SidaSubSaharaV1, Istex, Corpus, bibRecord, 002732

On Articulating Marginalization and Marginality

Identifieur interne : 002732 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 002731; suivant : 002733

On Articulating Marginalization and Marginality

Auteurs : Jeremy Punt

Source :

Journal for the study of the New Testament [ 0142-064X ] ; 2008-06.

RBID : ISTEX:788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21

English descriptors

KwdEn :
- Articulating, Articulating marginalization, Biblical studies, Biblical texts, Boer, Cultural production, Donaldson, Ethnicity, Gender, Global capitalism, Hegemony, Interdisciplinary, Interdisciplinary intersections, Jobling, Liew, Marginality, Marginalization, Marxism, Postcolonial, Postcolonial criticism, Postcolonial critics, Postcolonial studies, Postcolonial theory, Postcolonial work, Postcolonialism, Punt, Segovia, Such work, Sugirtharajah, Wide range.
Teeft :
- Articulating, Articulating marginalization, Biblical studies, Biblical texts, Boer, Cultural production, Donaldson, Ethnicity, Gender, Global capitalism, Hegemony, Interdisciplinary, Interdisciplinary intersections, Jobling, Liew, Marginality, Marginalization, Marxism, Postcolonial, Postcolonial criticism, Postcolonial critics, Postcolonial studies, Postcolonial theory, Postcolonial work, Postcolonialism, Punt, Segovia, Such work, Sugirtharajah, Wide range.

Url:

https://api.istex.fr/document/788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21/fulltext/pdf

DOI: 10.1177/0142064X08091444

Links to Exploration step

ISTEX:788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21

Le document en format XML

<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">On Articulating Marginalization and Marginality</title>
<author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Punt, Jeremy" sort="Punt, Jeremy" uniqKey="Punt J" first="Jeremy" last="Punt">Jeremy Punt</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, South Africa,</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: jpunt@sun.ac.za</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno>
<idno type="RBID">ISTEX:788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21</idno>
<date when="2008" year="2008">2008</date>
<idno type="doi">10.1177/0142064X08091444</idno>
<idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21/fulltext/pdf</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">002732</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">002732</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">On Articulating Marginalization and Marginality</title>
<author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Punt, Jeremy" sort="Punt, Jeremy" uniqKey="Punt J" first="Jeremy" last="Punt">Jeremy Punt</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, South Africa,</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: jpunt@sun.ac.za</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<monogr></monogr>
<series><title level="j">Journal for the study of the New Testament</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0142-064X</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1745-5294</idno>
<imprint><publisher>SAGE Publications</publisher>
<pubPlace>Sage UK: London, England</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="2008-06">2008-06</date>
<biblScope unit="volume">30</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="455">455</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="472">472</biblScope>
</imprint>
<idno type="ISSN">0142-064X</idno>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0142-064X</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Articulating</term>
<term>Articulating marginalization</term>
<term>Biblical studies</term>
<term>Biblical texts</term>
<term>Boer</term>
<term>Cultural production</term>
<term>Donaldson</term>
<term>Ethnicity</term>
<term>Gender</term>
<term>Global capitalism</term>
<term>Hegemony</term>
<term>Interdisciplinary</term>
<term>Interdisciplinary intersections</term>
<term>Jobling</term>
<term>Liew</term>
<term>Marginality</term>
<term>Marginalization</term>
<term>Marxism</term>
<term>Postcolonial</term>
<term>Postcolonial criticism</term>
<term>Postcolonial critics</term>
<term>Postcolonial studies</term>
<term>Postcolonial theory</term>
<term>Postcolonial work</term>
<term>Postcolonialism</term>
<term>Punt</term>
<term>Segovia</term>
<term>Such work</term>
<term>Sugirtharajah</term>
<term>Wide range</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Articulating</term>
<term>Articulating marginalization</term>
<term>Biblical studies</term>
<term>Biblical texts</term>
<term>Boer</term>
<term>Cultural production</term>
<term>Donaldson</term>
<term>Ethnicity</term>
<term>Gender</term>
<term>Global capitalism</term>
<term>Hegemony</term>
<term>Interdisciplinary</term>
<term>Interdisciplinary intersections</term>
<term>Jobling</term>
<term>Liew</term>
<term>Marginality</term>
<term>Marginalization</term>
<term>Marxism</term>
<term>Postcolonial</term>
<term>Postcolonial criticism</term>
<term>Postcolonial critics</term>
<term>Postcolonial studies</term>
<term>Postcolonial theory</term>
<term>Postcolonial work</term>
<term>Postcolonialism</term>
<term>Punt</term>
<term>Segovia</term>
<term>Such work</term>
<term>Sugirtharajah</term>
<term>Wide range</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
<langUsage><language ident="en">en</language>
</langUsage>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
</TEI>
<istex><corpusName>sage</corpusName>
<keywords><teeft><json:string>postcolonial</json:string>
<json:string>jobling</json:string>
<json:string>postcolonialism</json:string>
<json:string>boer</json:string>
<json:string>marxism</json:string>
<json:string>liew</json:string>
<json:string>punt</json:string>
<json:string>postcolonial theory</json:string>
<json:string>ethnicity</json:string>
<json:string>biblical studies</json:string>
<json:string>articulating marginalization</json:string>
<json:string>articulating</json:string>
<json:string>marginalization</json:string>
<json:string>sugirtharajah</json:string>
<json:string>postcolonial studies</json:string>
<json:string>interdisciplinary</json:string>
<json:string>hegemony</json:string>
<json:string>postcolonial criticism</json:string>
<json:string>postcolonial work</json:string>
<json:string>segovia</json:string>
<json:string>cultural production</json:string>
<json:string>wide range</json:string>
<json:string>global capitalism</json:string>
<json:string>such work</json:string>
<json:string>biblical texts</json:string>
<json:string>interdisciplinary intersections</json:string>
<json:string>postcolonial critics</json:string>
<json:string>marginality</json:string>
<json:string>gender</json:string>
<json:string>donaldson</json:string>
<json:string>marxist analysis</json:string>
<json:string>local sites</json:string>
<json:string>vernacular hermeneutics</json:string>
<json:string>africa postcolonial</json:string>
<json:string>certain authors</json:string>
<json:string>biblical interpretation</json:string>
<json:string>critical theory</json:string>
<json:string>lacanian psychoanalysis</json:string>
<json:string>material matrix</json:string>
<json:string>marxist critics</json:string>
<json:string>academic institutions</json:string>
<json:string>other hand</json:string>
<json:string>same time</json:string>
<json:string>liberation hermeneutics</json:string>
<json:string>cultural studies</json:string>
<json:string>theoretical intersections</json:string>
<json:string>suny series</json:string>
<json:string>state university</json:string>
<json:string>york press</json:string>
<json:string>columbia university press</json:string>
<json:string>academic press</json:string>
<json:string>biblical literature</json:string>
<json:string>bigger picture</json:string>
<json:string>marxist</json:string>
</teeft>
</keywords>
<author><json:item><name>Jeremy Punt</name>
<affiliations><json:string>Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, South Africa,</json:string>
<json:string>E-mail: jpunt@sun.ac.za</json:string>
</affiliations>
</json:item>
</author>
<articleId><json:string>10.1177_0142064X08091444</json:string>
</articleId>
<language><json:string>eng</json:string>
</language>
<originalGenre><json:string>research-article</json:string>
</originalGenre>
<qualityIndicators><score>5.512</score>
<pdfVersion>1.4</pdfVersion>
<pdfPageSize>442 x 663 pts</pdfPageSize>
<refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative>
<abstractCharCount>0</abstractCharCount>
<pdfWordCount>6548</pdfWordCount>
<pdfCharCount>42241</pdfCharCount>
<pdfPageCount>18</pdfPageCount>
<abstractWordCount>1</abstractWordCount>
</qualityIndicators>
<title>On Articulating Marginalization and Marginality</title>
<genre><json:string>research-article</json:string>
</genre>
<host><title>Journal for the Study of the New Testament</title>
<language><json:string>unknown</json:string>
</language>
<issn><json:string>0142-064X</json:string>
</issn>
<eissn><json:string>1745-5294</json:string>
</eissn>
<publisherId><json:string>JNT</json:string>
</publisherId>
<volume>30</volume>
<issue>4</issue>
<pages><first>455</first>
<last>472</last>
</pages>
<genre><json:string>journal</json:string>
</genre>
</host>
<publicationDate>2008</publicationDate>
<copyrightDate>2008</copyrightDate>
<doi><json:string>10.1177/0142064X08091444</json:string>
</doi>
<id>788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21</id>
<score>1</score>
<fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension>
<original>true</original>
<mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21/fulltext/pdf</uri>
</json:item>
<json:item><extension>zip</extension>
<original>false</original>
<mimetype>application/zip</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21/fulltext/zip</uri>
</json:item>
<istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">On Articulating Marginalization and Marginality</title>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority>
<publisher scheme="https://publisher-list.data.istex.fr">SAGE Publications</publisher>
<pubPlace>Sage UK: London, England</pubPlace>
<availability><licence><p>sage</p>
</licence>
</availability>
<p scheme="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-0J1N7DQT-B"></p>
<date>2008</date>
</publicationStmt>
<notesStmt><note type="research-article" scheme="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-1JC4F85T-7">research-article</note>
<note type="journal" scheme="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</note>
</notesStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">On Articulating Marginalization and Marginality</title>
<author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">Jeremy</forename>
<surname>Punt</surname>
</persName>
<email>jpunt@sun.ac.za</email>
<affiliation>Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, South Africa,</affiliation>
</author>
<idno type="istex">788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21</idno>
<idno type="ark">ark:/67375/M70-VQLL78DM-0</idno>
<idno type="DOI">10.1177/0142064X08091444</idno>
<idno type="article-id">10.1177_0142064X08091444</idno>
</analytic>
<monogr><title level="j">Journal for the study of the New Testament</title>
<idno type="pISSN">0142-064X</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1745-5294</idno>
<idno type="publisher-id">JNT</idno>
<idno type="PublisherID-hwp">spjnt</idno>
<imprint><publisher>SAGE Publications</publisher>
<pubPlace>Sage UK: London, England</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="2008-06"></date>
<biblScope unit="volume">30</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="455">455</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="472">472</biblScope>
</imprint>
</monogr>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><creation><date>2008</date>
</creation>
<langUsage><language ident="en">en</language>
</langUsage>
</profileDesc>
<revisionDesc><change when="2008-06">Published</change>
</revisionDesc>
</teiHeader>
</istex:fulltextTEI>
<json:item><extension>txt</extension>
<original>false</original>
<mimetype>text/plain</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21/fulltext/txt</uri>
</json:item>
</fulltext>
<metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="corpus sage not found" wicri:toSee="no header"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration>
<istex:docType PUBLIC="-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" URI="journalpublishing.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType>
<istex:document><article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="2.3" xml:lang="EN"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="hwp">spjnt</journal-id>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JNT</journal-id>
<journal-title>Journal for the Study of the New Testament</journal-title>
<issn pub-type="ppub">0142-064X</issn>
<publisher><publisher-name>SAGE Publications</publisher-name>
<publisher-loc>Sage UK: London, England</publisher-loc>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/0142064X08091444</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">10.1177_0142064X08091444</article-id>
<article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group><article-title>On Articulating Marginalization and Marginality</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Punt</surname>
<given-names>Jeremy</given-names>
</name>
<aff>Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland,
7602, South Africa, <email xlink:type="simple">jpunt@sun.ac.za</email>
</aff>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<pub-date pub-type="ppub"><month>06</month>
<year>2008</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>30</volume>
<issue>4</issue>
<fpage>455</fpage>
<lpage>472</lpage>
<custom-meta-wrap><custom-meta xlink:type="simple"><meta-name>sagemeta-type</meta-name>
<meta-value>Journal Article</meta-value>
</custom-meta>
<custom-meta xlink:type="simple"><meta-name>search-text</meta-name>
<meta-value>455
On
Articulating Marginalization and Marginality
SAGE Publications, Inc.200810.1177/0142064X08091444
JeremyPunt
Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland,
7602, South Africa, jpunt@sun.ac.za
Postcolonial
biblical criticism has been a very productive area for at least the last decade
or so, allowing investigations that have ranged from the speci c—whether
such speci city was historically (Horsley 1998), ethni- cally
(Brett 1996), textually (Dube 2000: 127-201) or otherwise marked and demarcated—to
the more general, all addressing how empire has functioned in and impacted
upon the ancient (read, biblical) world as well as recent and contemporary
structures and instances of geopolitical hegemony, such as, of course, colonialism
(without excluding the different forms that political hegemony can assume,
as, e.g., apartheid in South Africa [1948…1994]). Postcolonial Biblical
Criticism (Moore and Segovia 2005) is, at once, more than a stock-taking
exercise in which past tendencies are evaluated and considered with the bene t of hindsight, more than a probe into future possibilities as well
as blind alleys for a critical theory in its manifold manifestations, and
even more than an investigation of intersecting theo- retical lines and their
connections with biblical interpretation. To some extent, when the variety
contained in it is considered, this volume marks a timely, interrogative
pause in postcolonial biblical studies—and this with some authorial
intent! In retrospect, this is perhaps the sort of volume that should precede
all work in a new line of interpretation, clear- ing the critical space necessary
for such work to be undertaken within a discipline, but that tends rather
to follow such work, pausing early on to cast a critical glance backward
and forward, analysing past trajectories and envisioning future directions.
In any case, it is my hope that its appearance at this point—as the
postcolonial problematic, barely ten years after its emergence, continues
to have greater impact on biblical criticism—proves of value, both
by way of theory and practice, to its future con guration,
development, and expansion (Moore and Segovia 2005: 19).
456
My response
to this important book and aspects of its content is necessarily governed
by my social location in the South African academy, which is struggling—in
the positive sense of the word; it was, after all, `the struggle' which helped
the new South Africa to come to terms with its colonial past (Dutch and especially
British) and, importantly, the most recent hegemony of apartheid. The new
South Africa nds itself in so many ways exhibiting a postcolonial
demeanour, involving: prevalent notions of con icted, partial
and ambivalent identities; the presence of mimicry; various forms and levels
of hybridity; attempts to deal with issues such as race, class and gender
amidst the materiality of abject poverty (including homelessness and hunger),
the persistent spread of HIV/AIDS, unemployment, land redistribution, a rampant
violent crime rate, and other social matters of life and death. My institutional
setting is worth mentioning here, since the University of Stellenbosch has
had a tainted history of involvement in the estab- lishment and maintenance
of apartheid. From its peripheral position as an Afrikaner-oriented institution
in a sea of British imperialism, especially after the South African (Anglo…Boer)
War of 1899…1902, it eventually became the dominant Afrikaner-nationalist
institution and, unsurprisingly for the times, rendered the early architects
of the apartheid system. Already before independence in 1994, the University,
however, had started to reposition itself as a place of higher learning and
knowledge production for the broader South African society, intent on serving
the African con- tinent and the global community. It goes without saying that
such repositioning is not immediate, not without contention or problems,
and certainly at times viewed with not a little suspicion.1 The themes that
I have selected for discussion already betray, of course, my context(s) and
interests (and disinterests), but I will attempt to re ect more
consciously on a number of points. Plotting and Indicting: Brief Remarks
of Overview Postcolonial Biblical Criticism owes its initial scholarly impetus
to the rst meeting of the Consultation on the New Testament
and Postcolonial Biblical Criticism at an SBL Annual Meeting, in which a number
of these
1. Unfortunately, accounting
for individual and institutional social locations is limited to Moore 2005:
84-85. The usefulness of describing the historical setting of the development
of postcolonial biblical criticism (Moore and Segovia 2005) may have been
further enhanced by a brief account of the authors' and contributors' different
social locations.
457
authors
participated, subsequently bolstered by `the need for a volume that would
set forth postcolonial biblical criticism in the light of other critical
angles in the discipline' (Moore and Segovia 2005: 5). The volume contains
seven contributions in all. The rst is an introductory essay
by the editors on the `Beginnings, Trajectories and Intersections' of post-
colonial biblical criticism. There follow six contributions by Segovia, Moore,
Laura Donaldson, Tat-siong Benny Liew, Roland Boer and David Jobling. While
Segovia plots postcolonial studies and investigates various theoretical contributions
in this regard, the other authors consider post- colonialism's interdisciplinary
interactions—often disparate and inchoate, if not at times tainted—with
postmodernism and post-structuralism (Moore), feminism and gender studies
(Donaldson), race and ethnicity studies (Liew), and Marxism (Boer, Jobling).
Postcolonialism has had its fair share of critics, and this volume does
not try to hide, cushion or negotiate away such criticisms—unless one
would want to describe the attempt to interpret critiques in this way; rather,
while evidently nding some value and use in it and being willing
to invest in it, the book in fact engages postcolonialism head on. Various
criticisms have been levelled against postcolonialism. Thus, for example,
that it operates from a misplaced base, namely the West and more precisely
academic institutions of the West (Boer 2005: 171), and thus marginalizes
already marginalized local communities even further (Jobling 2005: 191).
Also, that it is at best `another intellectual fad within the Western global-
izing machine' (Jobling 2005: 191), that postcolonial biblical criticism obscures
contemporary and local people and their histories (Horsley 1998: 153-54).22
Segovia's contribution plays an important role in plotting postcolonial biblical
criticism and also successfully anchors the following discussions, which
would otherwise have probably appeared somewhat incongruent. He shows how
the strong point of postcolonial biblical interpretation is at the same time
(at least, potentially) its weak point: the interdisciplinary nature of such
work and its ability to accommodate a diversity of criti- cisms, approaches
and methods.3 Segovia aligns postcolonial biblical
2. From a queer perspective,
see Dayal 2001: 306: `But while this queering [constructionist and antiessential
theory of the subject] is a useful counter to a simplistic identity politics,
for many minorities it remains an imperative to assert an ethnic identity
grounded in material specificity, in the everyday and the local—an identity
firmly historicized'.
3. Thus, `[P]ostcolonial
criticism seeks to analyze how the imperial-colonial phenomenon bears on
constructions of the other-world, the this-world, and their
458
interpretation as a mode of critical inquiry with ideological criticism,
explaining that it is not unlike a variety of other strategies of interpretation
that deal with `uneven relationships of power' or focus on `relationships
of domination and subordination' in such wide-ranging areas as gender, economics,
race and sexuality.4 Postcolonial biblical interpretation addresses uneven
relationships of power at the geopolitical level, the relationship between
the imperial and the colonial.5 While Segovia's article is a mapping exercise,
and Moore's piece focuses on the mediating role that post-structuralism can
(and already does) play between postcolonialism and postmodernism, the other
con- tributors wish to point to serious lacunae as well as critical shortcomings
in current postcolonial theory/theories. It is not that Segovia and Moore
do not also address weaknesses and limitations,6 but a more critical tone
is detected in the other contributions, particularly in those on Marxism.
Unlike some earlier critical voices, in this book the critique generally
comes from within the fold of postcolonial studies—if with dissentious
af rmation, and even with some suggestions for restoration
and trans- guration. Reading through Spivak (and her notion
of planetarity), Donaldson charges postcolonial biblical criticism with excluding
gender from analytical categories and so marginalizing women in discourse,
theory and practice. Huge lacunae regarding race and ethnicity are relationship as advanced in the
texts themselves, as construed in the established tradition of readings
and readers in the West, and as offered in the contemporary production of
readings and readers in the world at large' (Segovia 2005: 24).
4. Digesting a wide range
of material, Segovia settles on five defining issues for postcolonial criticism:
postcolonial as a psychological or social term related to consciousness rather
than descriptive of historical conditions; a spatial understanding of imperialism
and colonialism as centre and periphery; the sphere or `terrain' of inquiry
as `the analysis of both cultural production and material matrix'; a broad
referential reach that allows for understanding the periphery in its own
right and not only in its inevitable relationship with the centre; and imperial…colonial
contact as multifarious in nature (2005: 64-70).
5. The scope (or range
of the field) of postcolonial studies covers, as far as operative breadth
is concerned, the wide range of imperial-colonial formations, from the empires
of antiquity up to the present reach of global capitalism; in terms of underlying
framework or foundational contexts, it covers both economic and political
environments, up to and including capitalism and modernity (Segovia 2005:
70-72).
6. For example, the limited
attention devoted to antiquity and other geopolitical areas (Latin America
and the Caribbean; Russia and the Soviet Socialist Republics; the USA),
and the exclusion of the religious realm (`whether by way of cultural production
or social matrix') from postcolonial biblical criticism (Segovia 2005: 72-75).
459
pointed
out by Liew, as well as the necessity to include them as categories of discussion
in postcolonial biblical criticism. Boer offers a serious challenge to postcolonial
biblical criticism for not invoking Marxist analysis, since at best Marxist
theory, deprived of important insights of Marx, is used. While Jobling shares
much of Boer's criticism regarding the ostensible elision of Marxism from
postcolonial biblical criticism, he is particularly worried about how the
emphasis on the geopolitical impacts on local sites of struggle.77 Intersections:
Postcolonial Junctions and Disjunctions The book derives its integrity, in
my opinion, not so much from focusing on postcolonial theory or postcolonial
biblical criticism as such but (and as suggested in the subtitle) from the
individual efforts to investigate and consider, probing and challenging, various
other possible theoretical positions and discourses in their current or possible
relationship to postcolonial biblical interpretation. I will attempt to refrain
from taking on and responding at length to any one particular author's position,8
trying to focus broadly on and to consider the value and contribution of
each input against the broader canvas of postcolonial biblical studies.99
7. Jobling argues, `Postcolonialism
in most of its forms retains a closeness to the local. But it is confronted
in my triad by two inveterately globalizing mindsets, those of Marxism and
the Bible/Christianity, both of which have a terribly hard time not
claiming a privileged view of the whole… From a postcolonial perspective,
both equally represent the attempt to impose global ideologies developed
in the West' (2005: 189, emphasis in original).
8. The contribution of
Boer, which deals with work done by Sugirtharajah and Brett, and that of
Jobling, which also partially attends to Sugirtharajah and provides, apart
from agreement, some correctives or at least alternatives as well to certain
positions of Boer (Jobling 2005: 191), are indicative of how the broader
argument— and vision?—can become obscured amidst some smaller
points of difference. Or is the devil indeed in the details?
9. This broader approach
within postcolonial (biblical) studies is, of course, exactly a cause of
concern to certain authors (Boer 2005; Jobling 2005: 194). Since this is
not the most appropriate place to conduct such an argument, suffice it to
claim that the successful grasp of and ability to portray the bigger picture
is often—if not without contradiction—the necessary condition
to investigate the particular, maybe in the same way as the globalizing
theory of Marxism is important for understanding the local postcolonial contexts?
For the latter, see Jobling 2005: 189-92.
460
Post-structuralism
Since postmodernism often manifests itself as no less than late- modernism
and at times amounts to neo-colonialism, Moore suggests that post-structuralism
serves as an intermediary—at least in academic discourse—between
postmodernism and postcolonialism, which are as disconnected as colonialism
and modernism are connected, to the extent that the former enables the latter.
Moore does well to identify the post- structuralist tenor in the postcolonial
work of Said, Spivak and Bhabha. Without minimizing their effect or cancelling
his appreciation for the value he nds in it, he deals with
the criticisms levelled against them and, by extension, against postcolonial
theory. It is the work of Bhabha that claims Moore's attention for the most
part, as he considers how Bhabha employs agency in an anecdote contained
in a chapter of his well-known The Location of Culture. Based upon Bhabha's
exposure of the ambivalence-ridden colonial discourse (with the locus of
colonial power inhabiting the space between colonizer and colonized, and
characterized by mimicry10 and hybridity), the decon- struction of the Bible
and especially the European colonizer's claims for its `univocity and universality'
(Moore 2005: 88), and his insistence on Lacanian psychoanalysis, Moore is
of the opinion that Bhabha neither pins postcolonial agency down nor seems
to know how or have the desire to handle the Bible in the postcolonial situation.11
Gender Studies Postcolonial criticism allows for readings of the Bible that
are both oppositional and multidimensional, according to Donaldson, but these
are nevertheless often inattentive to issues of sexuality and gender.12 She
traces the gure of the demon-possessed daughter of the Syro-Phoenician
10. Moore (2005: 88) writes,
`[T]he colonized heeds the colonizer's peremptory injunction to imitation,
but in a manner that constantly threatens to teeter over into mockery'.
11. Bhabha's anecdotal
reference to how the Bible as a European book ended up being traded without
being read in the colonial situation is the `epitome of a materialist reading'
(which affirms the Bible's materiality and so also its `cultural specificity
and relativity') amidst a resistant reading (`refusing its translation, its
sublation into a transcendental, transcontextual, transcultural signified')
shows interesting correspondence with the postcolonial African context (see
Punt 1998: 265-310).
12. When used, gender is
often tantamount to `Euro-American, middle-class feminism', which banalized
it and limited its use as a critical category (Donaldson 2005: 97).
461
and
Canaanite woman in the Gospels of Mark and Matthew13 within the framework
of postcolonial biblical criticism, which, she argues (2005: 98-98), could
bene t from Spivak's work on planetarity (moving beyond the
globe with its (neo)colonizing tendencies, and so focusing on inclu- sivity
but also on the alterity of human existence on earth), ethical singularity
(moving beyond the history of ideas, to focus on relationships and the single
gure in order to avoid `facile appropriations of the oppressed')
and spectrality (`acknowledging the presence of the invisible in the ordinary
world of the visible'). Pointing to how notions of disability14 and indigeneity
connect with the gender of the demon-possessed daughter, she shows how they
also disrupt and recon gure other postcolonial and feminist
readings of the texts. Donaldson suggests that these notions challenge but
also contribute to postcolonial biblical criticism's goal of including marginalized
and silenced voices. Disability refers no longerto `discomforting abnormalities
or intolerable ambiguities' but rather to `entitled bearers of a fresh view
of reality', and so challenges the often implicit connections made between
mental illness and demon-possession in colonialist discourse (Thompson, in
Donaldson 2005: 102). Indigeneity connects with demon-possession since `An
important hallmark of many indigenous spiritual traditions is their use of
ecstatic states or altered forms of consciousness as especially powerful sites
of knowledge' (p. 104); moreover, in the end, the ghosts created by historical
and discursive colonization come to haunt the post- colonial era. Race and
Ethnicity Amidst contestations regarding the theoretical accuracy and value
of categories such as race15 and ethnicity, Liew investigates how these
13. Interestingly, Donaldson
is the only author who addresses postcolonial biblical criticism from a sustained
focus on the interpretation of the biblical text (Mk 7.24-30; Mt. 15.21-28; and a brief interlude to the medium of Endor in 1 Sam. 28.3-25).
14. With reference to Thompson's work (1997), Donaldson refers to disability
as more than simply a physiological issue, but as `a pervasive ideological
discourse structuring a wide range of thought, language, and perception
in a predominantly abled culture' (2005: 101 n. 8).
15. Tentatively defined
by Liew as `the categorization of human beings in terms of phenotypical peculiarity
like skin color, skull size, hair type, and/or nose shape' (2005: 114).
However, race has more to do with culture than biology and theories of `inborn
or inherent inferiority', so well illustrated by the `New Racism' of the 1970s
in the UK, which invokes pragmatism and the quest for `cultural homogeneity'
(p. 118, also n. 9).
462
concepts
interface with postcolonial biblical criticism, while considering their continuing
impact on local and global societies. Is it because global capitalism has
co-opted black bodies that race resistance is largely fading, and how far
does its counter-effect and positive spin-off in the form of movements towards
`agreater community or a planetary humanism' reach? One cannot but agree that
the linking of the elusive yet pervious concept of ethnicity,16 permeated
by uid cultural and temporal signi cations, with
race has not contributed to any greater clarity, but rather the opposite.
Not deterred by this, Liew examines the effect of race and ethnicity within
their colonial employment in history and points to various links and correlations
between them, as `interdependent and interrelated issues' (2005: 129). Yet,
differences in conceptualizing race/ethnicity and postcolonialism abound,
and Liew argues for possibilities provoked by these. Post- colonialism provides
`a theoretical framework to read race/ethnicity in a wider, international
nexus of sociocultural and colonial politics' that warns against simplicity
or singularity, while prevailing racism and ethno- centrism caution against
romanticizing postcolonialism or taking the term to imply the end of colonialism.
`Essentialising group difference in a way that completely ignores history'
falls with the nostalgic pure nativist- drive into the (same) trap of colonialist
essentialism (Liew 2005: 124-26). Following upon a brief overview17 of how
race/ethnicity and post- colonialism were used in biblical studies, and insisting
on their con- vergence rather than mutual absorption, Liew relates the importance
of these categories to a number of other topics informed by them: vernacular,
diaspora, sexuality, psychoanalysis, community and authority.
16. For Bromley (1974)
and from an organic position, `ethnicity results from a dynamic interaction
between an ethnic core (some cultural and psychological traits that are
shared and recognized, but of unknown origin) and its surrounding environment
(mainly economical, but also political)', and for Barth (1969) it is `a construct
for group differentiation' and thus a category of boundary (Liew 2005: 118).
Whether ethnicity is a matter of `external domination' or `internal group
processes', instrumental or primordial, is still a matter of debate. The `use
of ethnicity betrays that it is often a label for groups who are not in
power', and thus, `If whiteness is not a race or an ethnicity, then race
and ethnicity share the common fate as labels of those who are lost in the
history of unequal power relations' (Liew 2005: 119).
17. Liew points to three
strands: reading race/ethnicity in the text, exposing the ideological basis
of much biblical scholarship along racial, ethnic or colonialist lines, and
honouring the agency of the racial, ethnic or colonial Other (2005: 129-32).
463
Marxism
It is Boer's contention that the architects of postcolonial theory—Said,
Spivak and Bhabha—divorced it from Marxism with detrimental effects
and that postcolonial theory needs to rediscover and reappropriate Marx-
ism.18 Postcolonial studies must, therefore, acknowledge its intellectual
debt to Marxism, consciously avail itself of its theoretical resources and
appropriate it as a source of criticism for its own practice (Jobling 2005:
192). Boer thus challenges postcolonial biblical critics to avoidbecoming
part of `the literary elites [who] work tirelessly as ideologues for the ruling
class' (p. 179). Boer reckons that the disjuncture between Marxism and postcolonial
criticism enters with Said's use of Gramsci's notion of hegemony.19 Gramsci's
theory of hegemony retained both consent and force, both the normalizing
power of ideology and the elimination of oppositional groups and their ideas; however, when Said connected the hegemony of colonialism with Foucault's
notion of power, class, class con ict and political economics—as
hegemony's `conceptual context'—fell by the wayside. In a different
way but in a similar vein, Spivak, to some extent contrary to her own claims
to Marx's work, contributed to Marx's elimination with her use of Derridean
deconstruction, with its stance against method and its focus on `the details
of the text in question, in the perpetual discovery of the way texts face
an incoherence that both sub- verts and structures the text itself'. It was
Bhabha's `misreadings' of `Lacanian psychoanalysis along with a demarxi ed Bakhtin' which up-
18. The debate between
Marxist critics and postcolonial critics is concentrated in certain central
assumptions and perceptions. Postcolonial critics are accused of succumbing
to late capitalism or `capitalist modernity' (Ahmad 1992) in addressing the
`superstructure of imperialism' while ignoring its material base, so that
social formation is neglected and unaffected, while cultural production
remains at the level of capitalism. Marxist critics, on the other hand, are
charged by their postcolonial counterparts for failing to direct a comprehensive
critique against colonial history and ideology and neglecting to consider
the historical, cultural and political alterity or difference of the colonized
world, being blinded by socioeconomic class to such an extent that they
fail to perceive any other social difference, and ultimately succumbing
to the ideology of racism embedded in Western life and thought (Gandhi 1998:
24; Segovia 2000: 136-37). Said also reminds us of Marx's argument that the
benefits of British colonialism more than counteracted its violence and injustices
(Gandhi 1998: 33).
19. The `eclectic invocation
of particular Marxist propositions and individual Marxists like Gramsci'
is experienced as a typical characteristic of American literature of the
last twenty years (Ahmad 1992: 5).
464
stage
him as `solid bourgeois writer for whom liberalism is the only possible position',
notwithstanding his introduction of the terms `mimicry', `hybridity' and
`border crossing' (Boer 2005: 168-70). For Boer, it is Ernst Bloch that holds
out tremendous potential for post- colonial biblical criticism, not in the
least because Bloch found the Bible so useful for his own work and theorization,
even if he thought the biblical texts were completely saturated in class con ict of various historical avours (Boer 2005: 177).
These texts, nevertheless, still contained sub- versive voices or at least
their traces, since, even if the historically domi- nant group erased these
in support of maintaining the patriarchal status quo, effacement was never
complete. The wise reader will nd alternative positions, `especially
in those myths that have later been papered over with more acceptable ideological
positions' (Boer 2005: 179). The layeredness and complexity of biblical texts
already gesture in the direction of dialectical reading.20 In another contribution
on Marxism, Jobling investigates the triad of postcolonialism, Marxism and
biblical studies (renamed as `the Bible/ Christianity', `letting the stroke
stand for all the identities, partial identi- ties, and non-identities between
different Bibles and different churches') (Jobling 2005: 187-88). Jobling's
opening dialogue with Takatso Mofokeng, in order to establish particularity
in his discussion, does not provide any serious acknowledgement of a vastly
changed—and in some ways astonishingly similar!—South Africa since
Mofokeng wrote in 1988, but for an aside on the fact of post-apartheid South
Africa and a curiously guarded claim about Mofokeng's current high-pro le position (Jobling 2005: 185 n. 2). While Jobling shares Boer's
concern about the neglect of Marxism and its considerable `conceptual resources'
in postcolonialism, and the latter's s seeming inability to admit to Marxism
as its constitutive element, he is more concerned about the elision of the
local in favour of the global. This happened in the categories of the Bible/Church
and Marxism, and is one of the perils that postcolonialism would want to
avoid: `a kind of counter- globalization, by conceiving the world in terms
of only a single struggle between `developed' and `undeveloped' regions'
(Jobling 2005: 191).21
20. Thus Boer, `However,
what is needed is an even more sophisticated dialectical reading that accounts
even better for the twists, foldbacks, curious alliances, and changing oppositions
of the text, one that reads back and forth between the ideological, social,
and economic contradictions that are inevitably found there' (2005: 179).
21. The usefulness of materialist
(Marxist) criticism in reading the Bible in South
465
Lingering Questions? Along with its engaging and challenging moments, postcolonial
biblical criticism has introduced a number of disciplinary and interdisciplinary
questions and areas of inquiry that continue to engage many. Thus postcolonial
biblical criticism is hard pushed to describe how it differs from, for example,
ideology criticism or liberation hermeneutics, both of which have established
importantpositions in biblical studies. At the same time, postcolonial biblical
criticism is increasingly nudged towards inters- ection with other, different
critical discourses, such as feminism, queer theory, race theory and the like—a
trend well exempli ed in this volume! While such interdisciplinary
handshaking is happening—and not a moment too soon, although we are
still some distance away from hug- ging!—a number of issues come to
the fore. The rst is a question of which discourses to greet
above all, since any normalizing regime's `ideo- logical longevity' is perpetuated
as long as certain struggles are relegated to being of lesser important and
therefore suitable to be deferred (Spurlin 2001: 200). A second is the concern
that the `hasty cognitive mapping of race, gender, and other identity-de ning categories onto another' is to be avoided (Dayal 2001: 313).
Finally, there are also worries, as voiced by Boer and Jobling in this volume,
that an important critical discourse— Marxism—has been neglected
and well-nigh elided, notwithstanding its constitutive force in postcolonial
biblical studies. In this nal section my focus will be on
various areas of importance in postcolonial work and certainly also in postcolonial
biblical criticism; these are, admittedly, governed by personal interests,
interests that cannot be dislodged from but are rather informed by my social
locations in South Africa. Africa
probably needs renewed attention, since the vast majority of South African
citizens belong to the working class and since victimization by apartheid
remains the most significant distinguishing factor identified by its overwhelming
black racial composition. Yet, the Marxist paradigm is also limited in South
Africa, since, while racial oppression can be functionally described with
reference to the proletariat, it is not exhausted by such ascription. It
is prevalent also in the social and cultural arena, given the quest for
cultural dominance and the formation of a national identity. The value of
Marxism's notion of consciousness, and its accompanying conscientization
and mobilization, is at stake when, given its subject's dependence on humanism,
it may re-introduce an imperialist subject. Such subservience to positivist
essentialism amounts to the introduction of a new ideology to replace an
older one (see Carusi 1991: 99).
466
Who
Are `We' (as Postcolonial Theorists or Critics)? While various contributors
to the volume are critical of a range of aspects in postcolonial theory and
discourse,22 all contributors raise the matter of self-criticism regarding
agency as a serious concern. Who are those who engage in postcolonial criticism,
who are those who consider and describe what they do as postcolonial?23 Are
postcolonial critics simply `migrant non-Western immigrant intellectuals
in the West who create thereby a new, academic variation of neo-colonialism'
(Segovia 2005: 62)? How can postcolonial discourse avoid becoming another
instance of an imperial- ist and homogenizing in uence originating
in the West, as enabled through globalization (see Spurlin 2001: 200)? Is
postcolonial theory the umpteenth instance in the Western academy where the
`international division of labor characteristic of global capitalism' is
re-created, with the Two Thirds world providing the raw materials for study
while the privileged intelligentsia at insulated academic institutions in
the West get to process them for the consumption by the `metropolitan elite
of fellow- scholars and graduate students' (Moore 2005: 82)?24 Other questions
and issues emerge when the issue of theoretical agency is raised. For example,
the general uneasiness towards—to use a phrase from another but maybe
cognate discourse—`using the master's tools to break down his house'
is present throughout but made explicit at times (Moore 2005: 89, on the
`blanket application of `First World' theory more generally to `Third World'
cultures').25 A related matter is the
22. It is not only Boer
and Jobling who lament—effectively—the excision of Marxism and
Marxist categories in postcolonial theory, in name at least if not in essence; others, as explained above, have identified the neglect of gender, race
and ethnicity in postcolonialism.
23. What Sugirtharajah
claims for a postcolonial Indian context holds true more broadly, `The notion
that everyone who writes in one of our regional languages and utilizes autochthonous
idioms, symbols and ceremonies is always free, emancipated and represents
true India, and that those who write in English and use contemporary western
modes of interpretation are by contrast always conniving with Anglo-American
or Sanskritic imperialism, is too simplistic' (Sugirtharajah 1999: 108).
24. Moore acknowledges the limits of the argument from a practical perspective
of whether academics elsewhere have the time and other resources for participating
in and contributing to the development of postcolonial theory (2005: 83).
25. An important consideration
for postcolonial reflection and theory is the ability to account for `the
dialectical relation between colonizer and colonized…the possibilities
of anti-colonialism and postcolonialism came, in part at least, from the
contradictory nature of European imperialism, providing colonized people
with the physical, economic, and conceptual tools—individual subjectivity
and agency; collective identity in a nation-state; racial and ethnic identity—that
made anti-467 question of who gets to decide about
the appropriateness of the epithet, who assumes the nal authority
for adjudicating on suitability? This question not only concerns the reintroduction
of domination and accom- panying notions of superiority, but registers discomfort
about lingering patterns of academic, theoretical hegemony. To take a leaf
from the (globalization) opponent's book, is (academic) networking not still
an undervalued exercise, notwithstanding the accom- panying dangers, including
the extension of the co-optation of the Two Thirds World's academics and
resources amidst the individualized West's concern for autonomy and achievement—partly
at least in the interest of academic survival and growth? Questions remain
regarding the democra- tization of articulation and access, given the West's
capital means and economic power, which can turn the postcolonial situation
and Other into commodities and which can continue to control (post)colonial
cultural production. What Are we Doing, Or, What Is in a Name? Nomenclature
and Focus- Area Is postcolonial studies one of those discourses that is apparently
more easily recognized than described, not to mention, de ned?
The `proper nomenclature' (Moore and Segovia 2005: 5) has been an elusive
item for the last ten years or so that this critical discourse has had an
impact on biblical studies. The dif culty with nomenclature
is related to pinpointing the area of investigation, which for Moore and
Segovia (2005: 5-10) are (historically) informed, inter alia, by three broad
clusters of study: liberation hermeneutics, in which Sugirtharajah's work
stands out, if not unproblematically; (mostly historical) work on empire,
as found in the studies by Horsley and others; and, extra-biblical postcolonial
studies, whose in uence on biblical scholars who have acquired
uency in other critical theories is evident. Yet, the term
`postcolonial' requires clarity not only for the scope of investigation,
but also for its related use and methodologies (Gandhi 1998: 3).26 How does
postcolonial accommodate both post-structuralist and Marxist enquiry—what
Gandhi (1998: 3) calls with reference to the former two, the `uneasy incorporation
of mutually antagonistic theories'— without incapacitating either discourse
or without making a mockery of postcolonial work, not to mention `uniformity
of approach'? What is the colonialism
possible in the first place' (Boer 2005: 174).
26. The term is useful
for at least providing theoretical resistance against the `mystifying amnesia'
of the aftermath of colonialism, argues Gandhi (1998: 4).
468
effect
when postcolonial studies27 is seen as one of the manifold variations of
cultural studies' (Moore and Segovia 2005: 2)? Indeed, when the notion of
`cultural studies' is invoked within postcolonial work, the question has
to be asked about how to ensure that it is not (again) rst
and foremost, and in the end not only primarily but also exclusively, about
the recipro- cality between Western culture and biblical interpretation?
Where on Earth? Scope, Matrix and Materiality The dif culty
with the term `postcolonial' is also related to its scope, put to service
as it is in addressing the multi-levelled nature of the post- colonial, brought
about by the many different levels at which colonialism has operated. The
essays in this volume all, to some extent, address the issue of theorizing
colonial and postcolonial contexts and people and, even more crucially, considering
the `speci c angle of inquiry' (Moore and Segovia 2005: 5)
for doing so! Segovia in this volume, as well as in his other work, emphasizes
the geopolitical scope of postcolonialism, the need to see the bigger picture.
Jobling in particular argues for the inclusion of the `local sites of struggle'
in postcolonial theory, for eliminating the distance between `theoretical
apparatus and local scenes'—both of which, by the way, he claims are
un- or under-theorized. Should one not ask whether there are not indeed
high stakes involved in recognizing and acknowledging the common struggles,
the shared liminalities? However, especially pertinent to my context of the
new, post-apartheid South Africa is the continuing con- uence
and intermingling28 of racism, gender oppression and homophobia (see Spurlin
2001: 185-205), requiring of postcolonial studies simul- taneously both the
geopolitical and local foci, but also much more attention for the material
matrix in global and local postcoloniality.
27. Boer (2005: 167), following
Moore-Gilbert, distinguishes between postcolonial theory (following in the
wake of Said, Spivak and Bhabha) and postcolonial criticism (as the longer
history of the critique of colonialism), but points out how the former is
used to conceptualize and describe the latter, leading to the undue privileging
of theory.
28. Power relations will
certainly benefit from Marxist analysis, but in South Africa it requires
more than social analysis of economic categories, or at least a different
positioning thereof: contradictions in society are more complex than class
differentiation and its involvement in modes of production; oppression needs
greater, focused attention; the creativity or marginality of the poor has
to be recognized and accounted for, going beyond the Marxist-Leninist theory
of party where people are political or economic but not cultural agents (Frostin
1988: 182-83).
469
Postcolonial,
Ancient and/or Modern? The discussion of Postcolonial Biblical Criticism
has to deal with the rather obvious situation at hand, namely, that scholars
in various parts of the world have found postcolonial theory a valuable hermeneutical
matrix with which to read biblical texts. However, considerable disagreement
still remains on the appropriateness of using such categories for analysing
biblical texts. Certain authors (Segovia 2000: 71-72) make a strong appeal
for the need to address `questions of transhistorical or transcultural appli-
cability',29 while others are concerned that the use of `postcolonial' and
`ancient' in the same sentence smacks of anachronism and ahistoricity (Jobling
2005: 194; see Gallagher 1996: 230). Clearly, the concerns amount to more
than nomenclature and the applicability of the term `postcolonial'. On the
one hand, caution is cer- tainly in order to avoid anachronism, to avoid giving
in to the temptation of using similar interpretative or theoretical frameworks
for comparing instances of domination and hegemony across different historical
periods. On the other hand, the usefulness of modern categories of analysis
can be recognized, as long as the particularity of the historical and cultural
context of biblical times is brought into play. Modern critical theories
are by default used in biblical hermeneutics, and, without over-claiming or
misappropriating postcolonial categories of domination and subordination,
of centre and periphery, postcolonial theory offers useful analytical and
conceptual tools. Any Role for Bible-based Religion (i.e., Christianity)?
In South Africa, discussing the Bible most often introduces the question
of where the church comes into this—the church in general, but, even
more importantly also, the local churches?30 The church's history is an
ambiguous one: the global church, with its massive resources—its `struc-
tural power' (Jobling 2005: 190)—and mobilizing momentum among its people; particular local churches, often found at the vanguard of the struggle against
colonialism, while at other times exhibiting a tainted history of enforcing
hegemony. It is more than ironic that the forces of
29. This entails moving
beyond the confinement of postcolonial studies to the history of the West
since the eighteenth century, the British Empire as a particular instance
of imperialist formation, and the `modern and capitalist imperial-colonial
formation' as found in its generalized form (the West) and its particular
manifestation (the United Kingdom) (Segovia 2005: 71-72).
30. Jobling seems worried
about how in Boer's article the concept of biblical studies tends to drift
(too far?) away from the church (2005: 187 n. 6).
470
colonialism
and hegemony have at times included the churches across the globe, but the
contemporary challenges coming from churches, or the churches themselves,
can hardly be sidelined in any simplistic way. It will neither be wise nor
serve the larger purpose of challenging hegemony, seeking to establish freedom,
justice and dignity. While the Bible has certainly for some decades now not
been simply or only the book of the church, in the post-colonial world—and
even in some of its academic and intellectual circles—it is often still
considered, rst and foremost, as sacred Scripture.31 In addition,
at a popular level the Bible is often considered as a persuasive agent of
change, as recent appeals in South Africa demonstrate effectively (see Punt
2006). How would postcolonial biblical criticism want to in uence
communities of faith— and societies with biblical legacies? Conclusion
It is both a good and bad habit that in review discussions the emphasis is
generally on criticism. Good, since it is in critical contestation that ques-
tions can be explored, unresolved issues and tensions identi ed,
and the discussion taken forward. Bad, since the importance of this book,
like so many others, is located not only in its (dis)connections with other
theories, con gurations and discourses, but also in its own
persuasive arguments and its reports of value found and appropriated (Moore
2005: 84). This is a great book, bringing out the value of postcolonial biblical
criticism— even if not in all these respects to the same extent—amidst
its complex and con icted nature, its diversity and hybridity
(Moore and Segovia 2005: 19), its geo-political scope and local focus. It
should in the rst instance be appreciated for its scoping,
intersecting and evaluating nature. For this reason, at least, it is good
that there is no general conclusion to the book, no attempt to gather all
the strands of the conversation and contestation about postcolonial biblical
criticism into some simplistic catch-all ending. Postcolonial biblical criticism
is only beginning to be appreciated in South African, and to some extent
in other African, biblical studies (e.g.,
31. Recently, this could
be seen again in the set of retorts and replies, of varying substance, to
Hector Avalos's contribution on the SBL website (June 2006) regarding the
study and teaching of biblical studies, and, by extension, the status, nature
and role of the Bible in the contemporary world. Naturally, vested interests
and ideological commitments also come into play here, at times underlined
by the vitriolic nature of some responses.
471
Dube
2000). It holds great potential and promise for biblical studies, at various
levels (to name a few): offering a critical theory, approach and epistemology
for interpreting the ancient texts of the Bible; rethinking curriculum at
theological schools (see Liew 2005: 151); entertaining approach and methodology
in biblical studies; integrating biblical studies in theology and religion
programmes as more than another (autonomous) component; offering another
interpretative grid to read pre-colonial `texts' in the widest sense of the
word; and, appropriating the Bible inside ecclesial as well as popular formations
in different, dissentious yet af rming, ways.
References
Ahmad, A.
1992 In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures
( London: Verso).
Barth, Fredrik
1969 `Introduction', in Fredrik Barth (ed.), Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The
Social Organization of Cultural Difference (Boston:
Little, Brown): 9-38.
Boer, Roland
2005 `Marx, Postcolonialism, and the Bible',
Moore and Segovia 2005: 166-83.
Brett, M.G. (ed.) 1996 Ethnicity
and the Bible (Leiden: Brill).
Bromley, Yulian V.
1974 `The Term fiEthnosfl and its Definition',
in Yulian Bromley (ed.), Soviet
Ethnology and Anthropology Today (Paris: Mouton ): 55-72.
Carusi, A.
1991 `Post, Post and Post. Or, Where is South African
Literature in All This?', in I. Adam
and H. Tiffin (eds.), Past the Last
Post: Theorizing PostColonialism and Post-Modernism (New
York: Harvester Wheatsheaf): 95-108.
Donaldson, Laura
2005 `Gospel Hauntings', in Moore and
Segovia 2005: 97-113.
Dube, M.W.
2000 Postcolonial Feminist Interpretation of the Bible (St Louis: Chalice Press).
Dayal, S.
2001 `By Way of an Afterword', in J.C.
Hawley (ed.), Postcolonial, Queer: Theoretical Intersections (SUNY series: Explorations in Postcolonial Studies; Albany: State University of New York Press ): 305-25.
Frostin, P.
1988 Liberation Theology in Tanzania and South Africa:
A First World Interpretation (Lund: Lund University Press).
Gallagher, S.V.
1996 `Mapping the Hybrid World: Three Postcolonial Motifs' , Semeia 75: 229-40.
Gandhi, L.
1998 Postcolonial Theory: A Critical Introduction
( New York: Columbia University Press).
472
Horsley, R.A.
1998 `Submerged Biblical Histories and Imperial Biblical
Studies' , in R.S. Sugirtharajah
(ed.), The Postcolonial Bible (The Bible and Postcolonialism , 1; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press): 152-73.
Jobling, David
2005 `Very Limited Ideological Options', in Moore and Segovia 2005: 184-201.
Liew, Tat-siong Benny
2005 `Margins and (Cutting)-Edges', in Moore and Segovia 2005: 114-65.
Marchal, J.A.
2006 `Review of S.D. Moore and F.F. Segovia (eds.), Postcolonial
Biblical Criticism: Interdisciplinary Intersections', Review
of Biblical Literature (April): 1-5. http.//www.bookreviews.org
Moore, Stephen D.
2005 `Questions of Biblical Ambivalence and Authority
under a Tree outside Delhi', in Moore and Segovia 2005: 79-96.
Moore, Stephen D., and Fernando
F. Segovia (eds.) 2005 Postcolonial Biblical
Criticism: Interdisciplinary Intersections (London:
T&T Clark International).
Punt, J.
1998 `The Status of the Bible in Africa: Foundational
Document or Stumbling Block?', Religion and Theology 5 .3: 265-310.
2006 `The fiBiblicisationfl of Politics in Post-apartheid South
Africa: The Bible's Presence in Ecclesial and Public Politics'. Paper read at the European Association of Biblical Studies conference , Hungary, August 2006.
Segovia, Fernando F.
2000 Decolonizing Biblical Studies: A View from the Margins (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books).
2005 `Mapping the Postcolonial Optic in Biblical Criticism' , in Moore and Segovia 2005: 23-78.
Spurlin, W.J.
2001 `Broadening Postcolonial Studies/Decolonizing Queer
Studies' , in J.C. Hawley (ed.),
Postcolonial, Queer: Theoretical Intersections (SUNY
Series: Explorations in Postcolonial Studies; Albany:
State University of New York Press): 185-205.
Staley, J.L.
2005 `Review of S.D. Moore
and F.F. Segovia (eds.), Postcolonial
Biblical Criticism: Interdisciplinary Intersections', Review of Biblical
Literature (December): 1-4. http.//www.bookreviews.org
Sugirtharajah, R.S.
1999 `Thinking about Vernacular Hermeneutics Sitting
in a Metropolitan Setting', in R.S. Sugirtharajah (ed.), Vernacular Hermeneutics (The Bible
and Postcolonialism , 2; Sheffield : Sheffield Academic Press): 92-115.
Thompson, Rosemarie Garland
1997 Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability
in American Culture and Literature (New York:
Columbia University Press).</meta-value>
</custom-meta>
</custom-meta-wrap>
</article-meta>
</front>
<back><notes><p><list list-type="order"><list-item><p>1. Unfortunately, accounting for individual and institutional social locations is limited to Moore 2005: 84-85. The usefulness of describing the historical setting of the development of postcolonial biblical criticism (Moore and Segovia 2005) may have been further enhanced by a brief account of the authors' and contributors' different social locations.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>2. From a queer perspective, see Dayal 2001: 306: `But while this queering [constructionist and antiessential theory of the subject] is a useful counter to a simplistic identity politics, for many minorities it remains an imperative to assert an ethnic identity grounded in material specificity, in the everyday and the local—an identity firmly historicized'.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>3. Thus, `[P]ostcolonial criticism seeks to analyze how the imperial-colonial phenomenon bears on constructions of the other-world, the this-world, and their relationship as advanced in the texts themselves, as construed in the established tradition of readings and readers in the West, and as offered in the contemporary production of readings and readers in the world at large' (Segovia 2005: 24).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>4. Digesting a wide range of material, Segovia settles on five defining issues for postcolonial criticism: postcolonial as a psychological or social term related to consciousness rather than descriptive of historical conditions; a spatial understanding of imperialism and colonialism as centre and periphery; the sphere or `terrain' of inquiry as `the analysis of both cultural production and material matrix'; a broad referential reach that allows for understanding the periphery in its own right and not only in its inevitable relationship with the centre; and imperial…colonial contact as multifarious in nature (2005: 64-70).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>5. The scope (or range of the field) of postcolonial studies covers, as far as operative breadth is concerned, the wide range of imperial-colonial formations, from the empires of antiquity up to the present reach of global capitalism; in terms of underlying framework or foundational contexts, it covers both economic and political environments, up to and including capitalism and modernity (Segovia 2005: 70-72).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>6. For example, the limited attention devoted to antiquity and other geopolitical areas (Latin America and the Caribbean; Russia and the Soviet Socialist Republics; the USA), and the exclusion of the religious realm (`whether by way of cultural production or social matrix') from postcolonial biblical criticism (Segovia 2005: 72-75).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>7. Jobling argues, `Postcolonialism in most of its forms retains a closeness to the local. But it is confronted in my triad by two inveterately globalizing mindsets, those of Marxism and the Bible/Christianity, both of which have a terribly hard time <italic>not</italic>
 claiming a privileged view of the whole… From a postcolonial perspective, both equally represent the attempt to impose global ideologies developed in the West' (2005: 189, emphasis in original).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>8. The contribution of Boer, which deals with work done by Sugirtharajah and Brett, and that of Jobling, which also partially attends to Sugirtharajah and provides, apart from agreement, some correctives or at least alternatives as well to certain positions of Boer (Jobling 2005: 191), are indicative of how the broader argument— and vision?—can become obscured amidst some smaller points of difference. Or is the devil indeed in the details?</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>9. This broader approach within postcolonial (biblical) studies is, of course, exactly a cause of concern to certain authors (Boer 2005; Jobling 2005: 194). Since this is not the most appropriate place to conduct such an argument, suffice it to claim that the successful grasp of and ability to portray the bigger picture is often—if not without contradiction—the necessary condition to investigate the particular, maybe in the same way as the globalizing theory of Marxism is important for understanding the local postcolonial contexts? For the latter, see Jobling 2005: 189-92.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>10. Moore (2005: 88) writes, `[T]he colonized heeds the colonizer's peremptory injunction to imitation, but in a manner that constantly threatens to teeter over into mockery'.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>11. Bhabha's anecdotal reference to how the Bible as a European book ended up being traded without being read in the colonial situation is the `epitome of a materialist reading' (which affirms the Bible's materiality and so also its `cultural specificity and relativity') amidst a resistant reading (`refusing its translation, its sublation into a transcendental, transcontextual, transcultural signified') shows interesting correspondence with the postcolonial African context (see Punt 1998: 265-310).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>12. When used, gender is often tantamount to `Euro-American, middle-class feminism', which banalized it and limited its use as a critical category (Donaldson 2005: 97).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>13. Interestingly, Donaldson is the only author who addresses postcolonial biblical criticism from a sustained focus on the interpretation of the biblical text (Mk 7.24-30; Mt. 15.21-28; and a brief interlude to the medium of Endor in 1 Sam. 28.3-25).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>14. With reference to Thompson's work (1997), Donaldson refers to disability as more than simply a physiological issue, but as `a pervasive ideological discourse structuring a wide range of thought, language, and perception in a predominantly abled culture' (2005: 101 n. 8).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>15. Tentatively defined by Liew as `the categorization of human beings in terms of phenotypical peculiarity like skin color, skull size, hair type, and/or nose shape' (2005: 114). However, race has more to do with culture than biology and theories of `inborn or inherent inferiority', so well illustrated by the `New Racism' of the 1970s in the UK, which invokes pragmatism and the quest for `cultural homogeneity' (p. 118, also n. 9).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>16. For Bromley (1974) and from an organic position, `ethnicity results from a dynamic interaction between an ethnic core (some cultural and psychological traits that are shared and recognized, but of unknown origin) and its surrounding environment (mainly economical, but also political)', and for Barth (1969) it is `a construct for group differentiation' and thus a category of boundary (Liew 2005: 118). Whether ethnicity is a matter of `external domination' or `internal group processes', instrumental or primordial, is still a matter of debate. The `use of ethnicity betrays that it is often a label for groups who are not in power', and thus, `If whiteness is not a race or an ethnicity, then race and ethnicity share the common fate as labels of those who are lost in the history of unequal power relations' (Liew 2005: 119).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>17. Liew points to three strands: reading race/ethnicity in the text, exposing the ideological basis of much biblical scholarship along racial, ethnic or colonialist lines, and honouring the agency of the racial, ethnic or colonial Other (2005: 129-32).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>18. The debate between Marxist critics and postcolonial critics is concentrated in certain central assumptions and perceptions. Postcolonial critics are accused of succumbing to late capitalism or `capitalist modernity' (Ahmad 1992) in addressing the `superstructure of imperialism' while ignoring its material base, so that social formation is neglected and unaffected, while cultural production remains at the level of capitalism. Marxist critics, on the other hand, are charged by their postcolonial counterparts for failing to direct a comprehensive critique against colonial history and ideology and neglecting to consider the historical, cultural and political alterity or difference of the colonized world, being blinded by socioeconomic class to such an extent that they fail to perceive any other social difference, and ultimately succumbing to the ideology of racism embedded in Western life and thought (Gandhi 1998: 24; Segovia 2000: 136-37). Said also reminds us of Marx's argument that the benefits of British colonialism more than counteracted its violence and injustices (Gandhi 1998: 33).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>19. The `eclectic invocation of particular Marxist propositions and individual Marxists like Gramsci' is experienced as a typical characteristic of American literature of the last twenty years (Ahmad 1992: 5).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>20. Thus Boer, `However, what is needed is an even more sophisticated dialectical reading that accounts even better for the twists, foldbacks, curious alliances, and changing oppositions of the text, one that reads back and forth between the ideological, social, and economic contradictions that are inevitably found there' (2005: 179).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>21. The usefulness of materialist (Marxist) criticism in reading the Bible in South Africa probably needs renewed attention, since the vast majority of South African citizens belong to the working class and since victimization by apartheid remains the most significant distinguishing factor identified by its overwhelming black racial composition. Yet, the Marxist paradigm is also limited in South Africa, since, while racial oppression can be functionally described with reference to the proletariat, it is not exhausted by such ascription. It is prevalent also in the social and cultural arena, given the quest for cultural dominance and the formation of a national identity. The value of Marxism's notion of consciousness, and its accompanying conscientization and mobilization, is at stake when, given its subject's dependence on humanism, it may re-introduce an imperialist subject. Such subservience to positivist essentialism amounts to the introduction of a new ideology to replace an older one (see Carusi 1991: 99).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>22. It is not only Boer and Jobling who lament—effectively—the excision of Marxism and Marxist categories in postcolonial theory, in name at least if not in essence; others, as explained above, have identified the neglect of gender, race and ethnicity in postcolonialism.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>23. What Sugirtharajah claims for a postcolonial Indian context holds true more broadly, `The notion that everyone who writes in one of our regional languages and utilizes autochthonous idioms, symbols and ceremonies is always free, emancipated and represents true India, and that those who write in English and use contemporary western modes of interpretation are by contrast always conniving with Anglo-American or Sanskritic imperialism, is too simplistic' (Sugirtharajah 1999: 108).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>24. Moore acknowledges the limits of the argument from a practical perspective of whether academics elsewhere have the time and other resources for participating in and contributing to the development of postcolonial theory (2005: 83).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>25. An important consideration for postcolonial reflection and theory is the ability to account for `the dialectical relation between colonizer and colonized…the possibilities of anti-colonialism and postcolonialism came, in part at least, from the contradictory nature of European imperialism, providing colonized people with the physical, economic, and conceptual tools—individual subjectivity and agency; collective identity in a nation-state; racial and ethnic identity—that made anti- colonialism possible in the first place' (Boer 2005: 174).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>26. The term is useful for at least providing theoretical resistance against the `mystifying amnesia' of the aftermath of colonialism, argues Gandhi (1998: 4).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>27. Boer (2005: 167), following Moore-Gilbert, distinguishes between postcolonial theory (following in the wake of Said, Spivak and Bhabha) and postcolonial criticism (as the longer history of the critique of colonialism), but points out how the former is used to conceptualize and describe the latter, leading to the undue privileging of theory.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>28. Power relations will certainly benefit from Marxist analysis, but in South Africa it requires more than social analysis of economic categories, or at least a different positioning thereof: contradictions in society are more complex than class differentiation and its involvement in modes of production; oppression needs greater, focused attention; the creativity or marginality of the poor has to be recognized and accounted for, going beyond the Marxist-Leninist theory of party where people are political or economic but not cultural agents (Frostin 1988: 182-83).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>29. This entails moving beyond the confinement of postcolonial studies to the history of the West since the eighteenth century, the British Empire as a particular instance of imperialist formation, and the `modern and capitalist imperial-colonial formation' as found in its generalized form (the West) and its particular manifestation (the United Kingdom) (Segovia 2005: 71-72).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>30. Jobling seems worried about how in Boer's article the concept of biblical studies tends to drift (too far?) away from the church (2005: 187 n. 6).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item><p>31. Recently, this could be seen again in the set of retorts and replies, of varying substance, to Hector Avalos's contribution on the SBL website (June 2006) regarding the study and teaching of biblical studies, and, by extension, the status, nature and role of the Bible in the contemporary world. Naturally, vested interests and ideological commitments also come into play here, at times underlined by the vitriolic nature of some responses.</p>
</list-item>
</list>
</p>
</notes>
<ref-list><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Ahmad, A.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>1992</year>
 In <source>Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures</source>
 ( <publisher-loc>London</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>Verso</publisher-name>
).</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Barth, Fredrik</surname>
</name> 
               <year>1969</year> 
               <source>`Introduction'</source>
, in <name name-style="western"><surname>Fredrik Barth</surname>
</name>
 (ed.), <source>Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Cultural Difference</source>
 (<publisher-loc>Boston</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>Little, Brown</publisher-name>
): <fpage>9</fpage>
-<lpage>38</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Boer, Roland</surname>
</name> 
               <year>2005</year> 
               <article-title>`Marx, Postcolonialism, and the Bible'</article-title>
, <source>Moore and Segovia</source> 
               <volume>2005</volume>
: <fpage>166</fpage>
-<lpage>83</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Brett, M.G.</surname>
</name>
 (ed.) <year>1996</year> 
               <source>Ethnicity and the Bible</source>
 (<publisher-loc>Leiden</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>Brill</publisher-name>
).</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bromley, Yulian V.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>1974</year> 
               <source>`The Term fiEthnosfl and its Definition'</source>
, in <name name-style="western"><surname>Yulian Bromley</surname>
</name>
 (ed.), <source>Soviet Ethnology and Anthropology Today</source>
 (<publisher-loc>Paris</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>Mouton</publisher-name>
 ): <fpage>55</fpage>
-<lpage>72</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Carusi, A.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>1991</year> 
               <source>`Post, Post and Post. Or, Where is South African Literature in All This?'</source>
, in <name name-style="western"><surname>I. Adam</surname>
</name>
 and <name name-style="western"><surname>H. Tiffin</surname>
</name>
 (eds.), <source>Past the Last Post: Theorizing PostColonialism and Post-Modernism</source>
 (<publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>Harvester Wheatsheaf</publisher-name>
): <fpage>95</fpage>
-<lpage>108</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Donaldson, Laura</surname>
</name> 
               <year>2005</year> 
               <article-title>`Gospel Hauntings'</article-title>
, in <source>Moore and Segovia</source> 
               <volume>2005</volume>
: <fpage>97</fpage>
-<lpage>113</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Dube, M.W.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>2000</year> 
               <source>Postcolonial Feminist Interpretation of the Bible</source>
 (<publisher-loc>St Louis</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>Chalice Press</publisher-name>
).</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Dayal, S.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>2001</year> 
               <source>`By Way of an Afterword'</source>
, in <name name-style="western"><surname>J.C. Hawley</surname>
</name>
 (ed.), <source>Postcolonial, Queer: Theoretical Intersections</source>
 (<source>SUNY series: Explorations in Postcolonial Studies</source>
; <publisher-loc>Albany</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>State University of New York Press</publisher-name>
 ): <fpage>305</fpage>
-<lpage>25</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Frostin, P.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>1988</year> 
               <source>Liberation Theology in Tanzania and South Africa: A First World Interpretation</source>
 (<publisher-loc>Lund</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>Lund University Press</publisher-name>
).</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Gallagher, S.V.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>1996</year> 
               <article-title>`Mapping the Hybrid World: Three Postcolonial Motifs'</article-title>
 , <source>Semeia</source> 
               <volume>75</volume>
: <fpage>229</fpage>
-<lpage>40</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Gandhi, L.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>1998</year> 
               <source>Postcolonial Theory: A Critical Introduction</source>
 ( <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>Columbia University Press</publisher-name>
).</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Horsley, R.A.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>1998</year> 
               <article-title>`Submerged Biblical Histories and Imperial Biblical Studies'</article-title>
 , in R.S. Sugirtharajah (ed.), <article-title>The Postcolonial Bible</article-title>
 (<source>The Bible and Postcolonialism</source>
 , <volume>1</volume>
; <publisher-loc>Sheffield</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>Sheffield Academic Press</publisher-name>
): <fpage>152</fpage>
-<lpage>73</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jobling, David</surname>
</name> 
               <year>2005</year> 
               <article-title>`Very Limited Ideological Options'</article-title>
, in <source>Moore and Segovia</source> 
               <volume>2005</volume>
: <fpage>184</fpage>
-<lpage>201</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Liew, Tat-siong Benny</surname>
</name> 
               <year>2005</year> 
               <article-title>`Margins and (Cutting)-Edges'</article-title>
, in <source>Moore and Segovia</source> 
               <volume>2005</volume>
: <fpage>114</fpage>
-<lpage>65</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Marchal, J.A.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>2006</year> 
               <article-title>`Review of S.D. Moore and F.F. Segovia (eds.), Postcolonial Biblical Criticism: Interdisciplinary Intersections'</article-title>
, <source>Review of Biblical Literature</source>
 (April): <fpage>1</fpage>
-<lpage>5</lpage>
. <uri xlink:type="simple">http.//www.bookreviews.org</uri>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Moore, Stephen D.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>2005</year> 
               <article-title>`Questions of Biblical Ambivalence and Authority under a Tree outside Delhi'</article-title>
, in <source>Moore and Segovia</source> 
               <volume>2005</volume>
: <fpage>79</fpage>
-<lpage>96</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Moore, Stephen D.</surname>
</name>
, and <name name-style="western"><surname>Fernando F. Segovia</surname>
</name>
 (eds.) <year>2005</year> 
               <source>Postcolonial Biblical Criticism: Interdisciplinary Intersections</source>
 (<publisher-loc>London</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>T&T Clark International</publisher-name>
).</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Punt, J.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>1998</year> 
               <article-title>`The Status of the Bible in Africa: Foundational Document or Stumbling Block?'</article-title>
, <source>Religion and Theology 5</source>
 .<volume>3</volume>
: <fpage>265</fpage>
-<lpage>310</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="confproc" xlink:type="simple"><conf-date>2006</conf-date>
 `<article-title>The fiBiblicisationfl of Politics in Post-apartheid South Africa: The Bible's Presence in Ecclesial and Public Politics</article-title>
'. <conf-name>Paper read at the European Association of Biblical Studies conference</conf-name>
 , <conf-loc>Hungary</conf-loc>
, August <conf-date>2006</conf-date>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Segovia, Fernando F.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>2000</year> 
               <source>Decolonizing Biblical Studies: A View from the Margins</source>
 (<publisher-loc>Maryknoll, NY</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>Orbis Books</publisher-name>
).</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"> 
               <year>2005</year> 
               <article-title>`Mapping the Postcolonial Optic in Biblical Criticism'</article-title>
 , in <source>Moore and Segovia</source> 
               <volume>2005</volume>
: <fpage>23</fpage>
-<lpage>78</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Spurlin, W.J.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>2001</year> 
               <source>`Broadening Postcolonial Studies/Decolonizing Queer Studies'</source>
 , in <name name-style="western"><surname>J.C. Hawley</surname>
</name>
 (ed.), <source>Postcolonial, Queer: Theoretical Intersections</source>
 (<source>SUNY Series: Explorations in Postcolonial Studies</source>
; <publisher-loc>Albany</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>State University of New York Press</publisher-name>
): <fpage>185</fpage>
-<lpage>205</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Staley, J.L.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>2005</year>
 `Review of <name name-style="western"><surname>S.D. Moore</surname>
</name>
 and <name name-style="western"><surname>F.F. Segovia</surname>
</name>
 (eds.), <source>Postcolonial Biblical Criticism: Interdisciplinary Intersections', Review of Biblical Literature</source>
 (December): <fpage>1</fpage>
-<lpage>4</lpage>
. <uri xlink:type="simple">http.//www.bookreviews.org</uri>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sugirtharajah, R.S.</surname>
</name> 
               <year>1999</year> 
               <article-title>`Thinking about Vernacular Hermeneutics Sitting in a Metropolitan Setting'</article-title>
, in R.S. Sugirtharajah (ed.), <article-title>Vernacular Hermeneutics</article-title>
 (<source>The Bible and Postcolonialism</source>
 , <volume>2</volume>
; <publisher-loc>Sheffield</publisher-loc>
 : <publisher-name>Sheffield Academic Press</publisher-name>
): <fpage>92</fpage>
-<lpage>115</lpage>
.</citation>
</ref>
<ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Thompson, Rosemarie Garland</surname>
</name> 
               <year>1997</year> 
               <source>Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability in American Culture and Literature</source>
 (<publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>
: <publisher-name>Columbia University Press</publisher-name>
).</citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>
</istex:document>
</istex:metadataXml>
<mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>On Articulating Marginalization and Marginality</title>
</titleInfo>
<titleInfo type="alternative" lang="en" contentType="CDATA"><title>On Articulating Marginalization and Marginality</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Jeremy</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Punt</namePart>
<affiliation>Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, South Africa,</affiliation>
<affiliation>E-mail: jpunt@sun.ac.za</affiliation>
</name>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<genre type="research-article" displayLabel="research-article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-1JC4F85T-7">research-article</genre>
<originInfo><publisher>SAGE Publications</publisher>
<place><placeTerm type="text">Sage UK: London, England</placeTerm>
</place>
<dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2008-06</dateIssued>
<copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2008</copyrightDate>
</originInfo>
<language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
<languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm>
</language>
<relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Journal for the study of the New Testament</title>
</titleInfo>
<genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre>
<identifier type="ISSN">0142-064X</identifier>
<identifier type="eISSN">1745-5294</identifier>
<identifier type="PublisherID">JNT</identifier>
<identifier type="PublisherID-hwp">spjnt</identifier>
<part><date>2008</date>
<detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption>
<number>30</number>
</detail>
<detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption>
<number>4</number>
</detail>
<extent unit="pages"><start>455</start>
<end>472</end>
</extent>
</part>
</relatedItem>
<identifier type="istex">788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21</identifier>
<identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/M70-VQLL78DM-0</identifier>
<identifier type="DOI">10.1177/0142064X08091444</identifier>
<identifier type="ArticleID">10.1177_0142064X08091444</identifier>
<recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-0J1N7DQT-B">sage</recordContentSource>
</recordInfo>
</mods>
<json:item><extension>json</extension>
<original>false</original>
<mimetype>application/json</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21/metadata/json</uri>
</json:item>
</metadata>
<serie></serie>
</istex>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Sante/explor/SidaSubSaharaV1/Data/Istex/Corpus

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 002732 | SxmlIndent | more

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 002732 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Wicri/Sante
   |area=    SidaSubSaharaV1
   |flux=    Istex
   |étape=   Corpus
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     ISTEX:788022C86C6E2DB159BD9BB35AF819CF0D78DC21
   |texte=   On Articulating Marginalization and Marginality
}}

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32.
Data generation: Mon Nov 13 19:31:10 2017. Site generation: Wed Mar 6 19:14:32 2024

	Le SIDA en Afrique subsaharienne (serveur d'exploration)
	Attention, ce site est en cours de développement ! Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts. Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

Le SIDA en Afrique subsaharienne (serveur d'exploration)

On Articulating Marginalization and Marginality

On Articulating Marginalization and Marginality

Source :

English descriptors

Links to Exploration step

Le document en format XML

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri