초록 열기/닫기 버튼
In Culture and Imperialism, Edward Said, by forsaking his earlier post- structuralist tendency, seems to have successfully tackled the theoretical problems of which many postcolonial critics accused his earlier work, Orientalism. In this later work, Said also tries to present a balanced cultural criticism by discussing both the artistic values of the British canons and their ideological service to the Empire, whereas he earlier criticized by wholesale both the European empires and their literatures. This paper charts the “progress” Said’s perspective on culture has made from Orientalism to Culture and Imperialism; and it brings to light the achievements and limita- tions of Said’s concepts of culture by relating them to such notions as “cultur- al determinism” and the “relative autonomy of culture.” The latter notion, according to Said, makes a point of major distinction between his earlier and later works. Previous postcolonial studies have paid attention to the influ- ences of Foucault upon Said, which have generated heated debates among Said’s scholars. Expanding on the insights of these studies, this paper discuss- es the structuralist implications which Said’s concept of culture comes to embrace by accepting Nietzsche’s and Foucault’s concepts of truth and dis- course. The conclusion of this paper is that in Culture and Imperialism, Said’s unchanging perspective on the nineteenth-century European culture, which informed Orientalism, clashes with his attempt at rectifying the theoretical problems his earlier adoption of poststructuralism incurred.
키워드열기/닫기 버튼
genealogy, culture, Edward Said, Orientalism, Culture and Imperialism
