DOCSLIB.ORG

Postcoloniality and the Artifice of History: Who Speaks for "Indian" Pasts? Author(S): Dipesh Chakrabarty Reviewed Work(S): Source: Representations, No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Postcoloniality and the Artifice of History: Who Speaks for Postcoloniality and the Artifice of History: Who Speaks for "Indian" Pasts? Author(s): Dipesh Chakrabarty Reviewed work(s): Source: Representations, No. 37, Special Issue: Imperial Fantasies and Postcolonial Histories (Winter, 1992), pp. 1-26 Published by: University of California Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2928652 . Accessed: 31/07/2012 17:18 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Representations. http://www.jstor.org DIPESH CHAKRABARTY Postcoloniality and the Artificeof History: Who Speaks for "Indian" Pasts? Pushthought toextremes. -Louis Althusser I IT HAS RECENTLY BEEN SAID in praise of the postcolonial project of SubalternStudies that it demonstrates,"perhaps for the firsttime since coloniza- tion,"that "Indians are showingsustained signs of reappropriatingthe capacity to representthemselves [within the disciplineof history]."'As a historianwho is a member of the SubalternStudies collective, I findthe congratulationcontained in this remark gratifyingbut premature.The purpose of this articleis to prob- lematize the idea of "Indians" "representingthemselves in history."Let us put aside for the momentthe messyproblems of identityinherent in a transnational enterprisesuch as SubalternStudies, where passports and commitmentsblur the distinctionsof ethnicityin a manner thatsome would regard as characteristically postmodern.I have a more perverseproposition to argue. It is thatinsofar as the academic discourse of history-that is, "history"as a discourse produced at the institutionalsite of the university-isconcerned, "Europe" remainsthe sovereign, theoreticalsubject of all histories,including the ones we call "Indian," "Chinese," "Kenyan," and so on. There is a peculiar way in which all these other histories tend to become variationson a masternarrative that could be called "the history of Europe." In this sense, "Indian" historyitself is in a position of subalternity; one can only articulatesubaltern subject positions in the name of thishistory. While the restof thisarticle will elaborate on thisproposition, let me enter a few qualifications."Europe" and "India" are treated here as hyperrealterms in that they refer to certain figuresof imaginationwhose geographical referents remain somewhatindeterminate.2 As figuresof the imaginarythey are, of course, subjectto contestation,but forthe momentI shall treatthem as thoughthey were given,reified categories, opposites paired in a structureof dominationand sub- ordination. I realize thatin treatingthem thus I leave myselfopen to the charge of nativism,nationalism, or worse, the sin of sins, nostalgia. Liberal-minded scholarswould immediatelyprotest that any idea of a homogeneous, uncontested REPRESENTATIONS 37 * Winter 1992 ? THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIF9RNIA "Europe" dissolves under analysis. True, but just as the phenomenon of orien- talismdoes not disappear simplybecause some of us have now attained a critical awareness of it,similarly a certainversion of "Europe," reifiedand celebrated in the phenomenal world of everydayrelationships of power as the scene of the birthof the modern,continues to dominatethe discourseof history.Analysis does not make it go away. That Europe worksas a silentreferent in historicalknowledge itself becomes obvious in a highlyordinary way. There are at least two everydaysymptoms of the subalternityof non-Western,third-world histories. Third-world historians feel a need to refer to works in European history;historians of Europe do not feel any need to reciprocate.Whether it is an Edward Thompson, a Le Roy La- durie, a George Duby,a Carlo Ginzberg,a Lawrence Stone, a RobertDarnton, or a Natalie Davis-to take but a few names at random from our contemporary world-the "greats"and the models of the historian'senterprise are alwaysat least culturally"European." "They" produce theirwork in relativeignorance of non- Westernhistories, and thisdoes not seem to affectthe qualityof theirwork. This is a gesture,however, that "we" cannot return.We cannot even affordan equality or symmetryof ignorance at thislevel withouttaking the riskof appearing "old- fashioned" or "outdated." The problem, I may add in parenthesis,is not particularto historians.An unselfconsciousbut neverthelessblatant example of this"inequality of ignorance" in literarystudies, for example, is the followingsentence on Salman Rushdie from a recent text on postmodernism:"Though Saleem Sinai [of Midnight'sChildren] narratesin English ... his intertextsfor both writinghistory and writingfiction are doubled: theyare, on the one hand, fromIndian legends,films, and literature and, on the other,from the West-The Tin Drum,Tristram Shandy, One Hundred Yearsof Solitude, and so on."3 It is interestingto note how thissentence teases out onlythose referencesthat are from"the West." The author is under no obligation here to be able to name withany authorityand specificitythe "Indian" allusions that make Rushdie's intertexuality"doubled." This ignorance, shared and unstated,is part of the assumed compact thatmakes it "easy" to include Rushdie in English departmentofferings on postcolonialism. This problem of asymmetricignorance is not simplya matterof "cultural cringe" (to let my Australianself speak) on our part or of culturalarrogance on the part of the European historian.These problems exist but can be relatively easilyaddressed. Nor do I mean to take anythingaway fromthe achievementsof the historiansI mentioned. Our footnotesbear rich testimonyto the insightswe have derived fromtheir knowledge and creativity.The dominance of "Europe" as the subject of all historiesis a part of a much more profound theoreticalcon- dition under which historicalknowledge is produced in the third world. This 2 REPRESENTATIONS condition ordinarilyexpresses itselfin a paradoxical manner. It is this paradox that I shall describe as the second everydaysymptom of our subalternity,and it refersto the verynature of social science pronouncementsthemselves. For generationsnow, philosophers and thinkersshaping the nature of social science have produced theoriesembracing the entiretyof humanity.As we well know,these statementshave been produced in relative,and sometimesabsolute, ignorance of the majorityof humankind-i.e., those livingin non-Westerncul- tures. This in itselfis not paradoxical, for the more self-consciousof European philosophershave alwayssought theoreticallyto justify this stance. The everyday paradox of third-worldsocial scienceis thatwe find these theories, in spiteof their inherent ignorance of "us," eminentlyuseful in understanding our societies. What allowed the modern European sages to develop such clairvoyancewith regard to societiesof whichthey were empiricallyignorant? Why cannot we, once again, returnthe gaze? There is an answer to thisquestion in the writingsof philosopherswho have read into European historyan entelechyof universalreason, if we regard such philosophy as the self-consciousnessof social science. Only "Europe," the argu- ment would appear to be, is theoretically(i.e., at the level of the fundamentalcat- egories that shape historicalthinking) knowable; all other historiesare matters of empirical research that fleshes out a theoreticalskeleton which is substan- tially "Europe." There is one version of this argument in Edmund Husserl's Vienna lecture of 1935, where he proposed that the fundamental difference between "oriental philosophies" (more specifically,Indian and Chinese) and "Greek-European science" (or as he added, "universallyspeaking: philosophy") was the capacity of the latter to produce "absolute theoreticalinsights," that is "theoria"(universal science), while the formerretained a "practical-universal,"and hence "mythical-religious,"character. This "practical-universal"philosophy was directedto the world in a "naive" and "straightforward"manner, while the world presented itselfas a "thematic"to theoria,making possible a praxis "whose aim is to elevate mankind throughuniversal scientific reason."4 A rather similar epistemologicalproposition underlies Marx's use of cate- gories like "bourgeois" and "prebourgeois" or "capital" and "precapital." The prefixpre here signifiesa relationshipthat is both chronologicaland theoretical. The coming of the bourgeois or capitalistsociety, Marx argues in the Grundrisse and elsewhere, gives rise for the firsttime to a historythat can be apprehended through a philosophical and universalcategory, "capital." Historybecomes, for the firsttime, theoretically knowable. All past historiesare now to be known (the- oretically,that is) fromthe vantage point of thiscategory, that is in termsof their differencesfrom it. Things reveal theircategorical essence onlywhen theyreach theirfullest development, or as Marx put itin thatfamous aphorism of the Grund- risse:"Human anatomycontains the keyto theanatomy of theape."5 The category "capital,"as I have discussed elsewhere,contains within itself the legal subject of WhoSpeaks for "Indian" Pasts? 3 Enlightenmentthought.6 Not surprisingly,Marx
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Provincializing Europe
    This content downloaded from 136.167.3.36 on Tue, 11 Dec 2018 02:40:59 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms PROVINCIALIZING EUROPE POSTCOLONIAL THOUGHT AND HISTORICAL DIFFERENCE With a new preface by the author Dipesh Chakrabarty PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS PRINCETON AND OXFORD This content downloaded from 136.167.3.36 on Tue, 11 Dec 2018 02:40:59 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Copyright © 2000 by Princeton University Press Published by Princeton University Press, 41 William Street, Princeton, New Jersey 08540 In the United Kingdom: Princeton University Press, 3 Market Place, Woodstock, Oxfordshire OX20 1SY All Rights Reserved Reissue, with a new preface by the author, 2008 ISBN 978-0-691-13001-9 The Library of Congress cataloged the original edition of this book as follows Chakrabarty, Dipesh. Provincializing Europe : postcolonial thought and historical difference / Dipesh Chakrabarty. p. cm. — (Princeton studies in culture/power/history) Includes bibliographical references and index ISBN 0-691-04908-4 (alk. paper)—ISBN 0-691-04909-2 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Historiography—Europe. 2. Europe—History—Philosophy. 3. Eurocentrism. 4. India—Historiography. 5. Decolonization. I. Title. II. Series. D13.5. E85 C43 2000 901—dc21 99-087722 British Library Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available This book has been composed in Sabon Printed on acid-free paper. ∞ press.princeton.edu Printed in the United States of America 1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2 This content downloaded from 136.167.3.36 on Tue, 11 Dec 2018 02:40:59 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms For Anne, Fiona, Robin Debi, Gautam, Shiloo IN FRIENDSHIP This content downloaded from 136.167.3.36 on Tue, 11 Dec 2018 02:40:59 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Contents Preface to the 2007 Edition ix Acknowledgments xxiii Introduction: The Idea of Provincializing Europe 3 PART ONE: HISTORICISM AND THE NARRATION OF MODERNITY Chapter 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Making a World After Empire: the Bandung Moment and Its Political Afterlives
    1 Th e Legacies of Bandung Decolonization and the Politics of Culture Dipesh Chakrabarty The urge to decolonize, to be rid of the colonizer in every pos- sible way, was internal to all anticolonial criticism aft er the end of World War I. Postcolonial critics of our times, on the other hand, have emphasized how the colonial situation produced forms of hybridity or mimicry that necessarily escaped the Manichean logic of the colonial encounter.1 It is not only this intellectual shift that separates anticolo- nial and postcolonial criticism. Th e two genres have also been sepa- rated by the political geographies and histories of their origins. Aft er all, the demand for political and intellectual decolonization arose mainly in the colonized countries among the intellectuals of antico- lonial movements. Postcolonial writing and criticism, on the other hand, was born in the West. Th ey were infl uenced by anticolonial criticism but their audiences were at the beginning in the West itself, for these writings have been an essential part of the struggle to make the liberal-capitalist (and, initially, mainly Anglo-American) West- ern democracies more democratic with respect to their immigrant, minority, and indigenous—though there have been tensions between these groups—populations. Race has thus fi gured as a category cen- tral to postcolonial criticism whereas its position in anticolonial 45 discourse varies. Th e question of race is crucial to the formulations of Fanon, Césaire, or C. L. R. James, for example, but it is not as cen- tral to how a Gandhi or a Tagore thought about colonial domination.
    [Show full text]
  • Provincializing Europe
    PROVINCIALIZING EUROPE POSTCOLONIAL THOUGHT AND HISTORICAL DIFFERENCE Dipesh Chakrabarty Copyright 2000 by Princeton University Press Published by Princeton University Press, 41 William Street, Princeton, New Jersey 08540 In the United Kingdom: Princeton University Press, 3 Market Place, Woodstock, Oxfordshire OX20 1SY All Rights Reserved. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Chakrabarty, Dipesh. Provincializing Europe : postcolonial thought and historical difference / Dipesh Chakrabarty. p. cm. Ð (Princeton studies in culture/power/history) Includes bibliographical references and index ISBN 0-691-04908-4 (alk. paper)ÐISBN 0-691-04909-2 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. HistoriographyÐEurope. 2. EuropeÐHistoryÐPhilosophy. 3. Eurocentrism. 4. IndiaÐHistoriography. 5. Decolonization. I. Title. II. Series. D13.5. E85 C43 2000 901Ðdc21 99-087722 This book has been composed in Sabon The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (R1997) (Permanence of Paper) www.pup.princeton.edu Printed in the United States of America 13579108642 13579108642 (Pbk) Contents Acknowledgments ix Introduction: The Idea of Provincializing Europe 3 PART ONE: HISTORICISM AND THE NARRATION OF MODERNITY Chapter 1. Postcoloniality and the Arti®ce of History 27 Chapter 2. The Two Histories of Capital 47 Chapter 3. Translating Life-Worlds into Labor and History 72 Chapter 4. Minority Histories, Subaltern Pasts 97 PART TWO: HISTORIES OF BELONGING Chapter 5. Domestic Cruelty and the Birth of the Subject 117 Chapter 6. Nation and Imagination 149 Chapter 7. Adda: A History of Sociality 180 Chapter 8. Family, Fraternity, and Salaried Labor 214 Epilogue. Reason and the Critique of Historicism 237 Notes 257 Index 299 INTRODUCTION The Idea of Provincializing Europe Europe...since 1914 has become provincialized,..
    [Show full text]
  • MLQ065-03 01-Fuchs.Pdf by Guest on 27 September 2021 330 MLQ September 2004
    The Postcolonial Past Barbara Fuchs and David J. Baker When? istoricism is the belief,” says Maurice Mandelbaum, “that an ade- Hquate understanding of the nature of any phenomenon and an adequate assessment of its value are to be gained through considering it in terms of the place it occupied and the role it played within a process of development.”1 But, says Dipesh Chakrabarty in Provincializ- ing Europe, when this belief was applied to “non-European peoples in the nineteenth century,” it often amounted to a way of saying “not yet” to them (8). The “process of development” that had brought the colo- nizers to power was exclusively a European process, these peoples were told. It had a “unity” from which non-Europeans were excluded (6)— indefinitely, in practice. Today, Chakrabarty says, as we consider the sit- uation of places such as “postcolonial India,” we need to move away from the view that the present is connected to the past by “a ceaseless unfolding of unitary historical time” (15). Instead, we should see that “historical time is not integral, that it is out of joint with itself” (16). In this way, we can at least begin to (re)imagine a history that is “radically heterogeneous” (46). This special issue of MLQ is a forum for histori- cal inquiry into the condition we now know as “postcoloniality,” but it has not been assembled as an exercise in historicism, at least not of the kind that Mandelbaum means. It brings together scholars of several 1 Quoted in Dipesh Chakrabarty, Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000), 22.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2014-2015
    ANNUAL REPORT 2014-2015 CENTRE FOR STUDIES IN SOCIAL SCIENCES, CALCUTTA R-1 Baishnabghata-Patuli Township, Kolkata 700 094 Centre For Studies In Social Sciences, Calcutta Annual Report 2014-2015 CONTENTS Pages 1. Director's Note 5 2. List of Members of the Board of Governors / 11 List of Faculty Members / List of Administrative Staff 3. Research Projects – Completed and On-going 17 4. Academic Activities of Faculty Members 21 5. Teaching Programmes and Students' Enrollment Lists 69 6. Academic Events 83 7. Archive and Library 109 8. Centre for Training and Research in Public 112 Finance and Policy (CTRPFP) 9. Jadunath Bhavan Museum & Resource Centre 120 (JBM&RC) 10. Oral History Project 11. Affiliation to Scholars from other Academic Institutions 123 and Institutional Collaboration 12. Statement of Accounts 125 [Photographs of publications by CSSSC's faculty members and photographs of important events of CSSSC are available on our website : www.cssscal.org] 5 Director's Note Established on February 1, 1973, the Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, Calcutta (CSSSC), is nationally and internationally recognised as a premier research institution of the Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR). Over the past four decades, the institution has kept going its reputation as a key centre in the promotion and advancement of research and teaching in the humanities and different social sciences disciplines. Over the years, the disciplines and areas of research represented at the CSSSC have significantly diversified to include cultural studies, gender studies, performance studies, and development and environmental studies alongside its continuing older strengths in the fields of history, politics and economics.
    [Show full text]
  • Postcolonial Studies by Harald Fischer-Tiné
    Postcolonial Studies by Harald Fischer-Tiné "Postcolonial studies" denotes a loosely defined inter-disciplinary field of perspectives, theories and methods that deal with the non-material dimensions of colonial rule and, at the same time, postulates the deconstruction of colonial dis- courses and thought patterns that continue to exert an influence up into the present. One of the reasons for the impor- tance of this current for European history is that its adherents define colonialism as a cluster of reciprocal relationships that has shaped not only the colonised regions, but also the European metropole. In addition, the nuanced methodologi- cal and theoretical apparatus developed by "postcolonial studies" to describe and analyse asymmetrical power constel- lations and hierarchical modes of representation in colonial contexts can also be transferred to primarily internal Euro- pean questions (for example, gender relationships or class conflicts). TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Postcolonialism avant la lettre 3. The Formation of Postcolonial Views since 1980 4. Postcolonial Studies and the History of Europe 5. Appendix 1. Bibliography 2. Notes Citation Introduction For decades, the scholarly study of European colonialism (ᇄ Media Link #ab) remained largely confined to its political, military and economic dimensions. The strategies and practices of conquest, rule and economic exploitation were the preferred topics for historians investigating the European penetration of the world in the 19th and early 20th centuries. In addition, well into the second half of the 20th century, numerous studies appeared which – in a continuation of late-imperial rhetoric – investigated the "development" of colonised regions, that is the more or less successful transfer of Western ideologies (nationalism, liberalism, socialism, etc.), institutions and technologies to the non-western world.
    [Show full text]
  • Postcolonialism Cross-Examined
    Postcolonialism Cross-Examined Taking a strikingly interdisciplinary and global approach, Postcolonialism Cross-Examined reflects on the current status of postcolonial studies and attempts to break through traditional boundaries, creating a truly comparative and genuinely global phenomenon. Drawing together the field of mainstream postcolonial studies with post-Soviet postcolonial studies and studies of the late Ottoman Empire, the contributors in this volume question many of the concepts and assumptions we have become accustomed to in postcolonial studies, creating a fresh new version of the field. The volume calls the merits of the field into question, investigating how postcolonial studies may have perpetuated and normalized colonialism as an issue exclusive to Western colonial and imperial powers. The volume is the first to open a dialogue between three different areas of postcolonial scholarship that previously developed independently from one another: • the wide field of postcolonial studies working on European colonialism, • the growing field of post-Soviet postcolonial/post-imperial studies, • the still fledgling field of post-Ottoman postcolonial/post-imperial studies, supported by sideways glances at the multidirectional conditions of interaction in East Africa and the East and West Indies. Postcolonialism Cross-Examined looks at topics such as humanism, nationalism, multiculturalism, nostalgia, and the Anthropocene in order to piece together a new, broader vision for postcolonial studies in the twenty-first century. By including territories other than those covered by the postcolonial mainstream, the book strives to reframe the “postcolonial” as a genuinely global phenomenon and develop multidirectional postcolonial perspectives. Monika Albrecht is Professor of literary and cultural studies (apl. Prof.) at the University of Vechta, Germany.
    [Show full text]
  • The Climate of History: Four Theses Author(S): Dipesh Chakrabarty Source: Critical Inquiry, Vol
    The Climate of History: Four Theses Author(s): Dipesh Chakrabarty Source: Critical Inquiry, Vol. 35, No. 2 (Winter 2009), pp. 197-222 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/596640 Accessed: 18-12-2017 11:01 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Critical Inquiry This content downloaded from 35.176.47.6 on Mon, 18 Dec 2017 11:01:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms The Climate of History: Four Theses Dipesh Chakrabarty The current planetary crisis of climate change or global warming elicits a variety of responses in individuals, groups, and governments, ranging from denial, disconnect, and indifference to a spirit of engagement and activism of varying kinds and degrees. These responses saturate our sense of the now. Alan Weisman’s best-selling book The World without Us sug- gests a thought experiment as a way of experiencing our present: “Suppose that the worst has happened. Human extinction is a fait accompli.... Picture a world from which we all suddenly vanished....Might we have left some faint, enduring mark on the universe?...Isitpossible that, instead of heaving a huge biological sigh of relief, the world without us would miss us?”1 I am drawn to Weisman’s experiment as it tellingly dem- onstrates how the current crisis can precipitate a sense of the present that disconnects the future from the past by putting such a future beyond the grasp of historical sensibility.
    [Show full text]
  • Subject Index
    Economic and Political Weekly INDEX Vol XLIV Nos 1-52 January-December 2009 Ed = Editorial MMR = Money Market Review F = Features SA = Special Article CL = Civil Liberties D = Discussion C = Commentary SS = Special Statistics P = Perspective LE = Letter to Editor BR = Book Review SUBJECT INDEX ACCIDENTAL DEATHS AFGHANISTAN-PAKISTAN RELATIONS Dead Man Walking; (Ed) The New Great Game in Afghanistan and Issue no: 33, Aug 15-21 Pakistan; Sajjad Aasim Akhtar (P) Issue no: 01, Jan 03-09 Road Traffic Crashes: The Scourge of UP's Cities; Sanjay K Singh (C) AFRICA Issue no: 48, Nov 28-Dec 4 Quiet Flows the Blood; (Ed) Issue no: 08, Feb 21-27 ADOPTION The Business and Ethics of Surrogacy; AGRARIAN RELATIONS Imrana Qadeer and Mary E John (C) The Crisis of the Left; Prabhat Patnaik Issue no: 02, Jan 10-16 (P) Issue no: 44, Oct 31-Nov 6 ADOPTION LAW The Business and Ethics of Surrogacy; Harvest of Despair; Archana Aggarwal Imrana Qadeer and Mary E John (C) (BR) Issue no: 02, Jan 10-16 Issue no: 29, Jul 18-24 AFGHANISTAN On Women Surviving Farmer Suicides in Afghanistan: Beyond the 'Surge' Strategy; Punjab; Ranjana Padhi (SA) (Ed) Issue no: 19, May 09-15 Issue no: 50, Dec 12-18 AGRIBUSINESS Afghanistan: Which Way Now?; (Ed) Unfair Minimum Support Price; Kripa Shankar Issue no: 45, Nov 7-13 (LE) Issue no: 51, Dec 19-25 Descent into `Democratic' Chaos; (Ed) Issue no: 36, Sep 05-11 AGRICULTURAL COSTS Peasant Classes under Neoliberalism: A Islam, Muslims and Ethnicity; Balraj Puri Class Analysis of Two States; Arindam (C) Banerjee (SA) Issue no: 17, Apr
    [Show full text]
  • Arnab Dey Associate Professor Department of History Library
    Arnab Dey Associate Professor Department of History Library Tower 803 State University of New York (SUNY) at Binghamton Binghamton, New York NY 13902-6000 Phone: +1 607.777.6716 Fax: +1 607.777.2896 [email protected] Visiting Scholar South Asia Program Mario Einaudi Center for International Studies 170 Uris Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 [email protected] Education Ph.D. Department of History, and department of South Asian Languages and Civilizations, University of Chicago, 2012 M.A. University of Chicago, 2007 M.Phil. University of Delhi, India, 2004 M.A. University of Delhi, India, 2002 B.A. Honors St. Stephen’s College, University of Delhi, India, 2000 Updated, July 2021 Publications MONOGRAPH (SINGLE-AUTHOR) Tea Environments and Plantation Culture: Imperial Disarray in Eastern India (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2018) The Bernard S. Cohn Book Prize 2020, Association for Asian Studies, Ann Arbor: Michigan, USA (Nominated) Reviews: Environmental History, The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Choice Reviews (American Library Association), The English Historical Review (forthcoming) Paperback edition: published June 2021; South Asia edition (forthcoming, 2021-22) ARTICLES (PEER-REVIEWED) ‘Planting “Improvement”: Tea in British India,’ Österreichische Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaften (Austrian Journal of Historical Studies), Vol. 30, No. 3 (2019): 63-89. ‘Diseased Plantations: Law and the Political Economy of Health in Assam, 1860-1920,’ Modern Asian Studies, 52, no. 2 (2018): 645-82. ‘Bugs in the Garden: Tea Plantations and Environmental Constraints in Eastern India (Assam), 1840-1910,’ Environment and History, 21.2 (November 2015): 537-65. INVITED BOOK CHAPTERS (PEER REVIEWED) ‘Labor History and “Culture” Critique: Reflections on an Idea,’ in Saurabh Dube, Sanjay Seth, and Ajay Skaria, eds., Dipesh Chakrabarty and the Global South: Subaltern Studies, Postcolonial Politics, and the Anthropocene (London: Routledge, 2019), pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Destiny, Agency, and Adaptation: Climate Change from a Historical Perspective
    Seton Hall University eRepository @ Seton Hall Symposium in Comparative History Department of History 2-12-2021 Destiny, Agency, and Adaptation: Climate Change from a Historical Perspective Seton Hall University, Department of History Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.shu.edu/history-symposium Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Seton Hall University, Department of History, "Destiny, Agency, and Adaptation: Climate Change from a Historical Perspective" (2021). Symposium in Comparative History. 7. https://scholarship.shu.edu/history-symposium/7 Destiny, Agency, and Adaptation Climate Change from a Historical Perspective A virtual keynote lecture and roundtable Event is free and open to public. Join the live event: Go to Link FRIDAY, 12 FEBRUARY 2021 1:00-3:00PM Department of History Seton Hall University Destiny, Agency, and Adaptation: Climate Change from a Historical Perspective 1:00-3:00pm, Friday, 12 February 2021 PROGRAM 1:00-2:00pm—Keynote Lecture and Q&A Dipesh Chakrabarty (Lawrence A. Kimpton Distinguished Service Professor of History, South Asian Languages and Civilizations, and the College at the University of Chicago) “Scale and Agency in the Anthropocene” Questions of scale have been at the heart of humanist debates on Climate Change and the Anthropocene. My lecture will touch on the history of historians' concern with human agency and discuss how older historiographical practices are being challenged by recent post-humanist calls for attention to agency as something distributed between humans and nonhumans and to the role nonhumans play in shaping human history. 2:00-3:00pm—Roundtable Discussion Roundtable Participants: - Dipesh Chakrabarty (Lawrence A. Kimpton Distinguished Service Professor of History, South Asian Languages and Civilizations, and the College at the University of Chicago) - Deborah R.
    [Show full text]
  • Minor Archives, Meta Histories GLASS Faculty Roundtable
    Minor archives, meta histories GLASS Faculty Roundtable Chair and Moderator Ethan Mark Panellists Dipesh Chakrabarty Nira Wickramasinghe Ksenia Robbe Wayne Modest Práticas da História, n.º 3 (2016): 93-124 This article is part of the issue “The archive and the subaltern”, edited by Carolien Stolte and António Rego. www.praticasdahistoria.pt Minor archives, meta histories GLASS Faculty Roundtable On 16 October 2015 in Leiden University Chair and Moderator Ethan Mark (LIAS - Japan Studies, Leiden) Panellists Dipesh Chakrabarty (History, Chicago) Nira Wickramasinghe (LIAS - Modern South Asia, Leiden) Ksenia Robbe (LUCAS - Literary Studies, Leiden) Wayne Modest (Research Centre for Material Culture) Dipesh Chakrabarty (DC): The problem of minor histories or ‘sub- altern pasts’ came to me and my colleagues in subaltern studies be- cause, as we explored the role of Indian peasants in nationalist mobili- sation, it became very clear that someone like [Mahatma] Gandhi was understood by peasants through rumours that circulated about him. All those circulated rumours, which one of my colleagues studied, clear- ly showed that people were ascribing to Gandhi the sort of powers that they would ascribe to local gods and goddesses. In the Hindu hierarchy there are gods with all India jurisdictions and all-subject jurisdictions, and they can basically decide your fate on anything. Then, there are specialised minor gods – somebody who is in charge of cholera, some- 94 Dipesh Chakrabarty et al body who is in charge of smallpox – and Gandhi was given the power of minor gods in these rumours. He was assimilated to some under- standing of powers of intervention that local gods and goddesses had.
    [Show full text]