1. POSTCOLONIAL CRITICISM

2. Important points:
Analysis of texts produced in countries and cultures that have come under European colonial powers at some point in history (either from European or colonized perspective). Basic belief is that history is written by the victors.
Three primary goals: recovery of neglected works, redress of a systematic denial of rights and recognition, and realization that the dualism of opposing groups reveal interdependence.
Most critics believe the context for literature in all countries is hybrid due to globalization.
Also questions the role of western literary canon as knowledge making.

3. Cultural Capital by John Guillory:
Canon formation is done through college professors and college syllabi.
Professors base syllabi on personal preference (individual judgment).
Problem? Racist professor?
Education is traditionally for societal elite which encourages “bourgeois language”. College syllabi promote texts that reflect this language. Those on lower rungs of socioeconomic ladder are denied access to education and literature.
Any text that does not use this language is denied entrance to canon (popular literature).

4. Edward Said – “Other” as opposite
Inherent Inferiority – according to Europeans, Europeans must describe and analyze the Orient because Asian Individuals (called “Orientals” by Said) are not capable of describing or analyzing themselves.
Inherent Femaleness – those who cannot see and speak must be spoken for by those that can see and speak. Lacan’s theory of “gaze” (men look and women are looked at).
Silencing – in the act of speaking for the “Other”, providing it with a voice, we silence it.
Inherent Distortion – European “perception” and interpretation of the Asian individuals has led to assumptions that contaminate true understanding. “Orientalism” is a study pursued by Europeans; the representation of the Orient is for the benefit of European interests.

5. WHY?
Power – knowledge is power. “Knowing” that Asian Individuals are different justifies efforts to dominate the East
Domination – if Asian individuals are “female” then they are “weak”. Orient was made “Oriental” by Europeans who convinced “Orientals” that they were weak. Exercise of power.

6. How to do:
How does text represent various aspects of colonial oppression?
What does the text reveal about issue of post-colonial identity? Double consciousness? Hybridity?
What person(s) or groups does the text identify as “other” (stranger)? How are these persons/groups represented?
What does the text reveal about politics/psychology of anti- colonialist resistance?

7. How to do Continued:
What does text reveal about how cultural differences – race, religion, class, gender, sexual orientation, customs combined to form identity – shape our perceptions of ourselves, others, and the world in which we live?
How does the text respond to or comment on the characters, themes, or assumptions of a canonized colonialist work?
Are there meaningful similarities among literatures of different post-colonial populations?
How does canonization of a text reinforce or undermine colonialist ideology through its representation of colonialization and/or its inappropriate silence about colonized peoples?