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
- Ahmad, Aijaz. In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures. Verso, 1992. https://www.versobooks.com/books/489-in-theory
- 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 - 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
- Morton, Stephen. Aijaz Ahmad: Literature, Politics, and the Struggle for Hegemony. Pluto Press, 2007. https://www.plutobooks.com/9780745322189/aijaz-ahmad/
- 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\
- 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/
- Ahmad, Aijaz. “Imperialism of Our Time.” Social Scientist, vol. 42, no. 9/10, 2014, pp. 3-20. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24372932
- 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
- Lazarus, Neil. The Postcolonial Unconscious. Cambridge University Press, 2011.