Discuss the concepts of the subaltern and of negritude. Which groups are addressed and included with/in these terms? What does this indicate when it comes to power, postcoliniality and subject positions? Relate to media representations and intersectionality!
The concept of “subaltern” (Spivak)
Subaltern literally translated means a kind of subordinate, serving or just a lower rank / position, inferior or secondary. The subaltern in our context can be seen as ‘the Other’, the oppressed within social structures: (colonized) women, prisoners, children, a cultural minority or those who hold a lower social status. And it is also a question of gender. But in contrast to former discussions they are not only excluded from the access of ‘voice’ or discourse, rather they are used as a tool to maintain the status quo of intellectuals / elite and also to consolidate it. In other words, the superiors rely on the subaltern. Intellectuals are not simply those from the West or another global power that dominates colonies or social classes; it could be also intellectuals / elite of a certain ethnic background. To maintain the status quo the intellectuals / elite do not forbid the subaltern to speak; rather they speak for them and therewith take over their genuine right to speak for themselves. That is a difference, since they pretend to defend the oppressed from the power of imperialism, but in fact they mould their (subaltern) discourse and shape it in order to maintain the hierarchy consolidated for their own benefits. Would the subaltern speak for themselves the power of intellectuals / elite would be at risk, since namely the subaltern are consciously of their desires. The subaltern can briefly defined as a pivotal point (“buffer group”) between dominant social groups and take up an essential role in the balance of power (whereas power could also be understand as rules of repress). In this conjunction Spivak relates here also to Marx and the class struggle. Consideration of social hierarchies in France, England and India.
The concept of “negritude” (Diawara)
The concept of negritude (the term itself is established by Césaire) is founded by the Parisian elite in the 1930s with the intention of a cultural self-assertion of all Africans and their reflection on their civilization. Diawara refers to “bringing back a true meaning of black”. Negritude in terms of Senghor “constituted a black that never existed except as the other in the unconscious of the French”, “because it was only addressed to French people, and because it was removed from Africa” (Diawara 2004: 460). Here we can see a division between the French civilization (“rational Europe“) and primitive Africa (“emotional Africa“). He divides negritude in two levels – objective and subjective. It stands for an inventory of the sum total of black civilizations and on the other hand it describes the way in which people of the African dispersion articulate their blackness in their contact with the material and spiritual worlds. In contrast Mudimbe defines negritude as “a product of a historical moment proper to Europe, more particularly to the French thought which marked it”. Further it is an affirmation of the independence of Black culture and its African heritage and a direct consequence of subalterns who got tired of not having their space in a society.
Conclusion: We might have an interesting intersection between the subaltern and negritude, in some aspects and circumstances
Indications in conjunction with power, postcoliniality and subject positions •
Postcoloniality
Our group believes that the term “Post colonialism” is often misapplied as it implies that the colonialism as a process is over. The prefix “Post” (McClintock 1995) signals an idea of linear, historical progress. A great number of “Postcolonial” studies have placed themselves in a binary relation against the term “Colonialism”. Clearly, this approach can not be acute as it is self-evident that “Colonialism” is not over yet (i.e. the Dutch or the French colonies in South America). Our group believes that a more accurate representation of such process would imply the use of another term that does not connote such implications. We go further and take a rather audacious position relating the increasing interconnectivity among nations, when it happens in an aggressive and hostile manner, as a novel form of “Colonialism”. Contemporary globalization, meaning high level of dependency, of media, culture, peoples and, mainly, economy implicates a subservience of a nation state against a foreign nation. This can be translated in several different contexts such as the current dominance position the U.S. assume nowadays when it is often quotes as an Empire without colonies. That is maybe a better definition of what can be read here as Neo-colonialism. That is, an Empire without colonies.
Looking from this perspective, therefore, one can make a further relation between neocolonialism and cultural imperialism/globalization.
subject positions
The western world has an “interested desire to conserve the subject of the West, or the West as Subject. The pluralized ‘subject-effects’ gives an illusion of undermining subjective sovereignty while often providing a cover for this subject of knowledge” (Spivak 1988: 271).
Discussion
concept of subaltern in the case of Brazil, lack of negritude:- Brazil is the country, outside Africa, with the highest level of black people in the world • Relation between neo-colonialism and media as well as intersectionality and globalization • classmates: Try to find something similar or that fit into this discussion based upon your realities!
