“流浪者”是游客的宿敌:齐格蒙特·鲍曼的后殖民批判

IF 0.5 Q4 HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM
Avishek Ray
{"title":"“流浪者”是游客的宿敌:齐格蒙特·鲍曼的后殖民批判","authors":"Avishek Ray","doi":"10.3727/109830420x15894802540179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Zygmunt Bauman invokes the trope of vagrancy, wherein the \"vagabonds\" are squarely juxtaposed with the \"tourists\" who are, in sum, the global elite. For him, there are no vagabonds, they are only forced to be. This article questions Bauman's classificatory categories, his dualistic\n views, and the explanatory apparatus of the \"voluntary-versus-involuntary travel.\" If \"vagabond\" de facto means involuntary traveler, where in Bauman's schema are we going to place those itinerants—particularly, in the context of South Asia—who self-assert, and quite eloquently\n so, to be \"vagabonds\"? Using India as a case study, this article demonstrates how the trope of the vagabond has been perpetually leveraged—by certain political dissenters—to articulate a nonroutinized, noninstrumental, rhizomatic-style traveling, and by extension, political dissidence\n in the face of statist techniques of demographic control. Thinking in these terms, the imagination of vagabonds as volition-stripped travelers can be assumed to be a product of the Western value system (that uses the utility-maximized \"tourists\" as the prototype of traveler), which anyway\n cannot be universalized. This article, from a postcolonial vantage point, argues that Bauman's differentiation of the category \"vagabond\" has no resonance in India.","PeriodicalId":41836,"journal":{"name":"TOURISM CULTURE & COMMUNICATION","volume":"172 1","pages":"107-116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The \\\"Vagabond\\\" as a Nemesis of the Tourist: Toward a Postcolonial Critique of Zygmunt Bauman\",\"authors\":\"Avishek Ray\",\"doi\":\"10.3727/109830420x15894802540179\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Zygmunt Bauman invokes the trope of vagrancy, wherein the \\\"vagabonds\\\" are squarely juxtaposed with the \\\"tourists\\\" who are, in sum, the global elite. For him, there are no vagabonds, they are only forced to be. This article questions Bauman's classificatory categories, his dualistic\\n views, and the explanatory apparatus of the \\\"voluntary-versus-involuntary travel.\\\" If \\\"vagabond\\\" de facto means involuntary traveler, where in Bauman's schema are we going to place those itinerants—particularly, in the context of South Asia—who self-assert, and quite eloquently\\n so, to be \\\"vagabonds\\\"? Using India as a case study, this article demonstrates how the trope of the vagabond has been perpetually leveraged—by certain political dissenters—to articulate a nonroutinized, noninstrumental, rhizomatic-style traveling, and by extension, political dissidence\\n in the face of statist techniques of demographic control. Thinking in these terms, the imagination of vagabonds as volition-stripped travelers can be assumed to be a product of the Western value system (that uses the utility-maximized \\\"tourists\\\" as the prototype of traveler), which anyway\\n cannot be universalized. This article, from a postcolonial vantage point, argues that Bauman's differentiation of the category \\\"vagabond\\\" has no resonance in India.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41836,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TOURISM CULTURE & COMMUNICATION\",\"volume\":\"172 1\",\"pages\":\"107-116\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TOURISM CULTURE & COMMUNICATION\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3727/109830420x15894802540179\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TOURISM CULTURE & COMMUNICATION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3727/109830420x15894802540179","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

齐格蒙特·鲍曼(Zygmunt Bauman)引用了流浪的比喻,其中“流浪者”与“游客”正好并列,后者总体上是全球精英。对他来说,没有流浪汉,他们只是被迫成为。本文质疑鲍曼的分类范畴,他的二元观点,以及“自愿与非自愿旅行”的解释工具。如果“流浪者”实际上意味着非自愿的旅行者,那么在鲍曼的图式中,我们将把这些流浪者——特别是在南亚的背景下——放在哪里呢?这些流浪者自称是“流浪者”,而且相当雄辩。本文以印度为例,展示了流浪汉的比喻如何被某些政治异见者永久地利用,以表达一种非常规的、非工具性的、草根式的旅行方式,并由此延伸到面对人口控制的国家主义技术的政治异见。从这些角度思考,把流浪汉想象成意志被剥夺的旅行者,可以认为是西方价值体系的产物(以功利最大化的“游客”作为旅行者的原型),无论如何都不能普遍化。本文从后殖民的角度出发,认为鲍曼对“流浪者”这一范畴的区分在印度没有共鸣。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The "Vagabond" as a Nemesis of the Tourist: Toward a Postcolonial Critique of Zygmunt Bauman
Zygmunt Bauman invokes the trope of vagrancy, wherein the "vagabonds" are squarely juxtaposed with the "tourists" who are, in sum, the global elite. For him, there are no vagabonds, they are only forced to be. This article questions Bauman's classificatory categories, his dualistic views, and the explanatory apparatus of the "voluntary-versus-involuntary travel." If "vagabond" de facto means involuntary traveler, where in Bauman's schema are we going to place those itinerants—particularly, in the context of South Asia—who self-assert, and quite eloquently so, to be "vagabonds"? Using India as a case study, this article demonstrates how the trope of the vagabond has been perpetually leveraged—by certain political dissenters—to articulate a nonroutinized, noninstrumental, rhizomatic-style traveling, and by extension, political dissidence in the face of statist techniques of demographic control. Thinking in these terms, the imagination of vagabonds as volition-stripped travelers can be assumed to be a product of the Western value system (that uses the utility-maximized "tourists" as the prototype of traveler), which anyway cannot be universalized. This article, from a postcolonial vantage point, argues that Bauman's differentiation of the category "vagabond" has no resonance in India.
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
TOURISM CULTURE & COMMUNICATION
TOURISM CULTURE & COMMUNICATION HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
16.70%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: Tourism, Culture & Communication is the longest established international refereed journal that is dedicated to the cultural dimensions of tourism. The editors adopt a purposefully broad scope that welcomes readers and contributors from diverse disciplines and who are receptive in a wide variety of research methods. While potential cultural issues and identities are unlimited, there is a requirement that their consideration should relate to the tourism and hospitality domain. Tourism, Culture & Communication provides readers with multidisciplinary perspectives that consider topics and fields extending beyond national and indigenous cultures as they are traditionally understood and recognized. Coverage may extend to issues such as cultural dimensions of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), gender and tourism, managing tourists with disabilities, sport tourism, or age-specific tourism. Contributions that draw upon the communications literature to explain the tourism phenomenon are also particularly welcome. Beyond the focus on culture and communications, the editors recognize the important interrelationships with economies, society, politics, and the environment. The journal publishes high-quality research and applies a double-blind refereeing process. Tourism, Culture & Communication consists of main articles, major thematic reviews, position papers on theory and practice, and substantive case studies. A reports section covers specific initiatives and projects, “hot topics,” work-in-progress, and critical reviews.
×
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