Bhabha, hybridity and identity

Textual Practice

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 341-348

  Easthope, Antony ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Bhabha; Hybridity; Identity; Postcolonial theor

Indexed keywords

EID: 61249686420     PISSN: 0950236X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09502369808582312     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Homi Bhabha, 'Difference, discrimination and the discourse of colonialism', in Francis Barker, Peter Hulme, Margaret Iversen and Diana Loxley, ed. The Politics of Theory (Essex: University of Essex, 1983), p. 200. This essay is not reprinted in The Location of Culture.
2. Robert Young, White Mythologies (London: Roudedge, 1990), p. 147.
3. Homi Bhabha, The Location of Culture (London and New York: Routledge, 1994); all page references are to this edition.
4. See Robert Young, 'Hybridity and diaspora', in Colonial Desire (London: Roudedge, 1995).
5. John Hutchinson and Anthony D. Smith, Introduction, in Hutchinson and Smith, ed. Ethnicity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), p. 4.
6. Alan Sinfield, 'Diaspora and hybridity: queer identities and the ethnicity model'. Textual Practice, 10(2) (summer 1996), p. 278.
7. At a price: as Ania Loomba points out, the colonial subject in Bhabha's work 'is remarkably free of gender, class, caste or other distinctions'; see 'Over- working the "Third World'", Oxford Literary Review, 13 (1991), p. 182.
8. Jacques Derrida, 'Différance', in Writing and Difference, trans Alan Bass (Brighton: Harvester, 1982), p. 22.
9. See Young, White Mythologies, pp. 149-52.
10. Jacques Lacan, Ecrits, trans Alan Sheridan (London: Tavistock, 1977), p. 27.
11. A debate such as that provoked recently by David Miller, for example, who makes a strong and detailed argument that, in the conditions of modernity, nation represents the most positive drive towards democracy actually on offer; see On Nationality (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995).
12. See Ernesto Laclau, '"The time is out of joint'". Diacritics, 23(2) (summer 1995), p. 93: 'Precisely because of the undecidability inherent in constitutive openness, ethico-political moves different from or even opposite to a "to come" can be made - for instance, since there is ultimate undecidability and, as a result no immanent tendency of the structure to closure and full presence, closure has to be artificially brought about from the outside. In that way a case for totalitarianism can be presented starting from deconstructionist premises.'