On Tuesday, January 26, we continued our discussion of nationalism from the previous class. We began by reviewing the arguments presented by Ernest Renan, Anthony Smith, and E.J. Hobsbawm. In particular, we noted how each of these authors construct their nationalist theories based on the Western experience.
We then turned our attention to Benedict Anderson's book Imagined Communities. Anderson claims that three paradoxes have traditionally "perplexed" nationalist theorists: the relative modernity of nations in the eyes of historians versus the inherent antiquity of nations in the eyes of nationalists, the perceived universality of nationality versus the particularity of its real-life application, and the philosophical poverty of nationalism versus its political power. Anderson's response to these inconsistencies is to define a nation as an imagined political community that is inherently both limited, and sovereign. In class, we examined each part of this definition. According to Anderson, a nation is an imagined community due to the fact that, although most of the nations inhabitants will never interact with the majority of their fellow citizens, a nation promotes a sense of horizontal brotherhood and shared purpose. A nation is limited in the sense that it is not imagined to be coterminous with all humanity; it is sovereign due to the fact that the concept of a nation has historically replaced the system of hierarchical dynastic rule.
We then discussed Anderson's claim that nations and nationalism have arisen out of the disintegration of two long-standing cultural systems: the religious community and the dynastic realm. He cites the emergence of the phenomenon he labels "print capitalism" as the primary force in breaking the socio-political hold of these ingrained systems and encouraging the development of nationalism. Print capitalism refers to the commercialization and secularization of literature that followed the invention of the printing press. Religious texts, which traditionally made up the entirety of most people's literary canon, were generally written in "sacred" languages such as Latin. It was believed that these language facilitated a deep connection with God, and were an necessary component of the sanctity of the texts. This allowed for a monopolization of religious communication by the educated. The invention of the printing press however, promoted the competition of languages and the capitalization of literature, thus exposing numerous people to texts written in their own vernacular. Anderson makes the case that being able to read in one's own language is conducive, indeed necessary, for nationalism to develop.
We ended with a discussion of two main components of print capitalism: the newspaper and the book. Anderson argues that both have played a significant role historically in the rise a nationalism. As Americans, we instinctively are aware of which novel's constitute the American canon. The literary canon of a nation allows for the dissemination of values that come to be seen as "characteristic" of that particular nation's citizens. By consolidating information from widespread sources in one place, newspapers also serve to affirm a person's nationality. Reading a newspaper, which Anderson compares to a form of prayer, gives the reader a sense of commonality with his fellow citizens, whom he knows are reading the very same news. In this way, both novels and newspapers serve to consolidate and strengthen nationalist sentiment.
Thank you Professor Trivedi!
Friday, January 29, 2010
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Trivedi, 1/28, Nationalism
On Thursday, January 29th, we talked more about nationalism in class. We began by finishing up discussing Benedict Anderson's book Imagined Communities from the previous class. In regard to Anderson, we talked mostly about his chapter on "Census, Map and Musuem." These three things are related in that they all serve to objectify a population. Census categories reflect the ways in which the census-makers already conceive of a certain group of people. A mueseum can show a nation's power over its past -- the power of imperialism, colonialism and economic domination over certain groups. We show in our musuems that which we wish to preserve through memory, but omit that which we wish to forget. Moving on from this chapter, we then discussed "Memory and Forgetting." The main ideas of this chapter were that, in creating a sense of a national identity, we suppress memories while we remember others that favor the ways in which we want to be viewed as a nation (much like the way in which musuems favor certain artifacts as opposed to others). We see how nationalism attempts to make itself seem like a natural process by omitting certain details and events in its collectively remembered history.
We then moved on to discuss Partha Chatterjee, who writes against colonial history -- specifically in India. Chatterjee agrees with many of Anderson's points, but has one major problem with the fact that Anderson assumes the model for nationalism was created solely by western European nations (and Russia) when in fact, the process of nation-creation may be the same for certain nations, but many nations capitalize on the differences from that original model. Furthermore, Chatterjee expresses that nationalism is not solely the effect of being dominated but a process of self-creation. We also discussed Chatterjee's theory of Anti-Colonial Nationalism: dividing social institutions into two domains, spiritual and material.
After discussing Chatterjee, we moved on to talk about Thongchai Winichakul. Winichakul was a student of Anderson's and his biggest contribution to the debate on nationalism stems from his creation of the idea of a geo-body. He studies what is lost in a nation through the processes of mapping, naming, dividing and categorizing a culture/population into a nation. In addition, he talked about the ways in which a geographic piece of land is objectified and represented and how that objectification then contributes to the formation of a nation. We concluded class with the reflection that, by mapping, dividing and naming a nation, the population of that nation is then able to conceptualize their society as bounded and sovereign, and in turn, view themselves as an independent entity.
We then moved on to discuss Partha Chatterjee, who writes against colonial history -- specifically in India. Chatterjee agrees with many of Anderson's points, but has one major problem with the fact that Anderson assumes the model for nationalism was created solely by western European nations (and Russia) when in fact, the process of nation-creation may be the same for certain nations, but many nations capitalize on the differences from that original model. Furthermore, Chatterjee expresses that nationalism is not solely the effect of being dominated but a process of self-creation. We also discussed Chatterjee's theory of Anti-Colonial Nationalism: dividing social institutions into two domains, spiritual and material.
After discussing Chatterjee, we moved on to talk about Thongchai Winichakul. Winichakul was a student of Anderson's and his biggest contribution to the debate on nationalism stems from his creation of the idea of a geo-body. He studies what is lost in a nation through the processes of mapping, naming, dividing and categorizing a culture/population into a nation. In addition, he talked about the ways in which a geographic piece of land is objectified and represented and how that objectification then contributes to the formation of a nation. We concluded class with the reflection that, by mapping, dividing and naming a nation, the population of that nation is then able to conceptualize their society as bounded and sovereign, and in turn, view themselves as an independent entity.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Monday, January 25, 2010
Trivedi 1/21 'Nations'
On Thursday Jan 21 Professor Trivedi discussed with us the idea of a nation.
We began with Ernest Renan, a Frenchman, who wrote ‘What is A Nation?’ in 1882 after the violent popular uprisings of 1848. In this essay he rejected the commonly held beliefs that nations are rooted in religion, dynasties geography language and especially race (which at the time was understood as natural and biological rather than a social construct). Citing the many different tribes that comprise the Anglo-Saxon and French races, he said that the idea of a single history of a homogenous people is a fiction. Rather, he argues poetically that “a nation is a soul, a spiritual principle” (Renan 52). It becomes clear in the final section that a nation is the shared idea and belief in a common story and struggle. For instance we discussed the different ways we could tell the story of the founding of our nation, the U.S. focusing on the revolution for liberty and democracy rather than the take-over of Native American land and people.
We then discussed Anthony Smith who wrote ‘The Origins of Nations’ shortly after the final decolonization period of the 1960s and 70s when several new countries were formed. He first rejects the idea that nations are only modern but notes how many ancient civilizations show nationalist tendencies. He secondly argues against Renan that nations are not merely constructs, rather they are a process and a combination of constructed and real commonalities among a body of people and their territory. Here, he introduces his idea of a ethnies which are groups of people that usually share (1) a name (2) origins (3) history/ memory (4) territory (5) language religion of customs (6) a sense of solidarity. He stipulates that these things are not necessarily in common from time immemorial but are understood commonalities during the process of becoming a nation.
Finally, we discussed E. J. Hobsbawm’s ‘The nation as novelty; from revolution to liberalism’ which he wrote after the Second World War, but before Smith’s time. Unlike Smith he argues that although the definition of nation changes over time he does understand them as modern. He dates the rise of nations to the 1830s and argues that they rise out of revolutions and are fundamentally economic units. He describes education, the army, and the common currencies / fiscal policies as technologies of nationhood.
We began with Ernest Renan, a Frenchman, who wrote ‘What is A Nation?’ in 1882 after the violent popular uprisings of 1848. In this essay he rejected the commonly held beliefs that nations are rooted in religion, dynasties geography language and especially race (which at the time was understood as natural and biological rather than a social construct). Citing the many different tribes that comprise the Anglo-Saxon and French races, he said that the idea of a single history of a homogenous people is a fiction. Rather, he argues poetically that “a nation is a soul, a spiritual principle” (Renan 52). It becomes clear in the final section that a nation is the shared idea and belief in a common story and struggle. For instance we discussed the different ways we could tell the story of the founding of our nation, the U.S. focusing on the revolution for liberty and democracy rather than the take-over of Native American land and people.
We then discussed Anthony Smith who wrote ‘The Origins of Nations’ shortly after the final decolonization period of the 1960s and 70s when several new countries were formed. He first rejects the idea that nations are only modern but notes how many ancient civilizations show nationalist tendencies. He secondly argues against Renan that nations are not merely constructs, rather they are a process and a combination of constructed and real commonalities among a body of people and their territory. Here, he introduces his idea of a ethnies which are groups of people that usually share (1) a name (2) origins (3) history/ memory (4) territory (5) language religion of customs (6) a sense of solidarity. He stipulates that these things are not necessarily in common from time immemorial but are understood commonalities during the process of becoming a nation.
Finally, we discussed E. J. Hobsbawm’s ‘The nation as novelty; from revolution to liberalism’ which he wrote after the Second World War, but before Smith’s time. Unlike Smith he argues that although the definition of nation changes over time he does understand them as modern. He dates the rise of nations to the 1830s and argues that they rise out of revolutions and are fundamentally economic units. He describes education, the army, and the common currencies / fiscal policies as technologies of nationhood.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Article about an Anti-Arpaio March in Pheonix
Joe Arpaio is the sheriff of Maricopa county, one of the most conservative districts in Arizona. He runs a strong anti-immigration campaign that violently and I believe illegally targets Latinos in Pheonix.
http://www.ipsnews.net/print.asp?idnews=50008
http://www.ipsnews.net/print.asp?idnews=50008
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)