Abstract
AbstractThis essay focuses on the liberatory possibilities and political and disciplinary difficulties of bringing together Jewish and postcolonial studies. It begins and ends with Adorno’s critique of “actionism” in order to see what is lost when the clarity and certainty of political action is privileged over scholarly nuance and complexity (“praxis” over “theory”). This loss is surveyed through a set of related binaries (supersessionism, foundationalism, and disciplinarity), which, it is contended, reduces critical thinking to polemic and makes it all but impossible to explore interconnected Jewish and postcolonial histories. The argument is illustrated with reference to postcolonial literature and by examining the disciplining of postcolonial and memory studies in relation to the Holocaust. A way out of the binary impasse, it is suggested, is to utilize as “traveling concepts” transcultural and transnational histories (such as “diaspora” and “ghetto”) that Jewish and postcolonial studies have in common.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Literature and Literary Theory,History,Cultural Studies
Cited by
14 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Mobilizing MSA Forward;Memory Studies;2023-12
2. Italian ghetto stories: Toward a transnational literary history;Forum Italicum: A Journal of Italian Studies;2023-06-01
3. Antisemitism and Racism;PSYCHOANALYTIC HORIZ;2023
4. Inter-doubt dialogue in Slimane Benaïssa’s
Prophètes sans dieu;Contemporary French Civilization;2022-06
5. On a Double Decker Omnibus to Golders Green;The Cambridge Journal of Postcolonial Literary Inquiry;2022-01