Krótki ustęp z moich obronowych (obronnych???) notatek:
Nowak states that the novelist whose works she discusses often refer to Salman Rushdie and his works. He casts a long shadow over Indian fiction written at home and in diaspora, remaining a domineering figure and setting standards of authenticity and importance. Rushdie seems to play a paternal role; through rewriting Rushdie’s visions the women writers find their own voice outside schemes set by Rushdie. Rushdie’s writing seems unable, in Baker’s words, to escape the discourse of Orientalism but it is as though it were to exist at a slight angle to Orientalist practice, neither quite fitting in nor fully divorced. Rushdie then occupies such an equivocal position “writing awry” from a stance of authority and simultaneously questioning it, which paradoxically permits other stances of "writing awry." In psychoanalytic vocabulary, he represents the oppressive Name of the Father that has to be rejected by the women writers in order for them to find their own voice, yet paradoxically, in that very rejection, the symbolic command of the Name of the Father is confirmed and its power of simultaneously bringing about separation and identity reinforced.
Uff, niezły odjazd, nie? A to raczej lajtowy fragmencik... ;)
10 września 2014
11 lat temu
6 komentarzy:
I zakuwasz to na blaszkę, żeby komisji wyrecytować? ;-)
narazie robię notki; jeszcze zostało mi całe empire writes back, esej Reckwitza i Coetzee... a potem... się zobaczy :D
Z okazji nadchodzącego 18 czerwca trzymam kciuki!
dziękuję, dziękuję, już nie wiem, jak się nazywam, ale dziękuję ;)
Nie martw się, są tacy co wiedzą i w razie czego Ci przypomną :)
Dobrze wiedzieć ;)
Prześlij komentarz