Conrad and Masculinity

214 Notes
6 Homi K. Bhabha, The Location of Culture (London and New York:
Routledge, 1994), p. 39.
7 Bristow, pp. 163–4.
8 Bristow, p. 164.
9 The term ‘Other’ or ‘other’ has a wide currency in contemporary academic
discourses, including radical philosophy, Lacanian psychoanalysis, and
feminist and postcolonial theory. The specific senses in which it is used are
quite diverse, although they have in common the idea of that which is
excluded, marginalized, repressed or seen as divergent from the norm.
Certain theories (e.g. Lacanian) distinguish between ‘the Other’ and ‘the
other’ but the significance of capitalization is not consistent across different
theories and writers. In the present book (which draws primarily on
feminist and postcolonial theory in its treatment of otherness) I capitalize
the word as ‘Other’ where a general principle or representation of otherness
is implied.
10 Bongie implies the link between exoticism and the ideology and fantasies
of masculinity when he deliberately uses the masculine pronoun for the
‘Romantic individual’, but he adds that he will not be considering ‘the
extent to which modern individualism and masculist ideology feed into
each other’ (EM, 10).
11 Hélène Cixous, ‘Sorties: Out and Out: Attacks/Ways Out/Forays’, in Hélène
Cixous and Catherine Clément, The Newly Born Woman, trans. Betsy Wing
(Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1986), pp. 63–132 (p. 71).
12 Homi Bhabha, ‘The Other Question’, in Contemporary Postcolonial Theory: A
Reader, ed. Padmini Mongia (London: Arnold, 1996), pp. 37–54 (p. 38).
Reprinted from Screen 24.6 (1983), 18–36.
13 Luce Irigaray uses the phrase ‘the other of the other’ (in the context of
gender rather than race) for a female economy, not subject to the male
realm of the Semblance. See Whitford, p. 104. Andrew Bennett and
Nicholas Royle suggest that black women’s writing ‘being marginalized
twice over, figuring the other of the other, reinforces a sense of the polymorphic
nature of identity in all discourse’. Andrew Bennett and Nicholas
Royle, An Introduction to Literature, Criticism and Theory: Key Critical
Concepts (Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall/Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1995), p.
162.
14 Bhabha, The Location of Culture, p. 4.
15 On Manichean values of good and evil attached to this binary structure see
Abdul R. JanMohamed, Manichean Aesthetics: The Politics of Literature in
Colonial Africa (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1983), pp. 3–4.
16 Jonathan Dollimore, ‘Homophobia and Sexual Difference’, in The Oxford
Literary Review, special issue on Sexual Difference, ed. Robert Young, 8.1–8.2
(1986), 5–12 (p. 5).
17 White’s argument for Haggard as representing the ‘shift towards subversion’
relies on identifying liberal and democratic tendencies within British
politics as the ‘status quo’ (AT, 99), so that Haggard’s reactionary militarism
is seen as oppositional. This ignores other strands within British
culture, including the militarism which connects Haggard’s vision to the
approaching First World War. As White herself notes, Paul Fussell argued
that Henty and Haggard ‘prepared a generation of young men for war in