Bhabha

"So far, I think I do get his central thoughts, at least has he has expressed himself in the Preface and Introduction (and the first part of Chapter 1)."

Yes, although I'm far from done with this book and it may well yet surprise me, it does seem that once you've read the Preface and Intro you've gotten his message and he's simply expanding it thereafter.

I like to imagine this book as being narrated by John Cleese as I read.

Nathan

Lost in Space, or Who’s on Third

“We should remember that it is the inter - - the cutting edge of translation and negotiation, the inbetween space - - the carries the burden of the meaning of culture” (Bhabha 56).


Somewhere between the speaker and the addressee meaning occurs. I think that was coming from Bordieu: the assumption that what I have to say is worth hearing and that the person to whom I am speaking is worthy of hearing it. It is not only my words and my intentions that give the utterance meaning, but the person to whom I am speaking.
I believe there is “a there there,” a meaning that is the “true” meaning, although I am not sure that if it is there or not is of any real importance at all. The interpretation is of more importance than what is being interpreted. I believe how we interpret the world, whether it is there or not, occurs somewhere between what I see and what everyone else sees. In an astrophysics class as an undergraduate, the professor described how the moon only appears to revolve around the earth. In fact, the earth and moon each revolved around a common point; it was just that the point around which they both revolved was inside the earth, not the center of the earth, but inside off center somewhere, that made it appear that the moon revolved around the earth. The same was true of any stellar bodies; the one with the greater mass was closer to the center point, often encompassing the center point. This is how I see the socially-constructed interpretation of reality- - the group with the most mass, or power, is closer to the point of revolution, yet it is still not the center. We all have an influence in how the world is viewed, yet not an equal or just influence. Somewhere in this astronomical, (starry-eyed?) tangent, I think is an analogy to Bhabha’s “third space of enunciations which (he) has made the precondition for the articulation of cultural difference” (Bhabha 56). It is not the hegemonic culture, nor The Other that makes the meaning of culture but the dynamic space between the two. Each of the polarities need the other for the meaning they give themselves, yet the meaning for the whole comes about in the liminal space between the two.

Werewolves Live Close to the Border

It's as if;
Metamorphosis:
in probability,
improbability
to transformulate.
Translate the form;
refine, define
the infinite:
cross boundries- - -
land to land a step,
the word changes.
Is metaphor logic,
being different,
irregular when compared
like it's as if?
Similiar to, yet
dissimiliar enough
to a simile to
name names like
It's as if.



In lieu of a real post I leave this.

Coincidentally I ran across a clipping (NYT 17 Nov) I had filed away in my mestizaje (aka hybridity) materials back in 2001. Subtitle: Do Any of Homi K. Bhabha's Devoted Disciples Know What He's Talking About? Marjorie Perloff, emeritus professor at Stanford said, "he doesn't have anything to say."

So far, I think I do get his central thoughts, at least has he has expressed himself in the Preface and Introduction (and the first part of Chapter 1).

As far as I can make out, it helped me to read his work more like poetry than prose...and I take each page as a poem, letting it evoke a central idea--hybridity.

I had no idea that my own work on mestizaje (Latin American and Mexican cultural blending between the Spanish and Indigenous - and also between Anglo and Mexican in the borderlands) would parallel this so much. I realize there are no new ideas, but the figure I am working with did his writing in the 70s. This is what I see Bhabha saying: Essentially, new peoples and cultures are born at every encounter between 'others'. This cultural space is a location of renewal, liberation, creativity, and power.

Favorite part so far: The prostitute penis pocket poem about religious identity. Who am I?

Enough for now.

Pjk, I detect a certain evolution in your argument........ which I agree with but struggle with since I am guilty of the same "evolution" you describe. Why do we expect this sacrifice only of our artists? Why do we not expect the same from ourselves in our daily lives. I completely agree with the analysis that mediocrity often results from our caving to outside pressure and am cognizant of it every single day. I see the same thing in art though, especially your last point about being overly concerned with how they are viewed or received. It may not be fair to ask of them what we ourselves are unwilling to do. Artists seem to be especially exposed to this pressure since their very livelihood depends on this acceptance. That's the same pressure that leads us to change the way we teach or write our dissertations. (Though never having even come close to writing one I would like to think that I would resist such urges) I haven't read more than a paragraph of our book yet, got it today, and I hope that is one of the things we get some insight into. I hate thinking of myself as a product of this culture but there seems to be no denying it. "We are the hollow men, the stuffed men...." I have a feeling I may be out of my league but I will proceed as if I am not. I enjoyed your first remarks and look forward to more.

Book Arrived

My book finally arrived yesterday.

I always like the way that used books have a distinct extra olfactory component (in addition to factory-supplied book smell).
(at no additional charge)

This is a silly thing to start with but I will go ahead. The second PPG of the acknowledgments comments that "the evolution of this book owes ...". I always find the artistic use of that term a bit fascinating.

The majority of what we do professionally is the product of our impetus mixed with exogenous pressures. Sometimes more of the former wins, sometimes the latter. In the case where pressure from outside directs the flow, content, feel, purpose, or impact of something we create ... then that work has truly evolved in the scientific meaning of the word. The parts of the work that have survived this outside pressure have emerged and likely gained more dominance. This can be content or style. For example, I long ago had to learn that in scientific writing exposition of this very nature is not allowed; strongly frowned upon. Thus, my dissertation at the time evolved in response to the external pressure of expectations.

Great, so all I have said is that work often does respond to external pressure and expectations and in that sense does evolve.

But should art?

I have always thought that art is the one domain that should resist external pressures. Expectations often lead to mediocrity; a state of the union where everything is distilled down to a common form that is neither glorious nor horrible. We look for glory and horror in art, however, and should thus encourage artists in some ways to not let their work evolve unless the pressure comes from them. Even this is tricky as pressure directed at work from only the artist can easily be the byproduct of their perception of external pressure, insecurity, and a desire for acceptance.

Thus, I'd like to read a prologue or hear the opening lyrics to an album someday be: This work has not evolved. Deal with it.

That's all I have for now.

Pjk