Introduction: Irish–Scottish Crosscurrents: Towards an Archipelagic Subaltern Aesthethics
Notes Introduction: Irish–Scottish Crosscurrents: Towards an Archipelagic Subaltern AesthEthics 1. For a detailed engagement with Levinas in relation to and through the liter- ary, see Robbins (1999). See also Kearney (2002). 2. While Ireland’s current economic woes indeed ‘poke a hole’ into Salmond’s ‘arc of prosperity’, as Iain Gray, the leader of the Scottish Labour Party, suggests, Alan Cochrane (2010: n.p.) notes that instead of evoking Ireland, Salmond nowadays responds by substituting ‘Norway as the country he would much rather discuss’. See also Alex Salmond (2010) interviewed on ‘The Andrew Marr Show’. 3. See, for example, Jim Smyth (2005) for a nuanced comparative analysis of Irish and Scottish unionism before and after 1921. See also Walker (1995). 4. See Edward Said’s (1984: 16–20) distinction between filiation and affiliation as taken up by Kelly (2005a: 15), who argues that the way in which national (and, by extension, postnational) ideologies are constructed around filiative, supposedly natural forms of relationships (whose paradigm is the family), is designated to obscure the complex web of affiliations that exist along the lines of class, gender, etc. 5. For a detailed study of Gramsci’s conception of the state, see Buci- Glucksmann (1980). 6. For an astute critique of Spivak’s (mis)reading of Marx, see Larsen (2002). 7. In a later interview, Spivak (in Landry and MacLean 1996: 292) has explained that the dire conclusion of her essay refers to its implication in a speech act, which consists of both ‘speaking and hearing’. That means, according to Spivak, ‘that even when the subaltern makes an effort to speak, she is not able to be heard’.
[Show full text]