Subaltern Studies and Postcolonial Historiography

Authors

  • Author

  • Dipesh Chakrabarty

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12816/0024965

Keywords:

Capitalism, Peasant rebellions, Ruling classes, History from below, Cambridge School, Marxism, History of India

Abstract

The author focuses on Subaltern Studies, and pays particular attention to Neo-Marxist Ranajit Guha, widely credited wish establishing this field. The author further argues that subaltern studies would escape the confines of Marxism and would found itself inescapably linked with post-colonial studies. This, suggests the paper, means that subaltern studies in fact surpassed a tradition of writing "history from below", which had been pioneered by British Marxist writers. It instead had a post-colonial view, linked to Edward Said’s critique of orientalism, as well as to Homi Bhabha’s discourse analysis and Gayatri Spivak’s ideas. From its onset, Subaltern Studies has asked questions about the methods of writing history, and separated inevitably from the traditional English Marxist method of chronicling working-class history. While Subaltern Studies indeed descended from this tradition, it quickly became a critique of the academic field of history.

References

  1. Guha and Spivak 1988 ; Cusicanqui and Barragán 1998 ; Chatterjee and Bhadra 1997 ; Amin and Pandey 1996. "Marxism and Modern India," in Alan Ryan 1992 , 79 - 84.
  2. Pandey 1978 ; Siddiqi 1978 ; Kumar 1984 ; Arnold 1977 ; Sanyal 1994 ; and Hardiman 1981 ;
  3. Antonio Gramsci, "Notes on Italian History" (1973).
4Total citations
3From ACRPS journals
1External sources

Published

2016-01-01

Usage statistics

48 views 68 downloads

Issue

Section

Translations