WEKO3
アイテム
「主体」への回帰は成功するか:カリブ研究からの視点
https://kbu.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/1718
https://kbu.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/1718b89a68c9-ae6d-4959-8069-010e79366954
| Item type | [ELS]紀要論文 / Departmental Bulletin Paper(1) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 公開日 | 2017-03-23 | |||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||
| タイトル | 「主体」への回帰は成功するか:カリブ研究からの視点 | |||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||
| タイトル | Will the Anthropological Return to the 'Subject' be Successful? : A Perspective froni Caribbean Studies. | |||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 言語 | ||||||||||
| 言語 | jpn | |||||||||
| 資源タイプ | ||||||||||
| 資源タイプ識別子 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | |||||||||
| 資源タイプ | departmental bulletin paper | |||||||||
| アクセス権 | ||||||||||
| アクセス権 | metadata only access | |||||||||
| アクセス権URI | http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_14cb | |||||||||
| 雑誌書誌ID | ||||||||||
| 収録物識別子タイプ | NCID | |||||||||
| 収録物識別子 | AA11291239 | |||||||||
| 著者 |
大杉, 高司
× 大杉, 高司
× OSUGI, Takashi
|
|||||||||
| 著者所属(日) | ||||||||||
| 京都文教大学人間学部 | ||||||||||
| 著者所属(英) | ||||||||||
| en | ||||||||||
| KYOTO BUNKYO UNIVERSITY Department of Human Studies | ||||||||||
| 記事種別(日) | ||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | 論文 | |||||||||
| 記事種別(英) | ||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | Article | |||||||||
| 抄録(日) | ||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | UNK | |||||||||
| 抄録(英) | ||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | The critique of anthropology in which recent meta-anthropology has busily been engaging had already been anticipated by the Caribbean poet Derek Walcott in his work from the early 60s. His distrust of anthropology stems from his insight that anthropologists have often encouraged the Afro-Creole nationalists* desire for monolithic national unity by digging 'pure’ culture out from the 'past* and defining and fixing it as the authentic national culture. For Walcott culture does not exist in the 'past,* which has already lost its meaning in the current reality, but is something that the schizophrenic imagination and creativity of Caribbean people is now forging by patchworking fragments of diverse cultures brought to this area. The poetics/ politics of Walcott are very close to those of the recent Post-Colonial Critique emerging from the now influential Cultural Studies. Theorists espousing the Post-Colonial Critique, which has been nurtured from the tradition of literary criticism, often quote and analyze the works of diaspora artists in order to describe the 'post-colonial'cultural situation. But a problem arises when they try to apply their theory/aesthetics to understanding the cultural situation of 'de-colonized' nations. As A. Ahmad has pointed out, theorists of 'post-coloniality' tend to occupy very privileged locations in the metropolises of former colonizing nations. They do pay attention to the works of certain 'Third World' artists. But even when they do, there is no guarantee that their works represent the cultural situation of their own countries. Here the heart of the problem is how we can talk about 'culture' privileging the thoughts of certain 'subjects' (Third World intellectuals and authors) who are picked up by privileged 'subjects' (Post-Colonial theorists.) The Japanese treatment of Caribbean culture, or more specifically Caribbean 'Creoleness', has a similar problem. When Caribbean 'Creole' aesthetics are introduced, coupled with familiar slogans such as 'crossing the boundary' , 'release from affiliations' an 'cultural heterogeneity' are 'independent spirit' ('Shutaisei', literally meaning 'subjectivity' ), 'individual will' , 'personal philosophy' , 'conscious self-declaration' etc. all of which are traditionally associated with the concept of the modern 'subject' . But to think that all these are characteristics of the Caribbean aesthetic of 'Creoleness' is too naive because in the British Caribbean, which, unlike the French Caribbean, got its independence in the 1960s, the assertion of 'Creoleness' has long been connected to 'nationalists' search for an 'authentic' and monolithic national identity as against mere 'mimicry' of the colonizer's culture. Severe protests against this nationalist assertion have already emerged from many sections including Rastafarians and East Indians. If we describe Caribbean culture while ignoring this aspect we might make the mistake of utopianising the Caribbean situation by projecting our desire to privilege the 'subject.' In recent studies of (post-) colonial cultures by some anthropologists(e.g. Ota 1996; Yamashita 1997; Matsuda 1997) we also find a fresh emphasis on the 'subject.' Behind it we find an awareness that the colonized were not only colonizers' 'objects' who passively received colonizers' culture but also creative 'subjects' who while living under strong hegemony shrewdly transformed the colonizers' culture into their own. But this valuable insight is marred firstly by their indiscriminate use of the word 'subject' and related concepts to both individual and group, and secondly by the strong implications of cultural utilitarianism or instrumentalism which attend their use of these words. The former carries the risk of nullifying the longstanding theoretical debate over methodological individualism and methodological collectivism. The latter, which are especially evident when authors emphasize 'tactics' of resistance in everyday life on the part of the colonized, tend to narrow our view of the dynamics of culture and also run the risk of supporting the post-colonial nationalists' agenda of removing 'impure' (i.e. colonial) elements from their 'national' culture by allowing them to think that they are just taking over the 'secret intentions' of their ancestors. I suggest two related alternatives to grasp the reality of post-colonial culture in de-colonized nations. Firstly, instead of abandoning our attention to the 'subject' we could pay more attention to 'irrational' aspects of the 'subject,' which can be seen when the 'subject' is attracted to the 'other' incompatible and incommensurable to the 'self' before and beyond logical thinking. About this 'irrational' aspect we need to learn more from Bataille's work on 'Eros' and Tausig's on 'Mimesis.' Secondly we could think more about how 'collectivity' or 'community' are made to exist by these 'irrational subjects.' Nancy and Blanchot have much to say on this subject. According to them the 'subject' is destined to lack self-containedness and needs to have the 'other' in order to experience the 'self,' and this pre-logical mutuality between 'subjects' is the basis of 'collectivity' and 'community.' Their insights are very instructive especially for the study of the post colonial situation in the Caribbean where people never have a self-contained 'authentic culture' , but rather deal in inconclusive fragments of 'cultures' out of which they are forging an entity which could be called Caribbean 'culture' - and 'culture' , by definition, is something collective. | |||||||||
| 書誌情報 |
人間・文化・心 : 京都文教大学人間学部研究報告 en : Reports from the Faculty of Human Studies, Kyoto Bunkyo University 巻 1, p. 111-136, 発行日 1998-07-20 |
|||||||||
| 表示順 | ||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | 10 | |||||||||
| アクセション番号 | ||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | KJ00009364339 | |||||||||
