Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak is an unsettling voice in literary theory and especially, post colonial studies. She has describes herself as a “practical deconstructionist feminist Marxist” and as a “gadfly”. she uses deconstruction to examine how the truth is constructed and to deploy the assertions of one intellectual and political position to interrupt” or “bring into crisis”. in her work she combines passionate denunciations of the harm done to women, non-Europeans and the poor by the privileged West with a president questioning of the grounds on which radical critique takes its stand. Her restless critiques connect directly to her critical aspiration for a “politics of the open end “, in which deconstruction acts as a safeguard ‘against the …show more content…
May be Spivak’s best-known essay, and it has controversial things. Post colonial critics like many feminists want to give silence to others a voice. But Spivak worries that even the most benevolent effort merely repeats the very silencing it aims to combat. Spivak points out the British outlawing of sati, the Hindu practice of burning a widow on her husband’s funeral pyre. While this invention saved some lives and may have given women a modicum of free choice, it also served to secure British power in India. It discussed the difference between British “Civilization” and Indian …show more content…
Her face softens when she speaks of her elder brother, the Dalit thinker Raj Gauthama. Since her father was away in the army, he was like a father to them. “We are not rich”, he would say. “We have no social status. Only your education will bring you respect”. And she used to write short poems that she read out to him. He introduced to her to Tamil Literature. He was very strict but gave us freedom; actually, he gave them the motivation for life. He played a very important role in her life. Through her brother and friends encouragement bama came to this wonderful writing field and now a day’s also she survive in the world
According to Dadabhai Naoroji’s article, “The Benefits of British Rule for India”, the Indians/natives had no voice in the taxes, legislations, or were qualified to earn the position of a court judge or high-ranking government official. The society the British constructed blocked the Indians out, and openly disregarded their opinions and desire for change and equality. Some may claim that the British modernized their country by reforming the natives education system, and implementing new innovations and technological advancements, like railroads to improve transportation within the country. However, according to the article written by Professor Peter Marshall titled, “The British Presence in India in the 18th Century,” the majority of these systems primarily focused on English and Western ideas, rather than their own distinctive culture. The traditional ideas and beliefs focusing on theory and methodology, that were implemented into their previous education system, were then modified to a practical approach, forcing their pre-existing system to slowly descend into oblivion.
This is was a major event in her life that influenced her to write
The British East India Company's lack of respect for the people of India, be it religious, economic, or administrative,
In paragraph 11 talks about the British bringing english law and language; there were more than 102 languages in India so communication wasn’t the easiest between people, they also built very fine universities that gave opportunities for people to learn. Indain literacy still went up by ten percent when the british left and it kept going up( doc. 5). But the british still prevented lots of death with the laws against thuggee, suttee and female infanticide right? No because overall around 58.73 million people died from famines caused by the exportation of the good indians grew themselves( doc.7). They also made it hard for Indians to grow food after the British left as said in document 6.
She begins the article by daringly challenging the views of readers, and she continues to do this throughout the article. She also helps her argument by establishing logos and ethos through examples and outside sources. However, she slowly diminishes this credibility
The British rulers of India helped settle 500 million diverse peoples with different religions all over India during their rulership, providing stronger communities held together by values of religion (Paragraph 6). However, the people of India were given little to no responsibility of themselves and their own nation (Document 1). Meaning the British also created a great divide of the native people and the British imperialists get to dictate what taxes and laws exist, all of which to only better the lives of themselves and did not pertain to the basic human needs for the people who actually lived in India. Paragraph 12 shows that the British did bring several different states of India into one unified nation to help establish an effective justice system, civil service, loyal army, and efficient police force to protect the people of India. On the other hand, document 2 shows that the Indians had no say in the taxes they had to pay to the British or how they spent their money as a nation.
Other issue, Britain support for Indian attacks on frontier settlements, also
As what Sir James Bentayao once said in our lecture, “The past is a good place to visit but not a good place to stay.” The past of how women are treated should not be the same as of now. Also, being free does not mean that we are totally free. What I am talking about in this paper is not to let women be totally free. What I mean is to let women choose what they really want without hurting or affecting other people.
They also have a higher standard of living, better sanitation, and a better means of transportation (Doc4). In addition, the coming of the British brought an end to the slave trade, infanticide, and brought the value of India’s exportation trade up (Doc5). The British used the idea of “White Man’s Burden” in order to bring civilization and justice to the “barbarians” and westernize them in a way. The British also brought free trade into India and while they were there became one of the wealthiest countries because of everything being extracted out of it. Lastly, the British kept peace on the region and introduced Western technologies.
On top of this, he was a respected author who had several books to his name. This made him one of the most-educated people of his time. Worth noting is that his achievements contributed to scholarship because several people and particular to his Indian community looked up to him. Besides, he and other scholars had undergone through different experiences in the hands of the white man. For instance, he mentions the idea of the “great mystery” at the chapel when he was together with other scholars.
In the 1600s, the British people took interest in India. In 1707 when the Mongol Empire was collapsing, which meant the British had a chance to take over. By 1857 Britain took full, direct control of India. Although the British developed a very strong army, they restricted the freedom of Indians, created national parks, but abused natural resources, and killed almost 60 millions people but brought modern medicine. When the British took over India, they took over pretty much the entire government and created laws that restricted the rights of the Indians.
As with all theories, this feminist approach to Louise Halfe’s “Body Politics” does not come without its flaws. While it can be argued that this poem criticizes the performativity of feminine gender roles in a patriarchal society, this cannot be proven definitively without knowing the author’s original intentions. Furthermore, the poem does not give its readers enough information to conclude that the society the women live in is in fact a patriarchal society. This becomes evident, as there is no reference to any masculine figure – so any assumptions about the masculine-dominant culture are purely speculative. It is possible that Halfe wrote this poem in an attempt to challenge the gender binary, however one stands to question how successfully she is in doing so.
We are going to see to what extent we can say that Macaulay’s “Minute on Indian Education” reflects British society and the western point of view at the time. In a first part, we will focus on the opposition between Orientalists and Anglicists and in a second part, we will see about the western society seen as culturally superior compared to other nations and societies. On one hand, there was an opposition
Discourse on colonialism generally results in the different opinions of the colonizer and the colonized. The upshot of such discourse shows that colonialism has divergent interpretations. For the colonizer, it is ‘a civilizing mission’; to the colonized, it is exploitation. Such concept is better understood when both the views are studied with an objective approach. Things Fall Apart is a perfect novel to study colonialism as it deals with the perspectives of the colonizer and the colonized.
The God of Small Things by Arundhati Roy depicts the inner lives and hardships women in a patriarchal society face. Roy provides a reflection of the social injustice in India in the form of abusive and tyrannical males who abuse women - both physically and psychologically. The novel is a vehicle for the author to express her disillusionment with the postcolonial social conditions. This response will critically analyse the lives of the female characters in Roy’s novel, specifically Mammachi and Ammu and explore the ways they have been marginalised.