当代文学和文化中的被迫流动和流离失所叙事罗杰·布罗姆利(书评)

IF 0.4 2区 文学 0 LITERATURE
Gabriella Pishotti
{"title":"当代文学和文化中的被迫流动和流离失所叙事罗杰·布罗姆利(书评)","authors":"Gabriella Pishotti","doi":"10.1353/ari.2023.a905718","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"259 Blackness’ function in Heideggerian thought “is to enable and sustain the primordial relation between Dasein and being” (58), essentially by serving as the opposite to being itself. Heidegger’s concept of landscape is thereby revealed to be exclusionary, both denying certain groups of people access to Dasein and reinforcing the coloniality of nature. Eggan’s engagement with the fields of decolonial studies and Black studies is extremely important, as it works against the hegemonic understanding of Heidegger’s work. In a book concerned with settler-colonialism, it is no surprise that the voices of white writers and thinkers take center stage—but Eggan’s strategy in this first chapter to incorporate marginalized voices is laudable. However, when Eggan turns to the work of Schreiner, Lessing, and Coetzee in the latter half of his book, there is not much engagement with Black scholars, especially those from Southern Africa. While Eggan incisively and knowledgeably explicates the African historical context for farm-narratives in his fourth chapter, and centers the story of Indigenous Southern Africans, he misses the opportunity to draw upon the work of Black scholars when he discusses the novels themselves. This is emblematic of a larger issue I see with Eggan’s work: if settler-colonialism is a political (and racial) issue, I am not sure it is possible to work toward “widespread, concerted acts of multispecies community building and restor(y)ation” (240) without first achieving a baseline of environmental/racial justice for the people historically displaced by settler-colonialism. In a similar sense, to read white writing, especially from Southern Africa, without also deeply engaging with the Black voices on the continent obviously works against this mission of “restor(y)ation.” While Unsettling Nature as a whole is an erudite and important examination of settler-colonial narratives, Eggan’s conclusion that “all entities are natural aliens, guests on contested land” (241) skips years of necessary work on race, difference, and environmental justice.","PeriodicalId":51893,"journal":{"name":"ARIEL-A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL ENGLISH LITERATURE","volume":"54 1","pages":"259 - 262"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Narratives of Forced Mobility and Displacement in Contemporary Literature and Culture by Roger Bromley (review)\",\"authors\":\"Gabriella Pishotti\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/ari.2023.a905718\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"259 Blackness’ function in Heideggerian thought “is to enable and sustain the primordial relation between Dasein and being” (58), essentially by serving as the opposite to being itself. Heidegger’s concept of landscape is thereby revealed to be exclusionary, both denying certain groups of people access to Dasein and reinforcing the coloniality of nature. Eggan’s engagement with the fields of decolonial studies and Black studies is extremely important, as it works against the hegemonic understanding of Heidegger’s work. In a book concerned with settler-colonialism, it is no surprise that the voices of white writers and thinkers take center stage—but Eggan’s strategy in this first chapter to incorporate marginalized voices is laudable. However, when Eggan turns to the work of Schreiner, Lessing, and Coetzee in the latter half of his book, there is not much engagement with Black scholars, especially those from Southern Africa. While Eggan incisively and knowledgeably explicates the African historical context for farm-narratives in his fourth chapter, and centers the story of Indigenous Southern Africans, he misses the opportunity to draw upon the work of Black scholars when he discusses the novels themselves. This is emblematic of a larger issue I see with Eggan’s work: if settler-colonialism is a political (and racial) issue, I am not sure it is possible to work toward “widespread, concerted acts of multispecies community building and restor(y)ation” (240) without first achieving a baseline of environmental/racial justice for the people historically displaced by settler-colonialism. In a similar sense, to read white writing, especially from Southern Africa, without also deeply engaging with the Black voices on the continent obviously works against this mission of “restor(y)ation.” While Unsettling Nature as a whole is an erudite and important examination of settler-colonial narratives, Eggan’s conclusion that “all entities are natural aliens, guests on contested land” (241) skips years of necessary work on race, difference, and environmental justice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51893,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ARIEL-A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL ENGLISH LITERATURE\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"259 - 262\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ARIEL-A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL ENGLISH LITERATURE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/ari.2023.a905718\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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":"ARIEL-A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL ENGLISH LITERATURE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ari.2023.a905718","RegionNum":2,"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

259黑度在海德格尔思想中的作用“是实现和维持此在与存在之间的原始关系”(58),本质上是作为存在本身的对立面。因此,海德格尔的景观概念被揭示为排斥性的,既否定了某些群体对该在的接触,又强化了自然的殖民性。埃根对非殖民化研究和黑人研究领域的参与是极其重要的,因为它违背了对海德格尔作品的霸权理解。在一本关于定居者殖民主义的书中,白人作家和思想家的声音占据了中心舞台并不奇怪,但埃根在第一章中融入边缘化声音的策略值得称赞。然而,当埃根在书的后半部分转向施赖纳、莱辛和库切的作品时,他与黑人学者,尤其是来自南部非洲的黑人学者的接触并不多。虽然埃根在他的第四章中精辟而知识渊博地阐述了农场叙事的非洲历史背景,并以南部非洲原住民的故事为中心,但他在讨论小说本身时错过了借鉴黑人学者作品的机会。这象征着我在埃根的作品中看到的一个更大的问题:如果定居者殖民主义是一个政治(和种族)问题,我不确定如果不首先为历史上因定居者殖民主义而流离失所的人实现环境/种族正义的基线,就不可能朝着“广泛、协调的多种族社区建设和恢复”(240)的方向努力。在类似的意义上,阅读白人的作品,尤其是来自南部非洲的作品,而不深入了解非洲大陆的黑人声音,显然违背了“复兴”的使命,埃根的结论是,“所有实体都是自然的外星人,是有争议的土地上的客人”(241)跳过了多年来关于种族、差异和环境正义的必要工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Narratives of Forced Mobility and Displacement in Contemporary Literature and Culture by Roger Bromley (review)
259 Blackness’ function in Heideggerian thought “is to enable and sustain the primordial relation between Dasein and being” (58), essentially by serving as the opposite to being itself. Heidegger’s concept of landscape is thereby revealed to be exclusionary, both denying certain groups of people access to Dasein and reinforcing the coloniality of nature. Eggan’s engagement with the fields of decolonial studies and Black studies is extremely important, as it works against the hegemonic understanding of Heidegger’s work. In a book concerned with settler-colonialism, it is no surprise that the voices of white writers and thinkers take center stage—but Eggan’s strategy in this first chapter to incorporate marginalized voices is laudable. However, when Eggan turns to the work of Schreiner, Lessing, and Coetzee in the latter half of his book, there is not much engagement with Black scholars, especially those from Southern Africa. While Eggan incisively and knowledgeably explicates the African historical context for farm-narratives in his fourth chapter, and centers the story of Indigenous Southern Africans, he misses the opportunity to draw upon the work of Black scholars when he discusses the novels themselves. This is emblematic of a larger issue I see with Eggan’s work: if settler-colonialism is a political (and racial) issue, I am not sure it is possible to work toward “widespread, concerted acts of multispecies community building and restor(y)ation” (240) without first achieving a baseline of environmental/racial justice for the people historically displaced by settler-colonialism. In a similar sense, to read white writing, especially from Southern Africa, without also deeply engaging with the Black voices on the continent obviously works against this mission of “restor(y)ation.” While Unsettling Nature as a whole is an erudite and important examination of settler-colonial narratives, Eggan’s conclusion that “all entities are natural aliens, guests on contested land” (241) skips years of necessary work on race, difference, and environmental justice.
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
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
×
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