Postmodern Geographies of the U.S. South

Madhu Dubey
{"title":"Postmodern Geographies of the U.S. South","authors":"Madhu Dubey","doi":"10.4324/9780429027239-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a 1990 essay, Cornel West identifies a key shift in U.S. cultural politics since the 1960s, the era widely termed “postmodern,” arguing that the “new cultural politics of difference” is distinguished by its emphasis on particularity and diversity as part of a reaction against the universalizing bent of modern politics (19). Drawing on West, Edward Soja and Barbara Hooper assert, in “The Spaces That Difference Makes” (1993, 184), that the emphasis on locally based micropolitics is a defining feature of the postmodern turn in U.S. culture, and that a renewed focus on spatiality is central to this politics. The postmodern emphasis on space is intended to highlight the situated nature of all political knowledge and action, and to disavow the view from nowhere—the global and disembedded claims of modern knowledge and politics. It is not surprising that postmodern cultural politics takes space rather than time as the dimension within which social differences can be made visible and active, given that the self-definition of European modernity has monopolized time, subsuming varied histories into a singular and teleological narrative of History. The hitherto underprivileged category of space offers a way of interrupting modernity’s global march as well as of restoring the divergent histories that have contributed to the modern legacy. The renewed interest in the regional specificity of the U.S. South in recent years offers an instance of this kind of spatialized cultural politics of difference. Since the mid-1970s, U.S. historians, sociologists, novelists, literary critics, and cultural commentators seem to have become obsessed with the South, reviving the enduring debate about what makes the region distinct from the rest of the nation. In this essay, I examine the turn south","PeriodicalId":343953,"journal":{"name":"Nepantla: Views from South","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nepantla: Views from South","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429027239-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In a 1990 essay, Cornel West identifies a key shift in U.S. cultural politics since the 1960s, the era widely termed “postmodern,” arguing that the “new cultural politics of difference” is distinguished by its emphasis on particularity and diversity as part of a reaction against the universalizing bent of modern politics (19). Drawing on West, Edward Soja and Barbara Hooper assert, in “The Spaces That Difference Makes” (1993, 184), that the emphasis on locally based micropolitics is a defining feature of the postmodern turn in U.S. culture, and that a renewed focus on spatiality is central to this politics. The postmodern emphasis on space is intended to highlight the situated nature of all political knowledge and action, and to disavow the view from nowhere—the global and disembedded claims of modern knowledge and politics. It is not surprising that postmodern cultural politics takes space rather than time as the dimension within which social differences can be made visible and active, given that the self-definition of European modernity has monopolized time, subsuming varied histories into a singular and teleological narrative of History. The hitherto underprivileged category of space offers a way of interrupting modernity’s global march as well as of restoring the divergent histories that have contributed to the modern legacy. The renewed interest in the regional specificity of the U.S. South in recent years offers an instance of this kind of spatialized cultural politics of difference. Since the mid-1970s, U.S. historians, sociologists, novelists, literary critics, and cultural commentators seem to have become obsessed with the South, reviving the enduring debate about what makes the region distinct from the rest of the nation. In this essay, I examine the turn south
美国南方的后现代地理学
在1990年的一篇文章中,康奈尔·韦斯特指出了自20世纪60年代以来美国文化政治的一个关键转变,这个时代被广泛称为“后现代”,他认为“新的差异文化政治”的特点是强调特殊性和多样性,作为对现代政治普遍化倾向的反应的一部分(19)。爱德华·索亚和芭芭拉·胡珀在《差异制造的空间》(1993,184)一书中借鉴了韦斯特的观点,强调以地方为基础的微观政治是美国文化后现代转向的一个决定性特征,对空间性的重新关注是这种政治的核心。后现代对空间的强调旨在强调所有政治知识和行动的情境性,并否认无处不在的观点——现代知识和政治的全球性和非嵌入性主张。鉴于欧洲现代性的自我定义垄断了时间,将不同的历史纳入单一的目的论的历史叙事,后现代文化政治将空间而不是时间作为社会差异可见和活跃的维度,这并不奇怪。迄今为止处于弱势的空间类别提供了一种中断现代性全球进军的方式,同时也恢复了为现代遗产做出贡献的不同历史。近年来,对美国南部地区特殊性的重新关注为这种空间化的文化政治差异提供了一个例子。自20世纪70年代中期以来,美国历史学家、社会学家、小说家、文学评论家和文化评论家似乎对南方着迷,重新掀起了一场旷日持久的辩论,即是什么使南方与美国其他地区区别开来。在这篇文章中,我考察了转向南方
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信