跨本土镜头:重新认识

IF 0.5 3区 文学 0 LITERATURE
Chadwick Allen
{"title":"跨本土镜头:重新认识","authors":"Chadwick Allen","doi":"10.1215/00104124-10475406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Originally part of the 2022 Presidential Roundtable “Comparative Literature and Indigeneity,” this essay meditates on the ACLA president’s call to “decolonize” the field of comparative literature. Beyond providing a catchy slogan, what might “decolonization” mean for the practice of our scholarship and teaching? As a beginning of an answer, the essay revisits the author’s 2012 Trans-Indigenous: Methodologies for Global Native Literary Studies and considers what has—and, importantly, what has not—changed within literary studies marked as “comparative,” “world,” and/or “global” in the decade since the book’s publication. How have provocations to center the Indigenous as an optics and as a mode of analysis been taken up, extended, critiqued, or reimagined by others? To illustrate the potential limitations of calls to “decolonize” dominant academic institutions, including the field of comparative literature, the essay offers a preliminary analysis of how a specific example of Indigenous self-representation produces meaning within two related but contrasting venues for display and interpretation: a conventional museum space implicitly coded as “colonial” and an avant-garde museum space explicitly labeled as “decolonizing.” The results are suggestive of the difficulty for dominant academic institutions to transcend colonial foundations and ongoing colonial habits.","PeriodicalId":45160,"journal":{"name":"COMPARATIVE LITERATURE","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Trans-Indigenous Lens: A Re-recognition\",\"authors\":\"Chadwick Allen\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/00104124-10475406\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Originally part of the 2022 Presidential Roundtable “Comparative Literature and Indigeneity,” this essay meditates on the ACLA president’s call to “decolonize” the field of comparative literature. Beyond providing a catchy slogan, what might “decolonization” mean for the practice of our scholarship and teaching? As a beginning of an answer, the essay revisits the author’s 2012 Trans-Indigenous: Methodologies for Global Native Literary Studies and considers what has—and, importantly, what has not—changed within literary studies marked as “comparative,” “world,” and/or “global” in the decade since the book’s publication. How have provocations to center the Indigenous as an optics and as a mode of analysis been taken up, extended, critiqued, or reimagined by others? To illustrate the potential limitations of calls to “decolonize” dominant academic institutions, including the field of comparative literature, the essay offers a preliminary analysis of how a specific example of Indigenous self-representation produces meaning within two related but contrasting venues for display and interpretation: a conventional museum space implicitly coded as “colonial” and an avant-garde museum space explicitly labeled as “decolonizing.” The results are suggestive of the difficulty for dominant academic institutions to transcend colonial foundations and ongoing colonial habits.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45160,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"COMPARATIVE LITERATURE\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"COMPARATIVE LITERATURE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/00104124-10475406\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COMPARATIVE LITERATURE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00104124-10475406","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章最初是2022年总统圆桌会议“比较文学与土著”的一部分,它思考了ACLA主席对比较文学领域“非殖民化”的呼吁。除了提供一个朗朗上口的口号,“非殖民化”对我们的学术和教学实践意味着什么?作为回答的开始,本文重新审视了作者2012年的《跨本土:全球本土文学研究的方法论》,并考虑了自该书出版以来的十年里,在被标记为“比较”、“世界”和/或“全球”的文学研究中,哪些发生了变化,更重要的是,哪些没有发生变化。以原住民为中心作为一种光学和分析模式的挑衅是如何被其他人接受、扩展、批评或重新想象的?为了说明包括比较文学领域在内的主流学术机构呼吁“去殖民化”的潜在局限性,本文初步分析了土著自我表现的具体例子如何在两个相关但对比鲜明的展示和解释场所中产生意义:一个隐含地标记为“殖民”的传统博物馆空间和一个明确地标记为“去殖民化”的前卫博物馆空间。研究结果表明,占主导地位的学术机构很难超越殖民基础和持续的殖民习惯。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Trans-Indigenous Lens: A Re-recognition
Abstract Originally part of the 2022 Presidential Roundtable “Comparative Literature and Indigeneity,” this essay meditates on the ACLA president’s call to “decolonize” the field of comparative literature. Beyond providing a catchy slogan, what might “decolonization” mean for the practice of our scholarship and teaching? As a beginning of an answer, the essay revisits the author’s 2012 Trans-Indigenous: Methodologies for Global Native Literary Studies and considers what has—and, importantly, what has not—changed within literary studies marked as “comparative,” “world,” and/or “global” in the decade since the book’s publication. How have provocations to center the Indigenous as an optics and as a mode of analysis been taken up, extended, critiqued, or reimagined by others? To illustrate the potential limitations of calls to “decolonize” dominant academic institutions, including the field of comparative literature, the essay offers a preliminary analysis of how a specific example of Indigenous self-representation produces meaning within two related but contrasting venues for display and interpretation: a conventional museum space implicitly coded as “colonial” and an avant-garde museum space explicitly labeled as “decolonizing.” The results are suggestive of the difficulty for dominant academic institutions to transcend colonial foundations and ongoing colonial habits.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The oldest journal in its field in the United States, Comparative Literature explores issues in literary history and theory. Drawing on a variety of theoretical and critical approaches, the journal represents a wide-ranging look at the intersections of national literatures, global literary trends, and theoretical discourse. Continually evolving since its inception in 1949, the journal remains a source for cutting-edge scholarship and prides itself on presenting the work of talented young scholars breaking new ground in the field.
×
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