Subaltern Studies Group

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Subaltern Studies Group (also: Subaltern Studies Collective ) is a group of South Asian scholars who deal with the post-colonial and post- imperialist societies in South Asia and world development in general. The term "Subaltern Studies" is sometimes expanded to include others who share their views. Their approach corresponds to that of history from below , but focuses more on what goes on in the masses of the lower classes than on those in the elite. This research direction is closely linked to the publication series of the same name, Subaltern Studies .

Name declaration

The word " subaltern ", which in the British army designates the officer degrees below the captain ( captain ), alludes in a political context to the work of the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937) who introduced the term. In the case of Gramsci, referring solely to ruled classes, especially the proletariat, in Subaltern Studies it refers to any person or group of low rank or position, be it because of their race , class , gender , sexual orientation , ethnicity or religion .

history

The Subaltern Studies Group emerged in the 1980s as a new approach to writing the history of India and South Asia; it was influenced by the studies of Eric Stokes . The group's approach was very clearly inspired by the writings of Antonio Gramsci and was explained in the writings of their "mentor" Ranajit Guha , most clearly in his Manifesto in Subaltern Studies I and also in his classic monograph The Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency . Although the group members clearly take a left-wing position politically , they are very critical of the traditional Marxist view of Indian history, according to which a semi- feudal India was colonized by Great Britain, then developed political consciousness and became independent. They are particularly critical of the focus of this view on the political consciousness of the elites, who would then have inspired the masses to resistance and rebellion against the dominant British rule structures.

Instead, they concentrate their work on the non-elite subaltern as real actors in political and social change and concentrated their interest on the discourses and speeches of emerging political and social movements, in contrast to visible actions such as demonstrations and uprisings .

The Subaltern Studies Group was founded by Ranajit Guha . The group's later postmodern turn disillusioned some of its members, such as Sumit Sarkar , who left the group.

In the course of time, Guha also turned to structuralist as well as poststructuralist and post-Marxist theories and methods, for example Claude Lévi-Strauss . Subaltern Studies were shaped by a variety of theories and methods. Partha Chatterjee, on the other hand, brought Michel Foucault's theory of power into Subaltern Studies.

In the course of time, the series of publications also turned to fields that were beyond the purely Indian-related conditions. So were u. a. the analysis of literature, anthropology, political and feminist theory etc. included in the focus of the analyzes.

Inspired by the South Asian group, John Beverley and Ileana Rodríguez accordingly founded Latin American Subaltern Studies to develop a similar perspective for Latin America . This group eventually disbanded because of internal methodological and political differences.

criticism

In 2013, the sociologist published Vivek Chibber with postcolonial theory and the specter of capital (German edition: Postcolonial Theory and the specter of capital , Berlin 2018) a much debated and criticized criticism of the Subaltern Studies, which he based on the analysis of its founders and their major publications unfolded. In particular, Chibber argues that the representatives of Subaltern Studies did not correctly grasp and depict the universalization of capital, reproduced clichés about the Orient themselves and created a picture of the development of Western liberalism in connection with the emergence of capitalism that was in no way the real one Story would correspond. Chibber defends central Marxist insights into the development of capitalism and capital. At the same time, it recognizes the work of Subaltern Studies on the colonial history of India. He tries to show that capitalism can come to terms very well with different cultures and the ways in which they act, and that it does not matter to completely turn societies and their internal relationships upside down and unify them. Chibber also criticizes post-colonialism in its entirety.

literature

  • Robert Young: White Mythologies . 2nd Edition. Routledge, London 2004, ISBN 0-415-31180-2 .
  • David Ludden (Ed.): Reading Subaltern Studies. Critical History, Contested Meaning and the Globalization of South Asia . London 2001.
  • Vinayak Chaturvedi (Ed.): Mapping Subaltern Studies and the Postcolonial . London / New York 2000.
  • Vinayak Chaturvedi: A Critical Theory of Subalternity. Considerations on the use of the term class in Indian historiography . In: Hans-Günter Thien (Ed.): Classes in Postfordism . 2. corr. Edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2011, p. 85-110 .
  • Vivek Chibber: Postcolonial Theory and the Specter of Capital . Dietz Verlag Berlin, Berlin 2018, ISBN 978-3-320-02356-0 .

Web links

References and comments

  1. ^ Subaltern in the English language Wikipedia
  2. Vinayak Chaturvedi: A Critical Theory of Subalternity. Considerations on the use of the term class in Indian historiography . In: Hans-Günter Thien (Ed.): Classes in Postfordism . 2. corr. Edition Münster 2011, pp. 85f.
  3. Vinayak Chaturvedi: A Critical Theory of Subalternity , p. 89.
  4. Vinayak Chaturvedi: A Critical Theory of Subalternity , pp. 90ff.
  5. Vinayak Chaturvedi: A Critical Theory of Subalternity , p. 103.