Post-Structuralism: An Indian Preview - Igcollege.org

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Proceedings of National Seminar on Postmodern Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded discourse has become the focal term among critics who oppose the deconstructive concept of the “general text” that functions independently of particular historical conditions. Instead they conceive of discourse as social parlance, or language-in-use, and consider it to be both the product and manifestation not of a timeless linguistic system, but of particular social conditions, class structures, and power relationships that alter in the course of history. (To) Michel Foucault, discourse-as-such is the central subject of analytic concern. Foucault conceives that “discourse” is to be analyzed as totally anonymous, in that is simply “situated at the level of the ‘it is said’ (on dit)” (241). There are two strands of poststructuralist thought, first looks at text, textuality and discourse from the point of view of social control, power structure and subversive practices and second one is advocated by Jacques Derrida, Jacques Lacan and Roland Barthes whose stress vividly seem on language. Being a linguist, Roland Barthes’ echoes Derrida’s views. Lacan was psychologist. He opines that unconscious is structured like language. His approach is purely that of a linguist. Foucault differs from other post structuralists. Foucault criticizes Derridian deconstruction as “mere rhetorical bag of tricks, a neat little pedagogy secure in its assumption that nothing exists outside the text’’ (Krishnaswamy, 57). More over in his most influential book ‘The Order Of Things: An Archeology Of Human Sciences’ Foucault says that ‘man’ (or the subject of humanist discourse in general) as a figure is drawn in sand at the ocean’s edge, soon to be erased by the coming tide((Krishnaswamy, 58). It means discourse shapes everything in the world. Man is also a creation of discourse. He may disappear soon arrival of the new form of knowledge. Thus discourses constitute objects, concepts subjects and strategies. Further Abrams puts: Michel Foucault’s view that the discourse of an era, instead of reflecting preexisting entities and orders, brings into being into the concepts, oppositions and hierarchies of which it speaks; that these elements are both products and propagators of “powers”, and social forces; and that as a result, the particular discursive formations of an era determine what is at the time accounted “knowledge” and “truth,” as well as what is considered to be humanly normal as against what is to be criminal, or insane, or sexually deviant (Abrams, 183). What Foucault writes in his book History of Sexuality is worth quoting here: “What is said about sex must not be analyzed simply as the surface projection of … power mechanism. Indeed, it is in discourse that power and knowledge are joined together. And for this very reason, we must conceive discourse as a series of discontinuous segments whose tactical function is neither uniform nor stable. To be more precise, we must not imagine a world of discourse divided between the accepted discourse and excluded discourse, or between the dominant discourse and the dominated one; but as multiplicity of discursive elements that can come into play in various strategies … Discourses are not once and for all subservient to power or raised up against it, any more than silences are. We must make allowance for the complex and unstable process whereby discourse can be both an instrument and an effect of power, but also a hindrance, a stumbling block, a point of resistance and a starting point for an opposing strategy. Discourse transmits and produces power; it reinforces it, but also undermines and exposes it ….” (Foucault, 100-1) Thus the above discussion leads one to think that discourse is nothing but a way of seeing and thinking about the world. It refers to a particular mind-set bound by philosophical assumptions that influences a person to interpret the world in a particular fashion. It is also referred to analyze the systems of thoughts, 100 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
Proceedings of National Seminar on Postmodern Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded ideas, images, patterns of language, culture, network of social institutions and other symbolic practices. It produces concepts and truths. And it is to be understood as a part of social structure itself. Some questions that arise within this framework, are: How some discourses maintain their authority? How some 'voices' get heard while others are silenced? Who benefits and how? Works Cited: Abrahmas, M.H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. 7th Ed. Singapore: Thomson Heinle, 2004. Foucault, M. The Order of Things: An Archeology of Human Sciences. London: Tavistock, 1973. Howarth, D. Discourse. Delhi: Viva Books, 2002. Jadhav, Kamlakar. Speech Act Analysis of Political Discourse. Kanpur: Asha Prakashan, 2009 Krishnaswamy, N. John Varghese et al. Contemporary Literary Theory. New Delhi: Macmillan India Ltd., 2001. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discourse http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Foucault 101 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
Page 1 and 2: Proceedings of National Seminar on
Page 23: Proceedings of National Seminar on
Page 43: Proceedings of National Seminar on

Post-Structuralism: An Indian Preview - Igcollege.org

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?