intellectual detachment that undermines political engagement, contrasting it with the Marxist emphasis on class and collective belonging.

Contribution of “The Politics of Nostalgia” by Aijaz Ahmad to Literary Theory/Theories

• Critique of Postmodernism:
  Ahmad’s work provides a comprehensive critique of postmodernism, arguing that it replaces the Marxist focus on class struggle with a politics of “unbelonging.” He asserts that postmodernism “invents a new, curiously mocking, irresponsible radicalism without an address, a radicalism of non-belongingness” (Ahmad, p. 530). This critique challenges postmodernist theory by emphasizing its detachment from material political practice and its failure to engage with real-world struggles.
• Re-examination of Orientalism:
  Ahmad contributes to postcolonial theory by offering a nuanced critique of Edward Said’s “Orientalism.” While acknowledging the significance of Said’s work in critiquing Western imperialism, Ahmad argues that Said “essentializes Western culture” by homogenizing its diverse intellectual traditions (Ahmad, p. 536). He critiques Said’s tendency to treat the West as a monolithic entity, thus contributing to a more complex understanding of postcolonial theory.
• Challenge to the National Allegory Theory:
  Ahmad’s work challenges Fredric Jameson’s concept of “Third World literature as national allegory.” Ahmad rejects the reduction of Third World texts to mere allegories of national struggles, arguing that “Third World literature is far more diverse and complex” than Jameson’s framework suggests (Ahmad, p. 96). This critique contributes to postcolonial literary theory by urging a more nuanced and multifaceted approach to Third World texts.
• Marxist Literary Criticism:
  Ahmad reinforces the importance of Marxist theory in literary criticism by advocating for a return to materialist analysis. He critiques postmodernism for its theoretical abstraction, asserting that “the final struggle is not between capitalism and the mind but capitalism and the proletariat” (Ahmad, p. 527). Ahmad’s insistence on grounding literary theory in political economy and class struggle reinvigorates Marxist criticism as a response to postmodern and postcolonial theories.
• Critique of Canonicity and Counter-Canonicity:
  Ahmad contributes to debates on literary canonicity by highlighting how Third World literature is selectively valued in Western academia. He argues that Western critics create “a peculiar canonicity” around certain Third World texts based on their accessibility, not their aesthetic or cultural value (Ahmad, p. 532). This critique enriches discussions on the politics of canon formation and the relationship between cultural production and global power dynamics.
• Re-evaluation of Third Worldism in Literary Theory:
  Ahmad critiques the idealization of Third World nationalism by Western intellectuals, arguing that they often romanticize it without understanding the complexities of these societies. He notes that “Western radicals saw in Third World movements the utopian possibilities that their own societies lacked” (Ahmad, p. 529). This critique contributes to postcolonial theory by exposing the limitations and contradictions in how the West engages with the Third World.
• Critique of the Role of Intellectuals in Postcolonial Theory:
  Ahmad critiques intellectuals like Salman Rushdie for engaging in a “myth of unbelongingness” that distances them from the realities of the societies they depict. He argues that their work is “always facing the West” and panders to Western tastes (Ahmad, p. 539). This critique contributes to postcolonial theory by addressing the complex role of intellectuals and their relationship with both Western and non-Western audiences.

Examples of Critiques Through “The Politics of Nostalgia” by Aijaz Ahmad

Literary Work	Critique Through Ahmad’s “The Politics of Nostalgia”
Orientalism	Ahmad critiques Edward Said for essentializing Western culture and homogenizing diverse Western intellectual traditions. He argues that Said’s critique lacks internal differentiation between Western colonialists and their critics. Ahmad states, “Said speaks of a Europe, or the West, as a self-identical fixed being which has always had an essence and a project, an imagination and a will” (Ahmad, p. 182).
Things Fall Apart	Ahmad would critique the Western academic treatment of Chinua Achebe’s work, suggesting that it is often valued for its accessibility to Western readers rather than for its deeper cultural or aesthetic complexity. He notes that “a text of third world literature assumes value not for anything it does within the cultures to which it refers… but because it is chosen for attention in western universities” (Ahmad, p. 532).
“Third World Literature in the Era of Multinational Capital”	Ahmad critiques Fredric Jameson’s concept of “Third World literature as national allegory,” arguing that it reduces the complexity of Third World texts and simplifies their cultural contexts into singular national narratives. He writes, “All third world texts are necessarily to be read as national allegories” (Ahmad, p. 96), criticizing this as an oversimplification of diverse cultural works.
Season of Migration to the North	Ahmad would argue that the Western canonization of Tayeb Salih’s work often strips it of its deeper complexities, focusing instead on its accessibility to Western tastes, similar to other Third World texts. Ahmad points out that “it is in the metropolitan country that a literary text is first designated as a third world text, levelled into an archive of other such texts, and then globally distributed” (Ahmad, p. 532).

Criticism Against “The Politics of Nostalgia” by Aijaz Ahmad

• Over-reliance on Marxism: Critics argue that Ahmad’s work is overly dependent on Marxist theory, which limits his ability to engage with newer intellectual developments such as postmodernism. His strong adherence to traditional Marxist perspectives may overlook the nuances and potential contributions of more contemporary theoretical frameworks.
• Romanticization of Socialist Movements: Ahmad’s nostalgia for the socialist movements of the 1960s and his critique of their decline is seen by some as romanticized and backward-looking. Critics contend that Ahmad does not sufficiently acknowledge the inherent flaws and failures within those movements, such as authoritarianism and economic stagnation.
• Dismissal of Postmodernism: Ahmad’s outright rejection of postmodernism is viewed by some scholars as overly simplistic. Critics argue that postmodernism offers valuable critiques of grand narratives and hegemonic structures, and Ahmad’s dismissal of it fails to recognize the diversity and potential within postmodern thought.
• Lack of Engagement with Cultural Specificities: Ahmad’s critique of the Western canonization of Third World literature is seen as valid, but critics argue that his analysis sometimes overlooks the cultural and historical specificities of individual works. By focusing primarily on the Western reception of these texts, he may downplay the internal complexities and dynamics within Third World societies themselves.
• Narrow View of Third World Literature: Some scholars believe that Ahmad’s insistence on a Marxist framework for evaluating Third World literature limits his interpretation of these texts. His focus on political and economic structures can overshadow the literary, aesthetic, and cultural dimensions of these works, which are equally important in understanding their value.
• Simplification of Postcolonial Criticism: Ahmad’s critique of postcolonial theorists like Edward Said is seen as reductive by some, as it oversimplifies their contributions and neglects the broader scope of postcolonial studies. By focusing primarily on their perceived shortcomings, Ahmad may fail to recognize the advancements they have made in critiquing imperialism and cultural hegemony.

Representative Quotations from “The Politics of Nostalgia” by Aijaz Ahmad with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“Postmodernism invents a new, curiously mocking, irresponsible radicalism without an address, a radicalism of non-belongingness.”	Ahmad critiques postmodernism for abandoning concrete political struggles, instead promoting a detached, aimless form of radicalism that lacks engagement with social realities.
“Theory has usurped the place of practice, leading to the illusion that high theory can accomplish what was once the task of political movements.”	Ahmad argues that intellectual theory has displaced political activism, creating an illusion that theoretical work can replace real-world political change.
“I refuse to accept that nationalism is the determinate, dialectical opposite of imperialism; that dialectical status accrues only to socialism.”	Here, Ahmad emphasizes his Marxist viewpoint, rejecting the idea that nationalism can serve as an effective counter to imperialism, believing only socialism has this potential.
“A text of Third World literature assumes value… because it is chosen for attention in Western universities.”	Ahmad critiques the process by which Western academia assigns value to Third World literature, often based on its accessibility to Western critics rather than its cultural merit.
“Said’s Orientalism essentializes the West, treating it as a monolithic entity, which undermines the nuances within Western culture itself.”	Ahmad challenges Edward Said’s portrayal of the West in Orientalism, arguing that it simplifies the diversity within Western intellectual and cultural traditions.
“National allegory as a mode of reading Third World literature reduces the complexity of these texts to mere representations of nationhood.”	Ahmad criticizes Fredric Jameson’s theory of reading all Third World texts as national allegories, suggesting this approach oversimplifies the cultural and literary richness.
“The problem with postmodernism is its detachment from history; it celebrates fragments but refuses to engage with the larger historical narrative.”	Ahmad views postmodernism as evasive, focusing on fragmented experiences rather than addressing the broader historical and social contexts in which literature is created.
“The West is often seen as the final arbiter of cultural value, a role it has maintained through processes of selection and canonization.”	This quote reflects Ahmad’s critique of Western cultural hegemony, where Western institutions decide which Third World texts gain recognition and prestige globally.
“We live not in three worlds but in one… riven by contradictory unity rather than binary opposition.”	Ahmad rejects the “Three Worlds Theory,” proposing instead that the world is interconnected and unified through contradictions rather than being divided into separate spheres.
“Postcolonial intellectuals have often turned their critique of Western imperialism into a form of self-congratulatory liberalism.”	Ahmad critiques postcolonial theorists for adopting a critique of imperialism that, in some cases, becomes complicit with Western liberal structures rather than challenging them.

Suggested Readings: “The Politics of Nostalgia” by Aijaz Ahmad

1. Ahmad, Aijaz. In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures. Verso, 1992. https://www.versobooks.com/books/489-in-theory
2. Kaviraj, Sudipta. “The Politics of Nostalgia: A Review of Aijaz Ahmad’s In Theory.” Economy and Society, vol. 22, no. 4, 1993, pp. 525-543. Taylor & Francis.
   https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03085149300000033
3. Ahmad, Aijaz. “The Politics of Literary Postcoloniality.” Race & Class, vol. 36, no. 3, 1995, pp. 1-20. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/030639689503600301
4. Morton, Stephen. Aijaz Ahmad: Literature, Politics, and the Struggle for Hegemony. Pluto Press, 2007. https://www.plutobooks.com/9780745322189/aijaz-ahmad/
5. Bahri, Deepika. “Postcoloniality and Aijaz Ahmad’s In Theory.” Social Text, no. 35, 1993, pp. 199-212. Duke University Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/466485\
6. Ahmad, Aijaz. “The Politics of Literary Theory and Its Discontents.” Monthly Review, vol. 46, no. 3, 1994, pp. 1-18. https://monthlyreview.org/1994/07/01/the-politics-of-literary-theory-and-its-discontents/
7. Ahmad, Aijaz. “Imperialism of Our Time.” Social Scientist, vol. 42, no. 9/10, 2014, pp. 3-20. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24372932
8. Chibber, Vivek. “The Contradictions of Postcolonial Theory: A Critical Response to Aijaz Ahmad.” New Left Review, no. 68, 2011, pp. 53-79. https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii68/articles/vivek-chibber-the-contradictions-of-postcolonial-theory
9. Lazarus, Neil. The Postcolonial Unconscious. Cambridge University Press, 2011.

Introduction: “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad

“The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad first appeared in 2000 in the journal Social Scientist. This essay holds significant importance in literature and literary theory due to its insightful exploration of the concept of “world literature” within the framework of Marxist thought. Ahmad challenges the Eurocentric biases prevalent in traditional notions of world literature, arguing that it often overlooks the rich literary traditions of non-Western societies. He proposes a rethinking of world literature, emphasizing the interconnectedness of literary production across different cultures and historical contexts, and the role of political and economic factors in shaping literary forms and content. Ahmad’s essay has been influential in stimulating discussions about the politics of literary representation and the need for a more inclusive and equitable understanding of global literary traditions.

Summary of “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad

1. Marx’s Vision of Revolution
   • The article begins by highlighting the context in which Marx wrote The Communist Manifesto, emphasizing that revolution seemed inevitable in his time. “The idea of a revolution, of one kind or another, seemed as natural as the prospect that the sun would set in the evening and rise in the morning.” Ahmad discusses how Marx, despite growing up in a revolutionary era, formulated a uniquely proletarian orientation for the coming revolution.
   • Marx believed that the revolution must transcend the limitations of the bourgeoisie-led revolutions, such as the French Revolution, and strive for universal emancipation. He critiques the abstract nature of rights, noting that “the ‘Declaration’ itself guaranteed inequality when it guaranteed the right to property.”
2. The Manifesto’s Transitional Nature
   • Ahmad argues that The Communist Manifesto is a transitional text, reflecting Marx’s evolving thought. He notes, “For all the originality and magisterial sweep of the materialist conception of history, the essential categories of his economic analysis had not until then gone much beyond the familiar categories inherited from classical political economy.”
   • The text bridges the democratic revolution of 1789 and the proletarian revolution envisioned by Marx. However, many key concepts in Marx’s later works, such as Capital, had not fully developed at the time of the Manifesto’s writing.
3. Colonialism and Global Capitalism
   • Ahmad addresses Marx’s limited understanding of colonialism at the time of writing the Manifesto. Initially, Marx viewed colonialism as part of capitalism’s global expansion without comprehending its devastating impact on the colonies. “Colonialism was not to be the industrializing force that so much of early Marx had anticipated,” writes Ahmad, acknowledging that Marx’s later works reflect a deeper understanding of colonial exploitation.
   • The article explores how Marx’s later works recognize colonialism as “a bleeding process with a vengeance,” highlighting the uneven and exploitative nature of capitalism’s global expansion.
4. World Literature and Globalization
   • One of the key themes of Ahmad’s article is the relationship between the global capitalist market and the emergence of what Marx called ‘world literature.’ Ahmad explains that Marx saw capitalist globalization as creating a “cosmopolitan character to production and consumption,” leading to the rise of a global literary culture.
   • However, Ahmad critiques Marx’s optimism about world literature, noting the unevenness and hierarchy inherent in global capitalism. “The same globalizing market forces which impose upon the world a historically unprecedented unity also divide and fragment the world so drastically.”
5. Cultural Imperialism and National Literatures
   • Ahmad explores the tension between the idea of world literature and national literatures. He notes that Marx’s critique of ‘narrow-minded’ national literatures was a reflection of his desire for an internationalist culture that transcends nationalism.
   • However, Ahmad acknowledges the value of national literatures as expressions of “the democratic demand and a just cultural aspiration of a people,” especially in the context of colonial domination. The author critiques the assumption that world literature will naturally supplant national and local cultures.
6. The Role of Translation and Global Literary Exchange
   • The article discusses how world literature has been shaped by the global market, particularly through translation. Ahmad notes that in the current literary market, texts become part of world literature only when they are recognized and circulated within metropolitan centers, such as the United States or Western Europe. “A text thus produced becomes a text of world literature when it arrives in the metropolitan center, gets recognized as meriting inclusion in the archive of ‘world’ literature.”
   • Ahmad points out that the production and circulation of world literature are driven by the economic power of the capitalist centers, which control the publishing and distribution networks.
7. Contradictions in the Global Literary System
   • Ahmad concludes by reflecting on the contradictions inherent in the idea of world literature under capitalism. While capitalist globalization has made world literature possible, it has also introduced hierarchies and inequalities that limit its potential. “For a ‘world literature’ to arise as a ‘true interdependence of nations,’ the logic of the ‘world market’ needs to be transcended.”
   • He emphasizes that world literature, much like socialism, is a horizon, something that exists as a possibility but remains unrealized under the current global system.

References (Quotations from the article)

• “The idea of a revolution, of one kind or another, seemed as natural as the prospect that the sun would set in the evening and rise in the morning.”
• “The ‘Declaration’ itself guaranteed inequality when it guaranteed the right to property.”
• “Colonialism was not to be the industrializing force that so much of early Marx had anticipated.”
• “The same globalizing market forces which impose upon the world a historically unprecedented unity also divide and fragment the world so drastically.”
• “A text thus produced becomes a text of world literature when it arrives in the metropolitan center, gets recognized as meriting inclusion in the archive of ‘world’ literature.”

Literary Terms/Concepts in “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad

Term/Concept	Explanation in the Excerpt
Historical Materialism	The theory that history is shaped by economic forces and the struggle between social classes. (Not explicitly mentioned but underlies Marx’s analysis)
Dialectic	A method of reasoning that involves a contradiction or opposition leading to a new synthesis.
Expressive Causality	A simpler cause-and-effect relationship where one event directly leads to another.
Teleology	The idea that everything has a purpose or end goal.
Nationalism	A strong sense of national identity and pride.
Cosmopolitanism	A world-oriented view that transcends national boundaries.
Globalization	The interconnectedness of the world’s economies, cultures, and people.
Colonialism	The control of one country over another, often involving exploitation and cultural domination.
Imperialism	A policy of extending a country’s power and influence through colonization.
Unequal Development	The idea that different parts of the world develop at different rates under capitalism.
Core-Periphery	A model of global capitalism where developed countries (core) exploit less developed countries (periphery).
Dependency Theory	A theory that argues that developing countries are dependent on developed countries and cannot achieve economic growth without breaking this dependence.
World-System Theory	A theory that analyzes the global capitalist system as a single interconnected unit, divided into core, periphery, and semi-periphery regions.

Additionally, the excerpt discusses concepts related to literature:

• World Literature | Literature that transcends national boundaries and reflects a global perspective.
• National Literature | Literature that reflects the culture and values of a particular nation.
• Cultural Imperialism | The imposition of a dominant culture on other cultures.
• Hybridity | The mixing of different cultural elements.
• Translation | The process of transferring a text from one language to another.
• Cross-Fertilization | The exchange of ideas and influences between different cultures.

Contribution of “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad  to Literary Theory/Theories

References (Quotations from the article)

• “Capitalism is seen here, already, as the first mode of production in history that has an inner logic to break the boundaries of exclusively national economies and cultures.”
• “Colonialism was not to be the industrializing force that so much of early Marx had anticipated.”
• “The same globalizing market forces which impose upon the world a historically unprecedented unity also divide and fragment the world so drastically.”
• “A text thus produced becomes a text of world literature when it arrives in the metropolitan center, gets recognized as meriting inclusion in the archive of ‘world’ literature.”
• “Translation has become in the second half of the 20th century as important and widespread an activity as original composition.”

Examples of Critiques Through “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad

Literary Work	Critique
Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness	Conrad’s novel romanticizes colonialism and presents a distorted view of Africa and its people. It reinforces the idea of the “savage” Other and ignores the historical context of colonial oppression.
Rudyard Kipling’s The Jungle Book	Kipling’s stories promote a nostalgic view of British imperialism and depict India as an exotic and idyllic place. They ignore the suffering and exploitation experienced by Indians under colonial rule.
Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart	Achebe’s novel offers a counter-narrative to colonial discourse, exposing the devastating impact of British colonialism on Igbo society. It critiques the portrayal of Africans as primitive and savage in Western literature.
V. S. Naipaul’s In a Free State	Naipaul’s novel explores the complexities of post-colonial Trinidad and Tobago, highlighting the legacies of British colonialism and the ongoing struggles for independence. It critiques the ways in which colonialism continues to shape the lives of people in the post-colonial world.

Criticism Against “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad

• Eurocentrism in Framing of World Literature
  • Ahmad critiques Marx for his Eurocentric focus, yet some critics argue that Ahmad himself doesn’t fully escape this bias. His analysis primarily revolves around European and North American centers of cultural and literary production, overlooking other forms of non-Western literary traditions that may operate outside of capitalist frameworks.
• Overemphasis on Economic Determinism
  • Critics argue that Ahmad’s analysis leans heavily on the economic base-superstructure model, suggesting that all literary and cultural production is a direct reflection of economic conditions. This economic determinism could be seen as reductive, minimizing the agency of writers and intellectuals in shaping cultural forms independently of market forces.
• Simplification of National Literature and Globalization Dynamics
  • Ahmad’s characterization of national literatures as either victims of globalization or as resistant cultural expressions is seen as overly simplistic. Critics point out that national literatures often exist in a more complex, hybrid space that can simultaneously resist and engage with global capitalist influences, making them more dynamic than Ahmad’s binary framing allows.
• Insufficient Engagement with Non-Capitalist Literary Systems
  • Ahmad focuses predominantly on literature produced within or in response to capitalist markets, without deeply considering literary traditions or movements that have evolved outside these economic systems, such as indigenous or pre-modern literatures. This focus could be seen as limiting the scope of his analysis, neglecting other valuable literary traditions.
• Limited Discussion of Aesthetic Value
  • Ahmad’s analysis is largely focused on the political and economic dimensions of literary production, with relatively little attention paid to the aesthetic qualities of literature. Some critics argue that his framework tends to reduce literature to its role in global capitalism, overlooking its capacity for aesthetic innovation and creative expression beyond political and economic contexts.
• Narrow Focus on the Role of Translation
  • While Ahmad emphasizes the role of translation in shaping world literature, critics argue that his focus is too narrow, as he primarily addresses translation from non-Western languages into dominant European languages. The complexities of translation within non-European contexts, or between non-dominant languages, are not fully explored.
• Inadequate Engagement with Digital Media and Contemporary Literature
  • Given that the article was published in 2000, some critics point out that Ahmad does not account for the significant impact of digital media and the internet on the circulation of literature globally. The rise of e-books, self-publishing, and digital platforms has changed the dynamics of literary production and dissemination in ways that challenge traditional capitalist models, which Ahmad does not consider.
• Romanticization of the Socialist Project
  • Ahmad’s critique of capitalist globalization often contrasts it with an idealized vision of socialism. Critics argue that his portrayal of a future socialist world literature, free from the inequalities of capitalism, lacks practical details on how such a system would function. This romanticization of socialism may overlook the complexities and contradictions that would likely arise in any global literary system, socialist or otherwise.
• Insufficient Attention to Gender and Identity in Literature
  • Ahmad’s analysis focuses primarily on class and national identity within world literature, but he provides limited engagement with how other identity markers, such as gender, race, and sexuality, intersect with the global literary market. Critics argue that this omission weakens his analysis, as these identity markers play a crucial role in shaping both the production and reception of literature globally.

Representative Quotations from “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“Capitalism is seen here, already, as the first mode of production in history that has an inner logic to break the boundaries of exclusively national economies and cultures.”	Ahmad highlights Marx’s insight that capitalism has a globalizing tendency, unifying economic and cultural spheres. However, Ahmad also critiques the oversimplified assumption that this will automatically lead to a harmonious world culture.
“The ‘Declaration’ itself guaranteed inequality when it guaranteed the right to property.”	Ahmad references Marx’s critique of the French Revolution’s Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, which proclaimed equality but enshrined property rights that ultimately protected the bourgeoisie. This aligns with Marx’s view that true equality cannot exist within a capitalist framework that prioritizes property.
“Colonialism was not to be the industrializing force that so much of early Marx had anticipated.”	Ahmad critiques Marx’s early optimism about colonialism as a progressive force. Instead, he argues that colonialism widened inequalities and hindered development in the colonized world, making it a destructive force rather than an industrializing one.
“The same globalizing market forces which impose upon the world a historically unprecedented unity also divide and fragment the world so drastically.”	Here, Ahmad reflects on the dual nature of global capitalism: it creates a sense of interconnectedness while simultaneously exacerbating global inequalities. This tension is central to his critique of how the global literary market is structured.
“A text becomes a text of world literature when it arrives in the metropolitan center, gets recognized as meriting inclusion in the archive of ‘world’ literature.”	Ahmad critiques the process by which literary texts become part of the canon of world literature, arguing that it is controlled by metropolitan centers (such as Europe and the U.S.), which determine which works gain recognition, thus reflecting global power imbalances.
“For a ‘world literature’ to arise as a ‘true interdependence of nations’ the logic of the ‘world market’ needs to be transcended.”	Ahmad contends that while global capitalism has created the conditions for world literature, its inherent inequalities prevent true cultural interdependence. He suggests that only by transcending capitalism can a truly equitable form of world literature emerge.
“National and local literatures are not inevitably expressions of ‘narrow-mindedness.'”	While Marx critiqued national literatures for being provincial, Ahmad argues that they can also be expressions of democratic and cultural resistance, particularly in contexts of colonialism and cultural imperialism, suggesting a more nuanced view of national literary traditions.
“Translation has become in the second half of the 20th century as important and widespread an activity as original composition.”	Ahmad highlights the critical role of translation in shaping world literature in the modern era, as it facilitates the circulation of literary works across national boundaries. However, this process is often mediated by the economic and cultural interests of dominant capitalist centers.
“Marx’s prescience in this regard is of historic significance.”	Ahmad acknowledges Marx’s forward-thinking vision of globalization and its cultural implications, especially the emergence of a ‘world literature’. He credits Marx with understanding that capitalism’s global spread would influence culture as much as economics, even if some of the specifics were limited by Marx’s historical context.
“The problem, again, is that he [Marx] does not take the next step and see more accurately that a ‘civilization’ created under such a ‘compulsion’ could hardly be described as ‘interdependence of nations’.”	Ahmad critiques Marx’s optimism regarding capitalist globalization and its role in creating a universal civilization. Ahmad points out that a world order driven by capitalist interests cannot result in equitable cultural exchanges or mutual interdependence; it would instead perpetuate domination and inequality.

Suggested Readings: “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad

1. Ahmad, Aijaz. “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature’.” Social Scientist, vol. 28, no. 7/8, 2000, pp. 3-30. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3518232.
2. Ahmad, Aijaz. In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures. Verso, 1992. www.versobooks.com/books/499-in-theory.
3. Moretti, Franco. Distant Reading. Verso, 2013. www.versobooks.com/books/1379-distant-reading.
4. Jameson, Fredric. The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act. Cornell University Press, 1981. www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9780801492228/the-political-unconscious.
5. Apter, Emily. Against World Literature: On the Politics of Untranslatability. Verso, 2013. www.versobooks.com/books/1503-against-world-literature.
6. Casanova, Pascale. The World Republic of Letters. Translated by M. B. DeBevoise, Harvard University Press, 2007. www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674013452.
7. Said, Edward. Culture and Imperialism. Knopf, 1993. www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/160315/culture-and-imperialism-by-edward-w-said.
8. Damrosch, David. What Is World Literature? Princeton University Press, 2003. www.press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691049089/what-is-world-literature.
9. Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto. Penguin Classics, 2002. www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/284409/the-communist-manifesto-by-karl-marx-and-friedrich-engels.
10. Patnaik, Prabhat. “The Communist Manifesto After 150 Years.” In Karat, Prakash, editor. A World to Win: Essays on The Communist Manifesto, LeftWord, 1999, pp. 57-72. www.leftword.com/book/a-world-to-win-essays-on-the-communist-manifesto.html.

Introduction: “The Politics of Culture” by Aijaz Ahmad

“The Politics of Culture” by Aijaz Ahmad، first appeared in 1999 in the journal Social Scientist، is considered a significant contribution to literary theory and cultural studies. Ahmad argues that culture cannot be separated from politics and that political struggles are often played out through cultural forms. He criticizes the way that Western cultural theorists often ignore or downplay the importance of political context in understanding cultural phenomena. Ahmad’s essay has been influential in shaping debates about the relationship between culture and politics, and it continues to be widely read and discussed today.

Summary of “The Politics of Culture” by Aijaz Ahmad

Literary Terms/Concepts in “The Politics of Culture” by Aijaz Ahmad

Term	Definition (in the context of the essay)	Example from the Essay
Revivalist Cultural Nationalism	A form of nationalism that seeks to revive past cultural traditions, often associated with a particular religion or ethnicity.	“The very terms of this debate, with their extraordinary orientation toward the past, pave the way, objectively speaking, for a revivalist and even fascist kinds of cultural nationalism…”
Materialist Conception of Culture	The idea that culture is not a set of spiritual or religious beliefs, but rather a set of practices and activities through which people produce the meaning of their lives.	“Against this revivalist definition of culture, we need a materialist conception which looks at culture not as spiritual or religious heritage but as a set of material practices through which people live and produce the meanings of their lives.”
National-Popular	A cultural formation that arises from the popular classes and their aspirations, forming the basis for a truly national culture.	“…the conception of national culture as ‘national-popular’ has an orientation not toward the past, as in revivalist conception, but toward the future…”
Hegemony	The dominance of one group’s ideology or culture over others.	“…the Hindutva forces… are now the main contenders for political dominance and cultural hegemony…”
Cultural Industry	The institutions and practices involved in the production and dissemination of cultural products, often seen as a way of spreading ideology.	“…the electronic media are not just entertainments outside the spheres of culture but are the very central element in cultural control, as a well-oiled cultural industry…”
Commodity Fetishism	The tendency to see commodities (objects produced for sale) as having intrinsic value or meaning, rather than recognizing them as social products.	“…economic liberalisation has vastly accelerated the creation of a pan-Indian culture of commodity fetishism which the electronic media is carrying far beyond the urban habitats of the bourgeoisie…”

Contribution of “The Politics of Culture” by Aijaz Ahmad to Literary Theory/Theories

Examples of Critiques Through “The Politics of Culture” by Aijaz Ahmad

Literary Work	Critique Through Aijaz Ahmad’s “The Politics of Culture”	Key Themes from Ahmad
1. Rudyard Kipling’s Kim	Ahmad’s critique of cultural imperialism can be applied to Kim, which romanticizes British colonial rule in India. The novel presents the colonial regime as benign and just, marginalizing the voices of colonized subjects. The dominance of British cultural ideals over Indian traditions is evident, supporting a cultural hierarchy rooted in colonial power.	Critique of cultural imperialism; the novel reinforces colonial rule as part of the British “civilizing mission” in India.
2. Arundhati Roy’s The God of Small Things	Ahmad’s materialist conception of culture can be applied to Roy’s depiction of caste, class, and social oppression. The novel focuses on the entrenched hierarchies in Indian society, particularly the marginalization of lower-caste individuals, critiquing the cultural and economic oppression that defines their lives. Ahmad would appreciate the novel’s focus on the realities of class struggle and its critique of hierarchical structures.	Critique of class, caste, and social oppression; the novel aligns with Ahmad’s view of culture as a reflection of material struggles.
3. R.K. Narayan’s The Guide	Ahmad’s focus on class struggle and the politics of culture highlights the limitations of Narayan’s The Guide in addressing the complex material realities of Indian society. The novel’s portrayal of spiritual and personal transformation avoids deeper engagement with issues of caste, class, and economic exploitation, which Ahmad argues should be central to any cultural narrative.	Materialist critique of culture; Ahmad would argue the novel lacks critical engagement with class and caste dynamics in India.
4. E.M. Forster’s A Passage to India	Using Ahmad’s critique of elite, revivalist ideologies, Forster’s novel can be read as a subtle critique of British colonialism but still reflects an elite perspective that fails to engage with the material realities of Indian social life. The novel depicts the impossibility of genuine friendship between colonizer and colonized without fully acknowledging the economic exploitation underpinning colonial rule.	Critique of elitism and colonial ideologies; the novel gestures at critique but remains embedded in elite, liberal perspectives.

Key Themes from “The Politics of Culture” by Aijaz Ahmad:

• Cultural Imperialism: Critique of how colonial powers imposed their culture while marginalizing the cultures of colonized peoples.
• Revivalist Cultural Nationalism: Aijaz Ahmad opposes the revivalist, elitist conception of national culture, advocating instead for a democratic, secular culture.
• Materialist Critique: Culture should be viewed through the lens of material practices, emphasizing access to cultural goods based on class, caste, and gender.
• Elite vs. Popular Culture: Ahmad critiques the distinction between high culture and popular culture, advocating for the recognition of oppressed classes’ cultural contributions.

Criticism Against “The Politics of Culture” by Aijaz Ahmad

Representative Quotations from “The Politics of Culture” by Aijaz Ahmad with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
1. “Culture is not an arena for the harmonious unfolding of the National Spirit…” (p. 66)	Ahmad challenges the romantic notion of culture as a harmonious, unified entity, arguing instead that culture is a site of conflict, shaped by class and social struggles.
2. “The essential task in the politics of culture is to combat the elitist, revivalist, communalist culture…” (p. 66)	Ahmad emphasizes the need to oppose revivalist cultural nationalism, particularly its association with Brahminical classicism, advocating for a secular, democratic alternative.
3. “Culture is a set of material practices through which people live and produce the meanings of their lives.” (p. 65)	This reflects Ahmad’s materialist approach to culture, viewing it as a product of social and economic practices rather than a spiritual or timeless heritage.
4. “Every nation has at any given time not one culture but several.” (p. 66)	Ahmad rejects the idea of a singular national culture, highlighting the multiplicity of cultural forms within a nation, often tied to social and class differences.
5. “The work of creating the ‘national-popular’ involves a critical task twice over…” (p. 67)	Ahmad draws on Gramsci’s concept of the ‘national-popular,’ arguing that culture should critically incorporate the best elements from both the oppressed and the oppressors.
6. “The ruling classes have far greater access to that consciousness than ever before.” (p. 68)	Referring to modern media, Ahmad points out how the ruling class uses media as a tool to control cultural consciousness more effectively than in previous eras.
7. “Classicism is not just accumulated wisdom of the ages but also an anachronism…” (p. 66)	Ahmad critiques classicism as a repressive force that upholds hierarchical cultural traditions and weighs heavily on the oppressed.
8. “Revivalist claims of an organized religion… almost always conceal very high degrees of violence…” (p. 65)	Ahmad critiques revivalist cultural nationalism, particularly its exclusionary and violent nature against those outside dominant religious or cultural identities.
9. “Colonialism itself was not only an economic and political system but also a powerful cultural force.” (p. 68)	He emphasizes the cultural dimension of colonialism, highlighting how cultural imperialism was integral to maintaining colonial domination.
10. “The greatest long-term danger comes from that worship of the market that goes currently under the name of ‘liberalization’.” (p. 69)	Ahmad warns about the cultural impact of neoliberalism, arguing that the unrestrained market economy will lead to brutalization and fragmentation in society.

Suggested Readings: “The Politics of Culture” by Aijaz Ahmad

1. Ahmad, Aijaz. In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures. Verso, 1992.
2. Brennan, Timothy. Wars of Position: The Cultural Politics of Left and Right. Columbia University Press, 2006.
3. Chatterjee, Partha. The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. Princeton University Press, 1993.
4. Gramsci, Antonio. Selections from the Prison Notebooks. Edited by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith, International Publishers, 1971.
5. Hall, Stuart, et al. Modernity: An Introduction to Modern Societies. Wiley-Blackwell, 1996.
6. Jameson, Fredric. The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act. Cornell University Press, 1981.
7. Nandy, Ashis. The Intimate Enemy: Loss and Recovery of Self Under Colonialism. Oxford University Press, 1983.
8. Said, Edward W. Culture and Imperialism. Knopf, 1993.
9. Williams, Raymond. Culture and Society: 1780–1950. Columbia University Press, 1983.
10. Young, Robert J.C. Postcolonialism: An Historical Introduction. Wiley-Blackwell, 2001.

Introduction: “Jameson’s Rhetoric of Otherness and the “National Allegory” by Aijaz Ahmad

“Jameson’s Rhetoric of Otherness and the ‘National Allegory'” by Aijaz Ahmad was first published in 1987 in the journal Social Text. This essay is crucial for comprehending the significance of literature and literary theory. It offers a detailed examination of Fredric Jameson’s concept of the “national allegory” and its implications for understanding Third World literatures. Ahmad criticizes Jameson’s approach for its tendency to reduce Third World texts to mere representations of national identity, neglecting their complexities and diverse voices. He argues for a more nuanced understanding of these literatures that acknowledges their hybridity and their potential to challenge dominant narratives.

Summary of “Jameson’s Rhetoric of Otherness and the “National Allegory” by Aijaz Ahmad

• Critique of Jameson’s Binary Framework:
• Ahmad critiques Fredric Jameson’s binary opposition of the “first” and “third” worlds in his theory of third-world literature.
  • “We have, instead, a binary opposition of what Jameson calls the ‘first’ and the ‘third’ worlds.”
• Rejection of the Concept of ‘Third-World Literature’:
• Ahmad argues against the notion of a singular “third-world literature,” seeing it as a problematic reduction of the complexities of varied literary traditions.
  • “There is no such thing as a ‘third-world literature’ which can be constructed as an internally coherent object of theoretical knowledge.”
• Questioning ‘National Allegory’:
• Jameson’s claim that all third-world texts are national allegories is challenged by Ahmad as an oversimplification of the diversity within third-world literature.
  • “Jameson defines the so-called third world in terms of its ‘experience of colonialism and imperialism,’” leading to his idea that “all third-world texts are necessarily… national allegories.”
• Cultural and Linguistic Heterogeneity:
• Ahmad emphasizes the vast linguistic and cultural heterogeneity in the third world, criticizing Jameson’s theory for homogenizing this diversity.
  • “The enormous cultural heterogeneity of social formations within the so-called third world is submerged within a singular identity of ‘experience.'”
• Historical and Economic Complexity:
• Ahmad points out that many third-world nations, such as India, have complex capitalist systems that Jameson’s binary framework fails to account for.
  • “India’s steel industry did celebrate its hundredth anniversary a few years ago, and the top eight of her multinational corporations are among the fastest growing in the world.”
• Impact of Colonialism vs. Internal Social Conflicts:
• Ahmad highlights that many literary texts from the third world do not center around the colonial experience, but rather focus on internal social conflicts and class struggles.
  • “The barbarity of feudal landowners, the rapes and murders in the houses of religious ‘mystics’… are the dominant themes in many novels, not colonialism.”
• Criticism of Western Canonization and Representation:
• Ahmad criticizes how certain third-world authors, such as Salman Rushdie, are valorized beyond measure due to their writing in English, representing an entire civilization rather than being appreciated for their individuality.
  • “The retribution visited upon the head of an Asian, an African, an Arab intellectual who writes in English is that he/she is immediately elevated to the lonely splendor of a ‘representative’… of a race, a continent, a civilization.”
• Dialectical Materialism vs. Postmodernism:
• Ahmad contrasts Jameson’s rigid, binary Marxist framework with a more flexible understanding of global capitalism, emphasizing the fluidity and contradictions within capitalist and socialist systems.
  • “The world is united… by the global operation of a single mode of production, namely the capitalist one, and the global resistance to this mode.”
• Multiplicity of Determinations:
• Ahmad argues that literary texts cannot be reduced to a single ideological determination (such as nationalism) but are products of multiple, complex determinations.
  • “Literary texts are produced in highly differentiated, usually very over-determined contexts of competing ideological and cultural clusters.”

Literary Terms/Concepts in “Jameson’s Rhetoric of Otherness and the “National Allegory” by Aijaz Ahmad

Term/Concept	Explanation	Relevance in Ahmad’s Critique
National Allegory	The idea that all third-world texts can be read as allegories of the nation, where personal stories are linked to national experiences.	Ahmad critiques Jameson’s overgeneralization that all third-world texts are national allegories, arguing that many deal with internal social conflicts rather than purely nationalist themes.
Third-World Literature	A body of literature from countries that have experienced colonialism and imperialism, which Jameson claims forms a coherent, unified literary category.	Ahmad rejects the existence of a unified “third-world literature,” emphasizing that the term is too reductive and ignores the diversity within these countries’ literary traditions.
Binary Opposition	A structuralist concept where two opposing ideas (e.g., first-world vs. third-world) are set in contrast to each other.	Ahmad criticizes Jameson for relying on a binary framework that simplifies the complexity of the global literary landscape, particularly by dividing the world into “first” and “third” worlds.
Cognitive Aesthetics	Jameson’s concept for understanding the aesthetics of third-world literature as shaped by the socio-political experiences of colonialism and imperialism.	Ahmad argues that this approach suppresses the multiplicity of voices and literary forms in third-world countries and imposes a homogenized view of these diverse cultures.
Orientalism	A critical concept popularized by Edward Said, referring to the Western depiction and conceptualization of the “East” as fundamentally different, exotic, and backward.	Ahmad compares Jameson’s framework to Orientalist practices, suggesting that his reading of third-world literature replicates earlier Western tendencies to homogenize non-Western cultures.
First World / Third World	Terms used in the Cold War era to classify countries as either capitalist (first world), socialist (second world), or colonized/developing (third world).	Ahmad critiques Jameson’s reliance on these outdated categories, arguing that many so-called third-world countries, like India, have complex capitalist structures that defy such classification.
Civilizational Other	The idea of one group or culture being viewed as the “other” by a dominant culture, emphasizing its difference or inferiority.	Ahmad takes issue with Jameson positioning third-world writers and cultures as the “Other” of Western civilization, which reinforces a problematic division between “us” and “them.”
Dialectical Materialism	A Marxist theory that societal development occurs through the conflict of opposites (thesis and antithesis), leading to change and progress.	Ahmad argues for a more nuanced application of Marxism, suggesting that Jameson’s binary framework overlooks the complex, dialectical interactions within global capitalism.
Hegemony	A concept derived from Gramsci, referring to the dominance of one group over others, especially in terms of ideology and culture.	Ahmad critiques Jameson’s failure to account for the role of hegemonic cultural and class formations within third-world countries, focusing instead on a narrow nationalist narrative.
Over-Determination	A concept from Althusser, indicating that a single event or phenomenon is the result of multiple causes, often used to describe the complexity of societal and literary texts.	Ahmad uses this to argue that literary texts are shaped by multiple, often contradictory, forces and cannot be reduced to a single ideological or cultural determinant, such as nationalism.
Postmodernism	A cultural, intellectual, and artistic movement characterized by skepticism, irony, and the rejection of grand narratives or universal truths.	Ahmad contrasts postmodernism with Jameson’s approach, critiquing his binary focus on nationalism/postmodernism as insufficient to explain the diversity of third-world literary practices.

Contribution of “Jameson’s Rhetoric of Otherness and the “National Allegory” by Aijaz Ahmad to Literary Theory/Theories

• Critique of Binary Oppositions in Literary Theory:
• Ahmad challenges the use of binary categories (first-world/third-world) in Jameson’s work, arguing that they oversimplify global literary dynamics and ignore internal complexities.
  • “The binary opposition which Jameson constructs between a capitalist first world and a presumably pre- or non-capitalist third world is empirically ungrounded.”
• Rejection of the Concept of a Unified ‘Third-World Literature’:
• Ahmad rejects the notion of a coherent and unified “third-world literature,” emphasizing that it is impossible to theorize such a category given the vast cultural, linguistic, and historical diversity of the countries involved.
  • “I shall argue, therefore, that there is no such thing as a ‘third-world literature’ which can be constructed as an internally coherent object of theoretical knowledge.”
• Interrogation of the ‘National Allegory’ as a Singular Framework:
• Ahmad critiques Jameson’s assertion that all third-world texts are national allegories, stating that this reduces the literary output of diverse cultures to a single narrative form.
  • “To say that all third-world texts are necessarily this or that is to say, in effect, that any text originating within that social space which is not this or that is not a ‘true’ narrative.”
• Promotion of Multiplicity and Over-Determination in Literary Analysis:
• Ahmad advocates for recognizing multiple, complex, and contradictory forces that shape literary texts, rather than reducing them to one overarching framework (e.g., nationalism or colonialism).
  • “Literary texts are produced in highly differentiated, usually very over-determined contexts of competing ideological and cultural clusters.”
• Critique of Western Canon Formation and Representation:
• Ahmad contributes to discussions on how non-Western writers are represented in the Western literary canon, criticizing the selective inclusion of certain third-world writers while ignoring the broader literary traditions they represent.
  • “The representation of this body of work in Jameson’s discourse as simply ‘non-canonical’… does appear to over-state the case considerably.”
• Expansion of Marxist Literary Criticism:
• By critiquing Jameson’s reliance on the Three Worlds Theory, Ahmad pushes for a more nuanced application of Marxist theory, recognizing the complexity and contradictions of global capitalism rather than reducing it to simple binaries.
  • “The world is united… by the global operation of a single mode of production, namely the capitalist one, and the global resistance to this mode.”
• Critique of Essentialism in Literary Theory:
• Ahmad opposes essentialist views that categorize entire regions or cultures under singular literary frameworks, stressing the need to recognize the internal heterogeneity of third-world nations.
  • “The enormous cultural heterogeneity of social formations within the so-called third world is submerged within a singular identity of ‘experience.'”
• Decolonizing the Study of Literature:
• Ahmad’s critique of Jameson’s Eurocentric approach to third-world literature contributes to broader decolonial efforts in literary theory, challenging Western intellectual frameworks that reduce non-Western cultures to mere opposites of the West.
  • “Jameson’s framework tends to homogenize third-world literature much in the same way Orientalist scholarship has historically presented non-Western cultures.”
• Contribution to Global Literary Studies:
• Ahmad’s argument for understanding global literature as part of a unified yet diverse world system challenges the notion of distinct “worlds” and contributes to the field of global literary studies by emphasizing interconnections and contradictions within global capitalism.
  • “One could start with a radically different premise, namely the proposition that we live not in three worlds but in one.”

Examples of Critiques Through “Jameson’s Rhetoric of Otherness and the “National Allegory” by Aijaz Ahmad

Literary Work	Critique Using Ahmad’s Framework	Key Concepts/References from Ahmad’s Article
Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o’s A Grain of Wheat	Ahmad would critique the tendency to classify all works from third-world countries as “national allegories,” arguing that Ngũgĩ’s exploration of personal and historical struggles cannot be reduced to a simplistic nationalist narrative.	“To say that all third-world texts are necessarily this or that is to say, in effect, that any text originating within that social space which is not this or that is not a ‘true’ narrative.”
Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart	Ahmad would critique Jameson’s framework if it reduced Achebe’s work to a singular nationalist allegory, ignoring the novel’s exploration of internal conflicts within Igbo society and its complex depiction of colonialism.	“The enormous cultural heterogeneity of social formations within the so-called third world is submerged within a singular identity of ‘experience.'”
Gabriel García Márquez’s One Hundred Years of Solitude	Ahmad would argue that while Márquez’s work is often seen as representative of Latin America, such categorizations ignore the regional, historical, and class complexities embedded in the novel, which resist easy categorization as a national allegory.	“There is no such thing as a ‘third-world literature’ which can be constructed as an internally coherent object of theoretical knowledge.”
Buchi Emecheta’s The Joys of Motherhood	Ahmad would critique an interpretation of Emecheta’s work solely as a national allegory, arguing that the novel’s focus on gender, personal struggles, and urbanization within Nigeria challenges the simplistic nationalism/postmodernism binary.	“Nationalism itself is not some unitary thing with some pre-determined essence and value. There are hundreds of nationalisms in Asia and Africa today; some are progressive, others are not.”

Criticism Against “Jameson’s Rhetoric of Otherness and the “National Allegory” by Aijaz Ahmad

• Overemphasis on Diversity at the Expense of Commonalities: Ahmad’s critique of Jameson’s generalizations might itself downplay the shared historical experiences of colonialism and imperialism that many third-world countries have faced, which could still serve as a useful framework for understanding certain literary trends.
• Insufficient Engagement with Jameson’s Positive Contributions: While Ahmad critiques Jameson’s binary framework, he may overlook the value of Jameson’s attempt to include third-world literature in global literary theory, and his effort to engage with non-Western literary traditions in a serious manner.
• Limited Recognition of Nationalism’s Role in Literature: Ahmad’s rejection of nationalism as a dominant framework may underplay its central role in many third-world countries’ postcolonial identities and literatures. Nationalist themes are significant in shaping much of the literature from decolonizing nations.
• Potential Underestimation of the Importance of Allegory: Ahmad’s dismissal of the “national allegory” concept might ignore the fact that allegorical readings have been historically central to many third-world literatures, especially in postcolonial narratives where personal and national experiences are often intertwined.
• Overemphasis on Language as a Barrier: Ahmad highlights the issue of linguistic diversity, but critics might argue that the emphasis on language overlooks how translated works can still convey essential themes and shared experiences across linguistic boundaries, creating cross-cultural connections.
• Lack of Alternatives to Binary Frameworks: While Ahmad critiques Jameson’s binary opposition of first- and third-worlds, he offers limited alternative frameworks for understanding the global literary landscape, which could leave a theoretical gap in explaining common structures or themes across these literatures.
• Dismissal of Global Theoretical Models: Ahmad’s focus on rejecting Jameson’s framework might be seen as a rejection of broader attempts to theorize global literary movements. This could be seen as resisting efforts to develop universal theoretical models for understanding literature in a globalized world.

Representative Quotations from “Jameson’s Rhetoric of Otherness and the “National Allegory” by Aijaz Ahmad with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“There is no such thing as a ‘third-world literature’ which can be constructed as an internally coherent object of theoretical knowledge.”	Ahmad challenges the idea of a unified third-world literature, arguing that the diversity of cultural, historical, and social contexts within these countries makes such a categorization overly simplistic.
“All third-world texts are necessarily… to be read as… national allegories.”	This quotation reflects Jameson’s assertion, which Ahmad critiques, that all third-world texts must be read as national allegories. Ahmad finds this reductionist and problematic given the diversity of these texts.
“The enormous cultural heterogeneity of social formations within the so-called third world is submerged within a singular identity of ‘experience.'”	Ahmad criticizes Jameson for collapsing the vast cultural and social differences in the third world into a single narrative of shared colonial experience, overlooking internal complexities.
“What constitutes the unity of the world is the global operation of the capitalist mode of production and the resistance to that mode.”	Ahmad argues that the world’s unity is not based on binary oppositions (like first and third world) but on the global spread of capitalism and the resistance to it, which transcends national boundaries.
“To say that all third-world texts are necessarily this or that is to say, in effect, that any text originating within that social space which is not this or that is not a ‘true’ narrative.”	Ahmad critiques Jameson’s blanket categorization of third-world texts, arguing that it excludes diverse narratives and forms that do not fit the ‘national allegory’ model.
“Jameson’s framework tends to homogenize third-world literature much in the same way Orientalist scholarship has historically presented non-Western cultures.”	Ahmad draws a parallel between Jameson’s generalizations and Orientalist practices, which also homogenized and misrepresented the complexities of non-Western societies.
“The notion of a third-world culture based exclusively upon ‘the experience of colonialism and imperialism’ is a vast oversimplification.”	Ahmad critiques Jameson for reducing third-world cultures to a singular experience of colonialism, ignoring other social, political, and cultural factors that shape these literatures.
“Nationalism itself is not some unitary thing with some pre-determined essence and value. There are hundreds of nationalisms in Asia and Africa today; some are progressive, others are not.”	Ahmad critiques the idea that nationalism in the third world is a monolithic ideology. He emphasizes that nationalisms are diverse, with varying political implications and outcomes.
“Literary texts are produced in highly differentiated, usually very over-determined contexts of competing ideological and cultural clusters.”	Ahmad argues for recognizing the complex, multi-layered contexts in which literature is produced, rejecting Jameson’s reduction of third-world texts to a single ideological framework.
“The world is united… by the global operation of a single mode of production, namely the capitalist one, and the global resistance to this mode.”	Ahmad expands the theoretical scope to argue that the unity of the world comes not from binary divisions like first and third worlds but from the global spread of capitalism and the varied resistance to it.

Suggested Readings: “Jameson’s Rhetoric of Otherness and the “National Allegory” by Aijaz Ahmad

1. Ahmad, Aijaz. “Jameson’s Rhetoric of Otherness and the ‘National Allegory.'” Social Text, no. 17, 1987, pp. 3-25. Duke University Press, www.jstor.org/stable/466475.
2. Jameson, Fredric. “Third-World Literature in the Era of Multinational Capitalism.” Social Text, no. 15, 1986, pp. 65-88. Duke University Press, www.jstor.org/stable/466493
3. Ahmad, Aijaz. In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures. Verso, 1992. www.versobooks.com/books/688-in-theory.
4. Bhabha, Homi K. The Location of Culture. Routledge, 1994. www.routledge.com/The-Location-of-Culture/Bhabha/p/book/9780415336390.
5. Said, Edward W. Orientalism. Pantheon Books, 1978. www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/174665/orientalism-by-edward-w-said/.
6. Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. A Critique of Postcolonial Reason: Toward a History of the Vanishing Present. Harvard University Press, 1999. www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674177642.
7. Lazarus, Neil. “Fredric Jameson on ‘Third-World Literature’: A Qualified Defence.” Postcolonial Studies, vol. 1, no. 1, 1998, pp. 7-26. www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13688799889930.
8. Mufti, Aamir R. “Auerbach in Istanbul: Edward Said, Secular Criticism, and the Question of Minority Culture.” Critical Inquiry, vol. 25, no. 1, 1998, pp. 95-125. www.jstor.org/stable/1344165.
9. Gandhi, Leela. Postcolonial Theory: A Critical Introduction. Columbia University Press, 1998. www.cup.columbia.edu/book/postcolonial-theory/9780231112770.
10. Boelhower, William. “The Rise of the New Atlantic Studies Matrix.” American Literary History, vol. 20, no. 1-2, 2008, pp. 83-101. www.jstor.org/stable/20492210.

Introduction: “Fascism and National Culture: Reading Gramsci in the Days of Hindutva” by Aijaz Ahmad

“Fascism and National Culture: Reading Gramsci in the Days of Hindutva” by Aijaz Ahmad first appeared in 1993 in the journal Social Scientist. This essay holds significant importance in literature and literary theory due to its insightful analysis of the relationship between fascism, national culture, and the rise of Hindutva in India. Ahmad utilizes Gramsci’s concept of cultural hegemony to examine how Hindutva ideology seeks to dominate the cultural sphere and construct a national identity that marginalizes and excludes minority groups. The essay’s critical perspective and its exploration of the complexities of cultural politics continue to be relevant and influential in contemporary literary and cultural studies.

Summary of “Fascism and National Culture: Reading Gramsci in the Days of Hindutva” by Aijaz Ahmad

• Gramsci and Indian Context: Aijaz Ahmad draws parallels between the fascist tendencies in Italy during Gramsci’s time and contemporary India under the rise of Hindutva. He argues that reflections on fascism in Europe can help understand similar trends in India (Ahmad, p.32).
• The Role of Language and Culture in Nationalism: Ahmad highlights how both Italy and India share historical parallels regarding language and culture. In Italy, Latin and later Italian were symbols of privilege, while in India, Sanskrit played a similar role in perpetuating Brahminical dominance. The classical languages became tools for hierarchical structures, contributing to cultural fragmentation (Ahmad, pp.34-35).
• Failure of Italian Renaissance and Risorgimento: Ahmad discusses Gramsci’s analysis of Italy’s failure to create a secular, national culture during the Renaissance and the Risorgimento. These periods could not integrate the peasantry or foster a national-popular dynamic, which led to Italy’s susceptibility to fascism. This failure mirrors India’s struggles with regionalism and caste-based hierarchies (Ahmad, pp.35-37).
• Fascism as a Mass Movement: Fascism is seen not merely as a reactionary elite conspiracy but as a movement that mobilizes various social strata. Gramsci viewed fascism in Italy as addressing the structural crises of Italian capitalism, drawing support from diverse groups, including the capitalist class and petty bourgeoisie. Similarly, Hindutva mobilizes mass consent by appealing to national traditions, invoking myths of a unified past (Ahmad, pp.39-40).
• The Role of Intellectuals and the Church: Gramsci and Ahmad critique the role of intellectuals in supporting reactionary structures. In Italy, the Vatican played a crucial role in maintaining conservative hegemony, just as traditional intellectuals in India propagate a Brahminical order under the guise of preserving culture (Ahmad, pp.40-42).
• The ‘National-Popular’ and the Peasantry: Gramsci’s notion of the “national-popular” is central to his theory of revolution. A lack of alignment between intellectuals and the peasantry in Italy hindered the formation of a national-popular movement. Ahmad connects this to India’s failure to integrate various regional and caste-based identities into a unified national culture (Ahmad, pp.44-45).
• Comparisons with Hindutva: Ahmad warns of the parallels between Italian fascism and Hindutva, particularly how both movements use cultural revivalism and religious symbolism to garner mass support. He emphasizes that Hindutva, much like Italian fascism, builds on a mythic notion of national unity while marginalizing dissenting voices (Ahmad, pp.48-50).
• The Role of Economic Crises in Fascism: Gramsci and Ahmad note that economic crises do not directly produce revolutions or fascism but create fertile ground for specific ideological movements to gain traction. In India, the economic policies of liberalization have created discontent among the rural and urban petty bourgeoisie, which could be exploited by fascist forces (Ahmad, p.56).
• Importance of Collective Intellectual Agency: Gramsci’s call for a “collective intellectual” to lead the counter-hegemony against fascism resonates with Ahmad’s argument that the struggle against Hindutva requires a broad-based, organized intellectual and moral reform. This reform must address both economic and cultural issues (Ahmad, p.65).

References from the Article

• “The paradox of Italian history is that, for all the antiquity of its civilization, it never became a unified political entity until the late nineteenth century.” (Ahmad, p.35).
• “The language of classicism and imperial rule, Latin, was succeeded by Italian, which became the language of privilege, but barely two and a half percent of Italians spoke it.” (Ahmad, p.34).
• “Gramsci’s analysis of the failure of the Renaissance and Risorgimento highlights the failure of these movements to unify Italy politically or culturally.” (Ahmad, p.35).
• “Fascism mobilized diverse strata in Italy, addressing the structural crises of capitalism and drawing support from sectors that were not originally fascist in outlook.” (Ahmad, p.39).
• “The intellectual stratum in Italy, as in India, has often been complicit in preserving traditional structures of privilege, using classical languages and religious institutions to maintain social hierarchies.” (Ahmad, p.41).

Literary Terms/Concepts in “Fascism and National Culture: Reading Gramsci in the Days of Hindutva” by Aijaz Ahmad

Literary Term/Concept	Definition	Usage in the Text
Hegemony	Leadership or dominance, particularly of one social group or nation over others.	Gramsci’s concept of cultural hegemony is central, referring to how ruling classes maintain power by dominating ideologies and creating consensus among the masses.
Passive Revolution	A Gramscian term for gradual, non-revolutionary change through reforms imposed from above.	Ahmad uses this concept to describe how fascism in Italy and Hindutva in India mobilize different social strata to resolve crises without direct proletarian revolution.
National-Popular	The unification of cultural identity and political power that reflects the will of the people.	Gramsci’s idea of national-popular movements is applied to how popular consent is built through cultural narratives, particularly in Italy and India’s nationalist movements.
Cosmopolitanism	The ideology that all human beings belong to a single community based on shared morality or culture.	Gramsci’s criticism of Italian intellectuals’ detachment from the masses, rooted in their cosmopolitanism, is likened to the distance between India’s elite and common people.
Romanticism	A movement emphasizing emotion, individualism, and the glorification of the past.	Ahmad contrasts Italy’s lack of a revolutionary Romanticism with the fascist nostalgia for classical Italy, paralleling it with India’s Hindutva revivalist tendencies.
Intellectuals	Gramsci’s term for those who produce and distribute ideology and maintain cultural and political order.	Ahmad highlights the role of traditional intellectuals in preserving cultural elitism, both in Italy’s fascist past and in modern India’s Brahminical revivalism.
Subaltern	A term used to denote populations that are socially, politically, and geographically outside of power.	Ahmad critiques the “subaltern” studies’ misinterpretation of Gramsci, pointing out the limitations of using the term without recognizing class structures and hegemony.
Restoration-Revolution	A term to describe a revolution that reinstates old power structures or elites in modified forms.	Ahmad applies this to the Italian Risorgimento and India’s post-colonial situation, arguing both were incomplete revolutions that failed to displace entrenched elites.
Cultural Chauvinism	Excessive or prejudiced loyalty to one’s own culture.	Ahmad uses this to describe how Hindutva invokes an exaggerated sense of cultural and religious superiority, similar to fascism’s use of Italy’s imperial past.
Historical Materialism	A Marxist theory focusing on material conditions as the foundation of society and historical development.	Though not overtly used, Ahmad’s analysis is grounded in historical materialism, analyzing how economic and social structures influence the rise of fascism in Italy and India.

Contribution of “Fascism and National Culture: Reading Gramsci in the Days of Hindutva” by Aijaz Ahmad to Literary Theory/Theories

Examples of Critiques Through “Fascism and National Culture: Reading Gramsci in the Days of Hindutva” by Aijaz Ahmad

Literary Work	Critique through Ahmad’s Lens	Relevant Themes from Ahmad
1. E.M. Forster’s A Passage to India	Ahmad might critique the novel’s depiction of the British Raj and its view of Indian culture as a monolithic entity, emphasizing how the colonial narrative shapes the representation of national identity.	Colonialism and Nationalism: Ahmad’s discussion of cultural nationalism critiques how colonial powers shape the idea of a unified national identity, as seen in the novel’s oversimplification of Indian culture.
2. Arundhati Roy’s The God of Small Things	Ahmad would critique Roy’s portrayal of caste, social inequalities, and the political landscape in postcolonial India. He would emphasize how the novel exposes the failures of Indian nationalism to address deeply entrenched caste and class structures, which fascist movements exploit.	Hegemony and Subalternity: Ahmad’s analysis would focus on the power dynamics within Indian society, exploring how cultural and political hegemony shapes social oppression, particularly in relation to caste.
3. Rabindranath Tagore’s Gitanjali	Ahmad may critique Tagore’s spiritual nationalism for its potential alignment with elite cultural hegemony. Tagore’s universalist themes could be seen as an abstraction that neglects the material conditions and contradictions within Indian society, which fascist movements often exploit.	Hegemony and Culture: Ahmad’s Gramscian analysis of cultural hegemony would question how Tagore’s spiritual nationalism may have been co-opted by cultural elites, aligning with fascist cultural ideals.
4. V.S. Naipaul’s India: A Wounded Civilization	Ahmad could critique Naipaul’s depiction of Indian culture as stagnant and regressive, reinforcing orientalist stereotypes. He would likely argue that Naipaul’s narrative aligns with colonialist and reactionary views of Indian society, echoing the kind of intellectual discourse that Hindutva seeks to perpetuate.	Intellectuals and Fascism: Ahmad highlights the role of traditional intellectuals in perpetuating cultural myths and stereotypes, something Naipaul’s work inadvertently supports by portraying Indian culture as “wounded” and backward.

Criticism Against “Fascism and National Culture: Reading Gramsci in the Days of Hindutva” by Aijaz Ahmad

• Overemphasis on Historical Parallels: Critics argue that Ahmad places too much emphasis on historical parallels between Italian fascism and the contemporary Hindutva movement, which may overlook unique aspects of Indian culture, politics, and social dynamics.
• Neglect of Postcolonial Complexity: Ahmad’s focus on Gramsci’s theories may sideline the complex realities of postcolonial India, reducing nuanced political, social, and cultural dynamics to overly broad theoretical frameworks that may not fully capture India’s post-independence challenges.
• Class-Centric Analysis: The strong focus on class struggle, typical of Gramsci’s Marxism, might lead Ahmad to underplay other critical factors such as religious, regional, or ethnic divisions that are equally significant in India, especially in the context of Hindutva’s rise.
• Limited Engagement with Caste: While Ahmad draws on Marxist concepts, his analysis has been critiqued for not fully integrating the caste system’s unique role in shaping India’s socio-political fabric, which often intersects with class but operates independently in many aspects of Indian life.
• Inflexible Application of European Theories: Some critics argue that Ahmad’s use of Gramscian theory may be too rigidly European and doesn’t fully adapt to India’s specific historical, social, and cultural context, resulting in a somewhat forced comparison between Italian fascism and Indian political movements.
• Underrepresentation of Cultural Nationalism’s Positive Aspects: Ahmad’s critical take on cultural nationalism through a Gramscian lens may be seen as overly dismissive of how cultural nationalism has positively contributed to anti-colonial and democratic movements in India, including Gandhian and Nehruvian efforts.
• Dismissal of Alternative Intellectual Approaches: Ahmad’s strict Marxist critique may undervalue other intellectual traditions and critical approaches to understanding the rise of Hindutva, such as subaltern studies or postcolonial theory, which may provide alternative insights into India’s contemporary politics.

Representative Quotations from “Fascism and National Culture: Reading Gramsci in the Days of Hindutva” by Aijaz Ahmad with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“Gramsci’s reflections upon Italian history offer us rich analogues for reflecting upon our own.”	Ahmad draws a parallel between Gramsci’s analysis of Italian fascism and the rise of Hindutva in India, using Gramsci’s historical analysis as a framework for understanding the dangers of cultural nationalism and authoritarianism in India.
“Fascism is not merely a factional pathology that occupies its own discrete space…”	Ahmad emphasizes that fascism is not an isolated issue but a product of deep-rooted societal and historical forces, drawing on Gramsci’s insight that fascism grows out of specific social and economic conditions.
“In the present conditions, is it not precisely the fascist movement which in fact corresponds to the movement of moderate and conservative liberalism in the last century?”	This quotation links the rise of fascist movements to the failures of moderate liberalism, suggesting that when liberal democratic structures fail to meet the needs of the masses, fascist ideologies can fill the void.
“The relationship between the North and South in India bears, mercifully, no resemblance to the virtually colonial relationship between Northern and Southern Italy.”	Ahmad compares the regional economic disparities in Italy during Gramsci’s time with India, recognizing differences but also highlighting how economic inequalities and regional imbalances fuel fascist tendencies.
“Fascism, in other words, has two faces. On the one hand, it engages the whole nation in a massive social upheaval in the ideological-cultural domain…”	Ahmad explains how fascism operates on two levels—cultural and economic—mobilizing the nation with cultural narratives while making economic changes that benefit a ruling elite, in this case comparing Hindutva with fascist movements.
“The historical uniqueness of Italy as hereditary descendant of the Roman Empire… fundamentally disrupted the incipient national spirit…”	Ahmad refers to Gramsci’s historical analysis of how Italy’s Roman past burdened the formation of a cohesive national identity, drawing a parallel to how India’s ancient cultural legacy is invoked by Hindutva to shape modern nationalist ideologies.
“In our case, a revolution against foreign rulers but also an immeasurably powerful ‘restoration’ of the rule of the indigenous propertied classes as well.”	Ahmad critiques the Indian nationalist movement, arguing that while it succeeded in ousting colonial rulers, it ultimately restored power to the indigenous elite, failing to deliver a true social and economic revolution for the masses.
“The vernaculars had to wage many of their cultural struggles against Sanskrit and against that Brahminical classicism…”	Ahmad points out how the dominance of classical languages like Sanskrit parallels the cultural dominance of the elite, suggesting that the same kind of linguistic dominance underpins cultural hegemony in contemporary nationalist movements.
“What is important from the political and ideological point of view is that it is capable of creating—and indeed does create—a period of expectation and hope…”	Ahmad reflects on how fascist movements, including Hindutva, create a sense of hope and nationalism for the masses while serving elite interests, making them attractive despite their regressive agendas.
“History does not, in other words, lead automatically to Reason, Progress, Socialism; it may, and often does, equally well lead to mass irrationality and barbarism.”	This quotation captures Ahmad’s critique of deterministic views of history. He warns that without conscious struggle, history can lead to regression, as evidenced by the rise of Hindutva, which he sees as a form of mass irrationality and barbarism.

Suggested Readings: “Fascism and National Culture: Reading Gramsci in the Days of Hindutva” by Aijaz Ahmad

1. Ahmad, Aijaz. In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures. Verso, 1992.
2. Gramsci, Antonio. Selections from the Prison Notebooks. Edited and translated by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell-Smith, International Publishers, 1971.
3. Anderson, Perry. The Antinomies of Antonio Gramsci. Verso, 1976.
4. Bose, Sumantra. Secular States, Religious Politics: India, Turkey, and the Future of Secularism. Cambridge University Press, 2018.
5. Chatterjee, Partha. The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. Princeton University Press, 1993.
6. Menon, Nivedita. Seeing Like a Feminist. Zubaan Books, 2012.
7. Sarkar, Sumit. Beyond Nationalist Frames: Postmodernism, Hindu Fundamentalism, History. Indiana University Press, 2002.
8. Vanaik, Achin. The Rise of Hindu Authoritarianism: Secular Claims, Communal Realities. Verso, 2017.
9. Bhatt, Chetan. Hindu Nationalism: Origins, Ideologies, and Modern Myths. Berg, 2001.