탈식민 담론과 제3세계 페미니즘

목차

목차없음

본문내용

r example, questioning the relegation of "the colonized" and "women" to the position of the other, respectively, but they were not seriously addressed until mid-1980s by critics on either side. Feminist and postcolonial theoretical trajectories thus demonstrate striking similarities but have rarely intersected, and only in the last decade they have pointed out each other's blind spots, giving timely warnings, and thus contributed to the development of each other. The main purpose of this paper is to read the ways in which third world feminist discourses critique both colonial and western feminist discourses and try to salvage what they can use for understanding and theorizing their "double colonization," i.e. both by patriarchy and neo-colonialism.
Edward Said, so-called "the father of colonial discourse," admits that "latent Orientalism ... encouraged a peculiarly .. male conception of the world"(207), and thus reads in his Orientalism only male writers except for Gertrude Bell. Other postcolonial theoreticians don't consider patriarchy as a determinant in social formation, either. Susan Gubar and Sandra M. Gilbert read 19th-century British women writers focusing on western middle-class women characters in terms of their individual development and regard colonized women only as a "foil" for, and/or as a touchstone by which to measure, the growth of metropolitan women, which is a typical first world feminist reading of the colonized women, that is, only as they serve the identity formation of western women.
G. C. Spivak is the first who has pointed out the ethnocentrism of western feminist texts in her famous article "Can the Subaltern Speak?" Her reading of Jane Eyre and Wide Sargasso Sea in "Three Women's Texts and a Critique of Imperialism" has had the reader's attention directed to the colonized women represented by Bertha Mason, brought about vigorous discussion on the texts, and thus effectively pointed out the blind spots in western feminist writers and critics. C. T. Mohanty critiques Western feminism for treating third world women as a monolithic group, backward, uneducated, without the power to control their own bodies, victims to law and family institution, etc. even before they enter the institutions to be analyzed.
Kirsten Holst Petersen and Ketu H. Katrak review the canonical postcolonial writers such as Achebe, Ngugi, Arma, Fanon, and Ghandi, and estimate them in terms of the ways in which they can be useful in explaining the oppression caused by both patriarchy and neo-capitalism. Petersen recommends Buchi Emecheta, Honor Ford-Smith praises Sistren, and Katrak commends many Caribbean and African women writers including Emecheta, Sistren, and Aidoo, for their revolutionary use of language and new literary forms in representing their own problems. These examples suggest possibilities of employing language and culture in theorizing and finding an answer to the question of "the double colonization" experienced by third world women.

키워드

탈식민담론,   제3세계,   페미니즘