To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Concepts of ‘appropriation’ have been discussed for several decades, in a variety of disciplines from art history to sociology. This chapter is primarily concerned with the relevance of appropriation as a category of historical research. Based on the history of everyday life and postcolonial theory, the chapter addresses the resistant forms of an art of the weak as well as the repressive forms of ‘cultural appropriation’. In doing so it shows that the genealogy of appropriation is to be historicised, just as its application in turn serves to historicise past practices. A look at empirical case studies proves the analytical fruitfulness of appropriation.
In recent years, scholars of International Relations and the Middle East have increasingly argued that the region’s enduring colonial legacies render postcolonial theory not merely relevant but essential. This chapter contends that the relationship also works in the opposite direction: the Middle East has been central to the emergence and evolution of postcolonial thought. It traces the disciplinary and historical foundations of postcolonialism, outlines its key claims and limitations, and concludes with an analysis of Syria as an illustrative case of postcolonial inquiry in the Middle Eastern context.
‘Sexuality and the Irish Novel’ situates the work of Irish writers addressing sexuality in Irish fiction after about 1960 in the context of the final years of literary censorship in the Irish Republic. Around the time of Edna O’Brien’s Country Girls Trilogy (1960–4), a series of novels, including J. P. Donleavy’s The Ginger Man (1955), Anthony Cronin’s The Life of Riley (1964), and later John McGahern’s The Pornographer (1979), combine explorations of sexuality with experiments in literary form. In the case of Anthony C. West’s The Ferret Fancier (1963) and Julia O’Faolain’s Women in the Wall (1975), the exploration of sexuality involves combining the historical novel with the Bildungsroman, while Leland Bardwell’s Girl on a Bicycle (1977) strives for an embodied feminine consciousness. In each case, these novels explore sexual repression as a symptom not only of a postcolonial condition but also of the alienating tendencies of capitalist modernity.
In 2024, Belize marked the 130th anniversary of the Ancient Monuments Protection Ordinance of 1894, the nation’s first formal cultural heritage protection law. This ordinance laid the foundation for a comprehensive legal framework aimed at preserving Belize’s rich and diverse cultural heritage. Despite having one of the most extensive heritage protection systems in the Americas, Belize continues to face serious threats, including looting, theft, and vandalism. This legal milestone offers a critical moment for reflection on the evolution of heritage protection in the country. This article provides a historical analysis of Belize’s national and international legislative developments in heritage conservation. It also assesses the effectiveness of current heritage policies and highlights persistent challenges. Drawing from this evaluation, the study proposes strategic recommendations to enhance Belize’s capacity to safeguard its cultural and historical patrimony, ensuring its preservation for future generations amid ongoing threats and global heritage protection trends.
This chapter systematically moves through the key questions of critique as a mode of building and improving knowledge in the humanities. It surveys key works in the conversation in relation to a variety of critical conversations and traditions, relating the questions of critique to major projects and goals in the field.
This chapter discusses the issue of Holocaust distortion and relativization, particularly in the context of far-left ideologies and antisemitism. It explores how certain groups have attempted to reframe the Holocaust narrative to support their political agendas, often in ways that trivialize or distort historical reality. The text delves into specific examples, such as the Norwegian far-left newspaper Klassekampen, which published articles in the late 1970s claiming collaboration between Zionists and Nazis during World War II. These articles distorted historical facts to paint Zionists as complicit in the Holocaust, using selective quotations and misrepresentations to support their narrative. The chapter also examines the role of Soviet propaganda in shaping anti-Zionist and antisemitic narratives, which were then adopted and spread by far-left groups in other countries. It highlights how these narratives often blurred the lines between legitimate criticism of Israel and antisemitic conspiracy theories. The chapter looks at the impact of the American TV series Holocaust on public discourse and how it sparked debates about historical memory and responsibility.
Chapter 4 examines how absurdism becomes a postcolonial aesthetic. Beginning with The Thing (1960), likely the first absurdist play in the subcontinent, the chapter focuses on the East Pakistani playwrights Sayeed Ahmad and Syed Waliullah and their dramaturgical experiments, read as reflective of a widespread engagement with absurdism in almost all of the languages of the subcontinent. Beyond encounters with Samuel Beckett (and Ahmad’s writings on not only Albert Camus, Harold Pinter, and Eugene Ionesco but everything from Ousmane Sembène to Zen Buddhism and Kabuki theater), I argue that for Ahmad and Waliullah, the absurdist register makes available a new kind of political critique and, in its abstract, decoded language, creates space for the postcolonial moral inventory. The wild heteroaesthetica of these plays (itinerant flute players, clowns, stick games, decimation) mark a departure from available dramatic modes during a period of interregnum: after the Independence of Pakistan (1947) and before the Independence of Bangladesh (1971), the absurd suggests confusion, drowsiness, and waiting as forms of postcolonial being.
Spurred on in part by the large social justice mobilizations that began in 2020, recent years have seen growing calls for diversifying and decolonizing the disciplinary practices in the field of International Relations (IR). In response to these calls within the field and across academia more broadly, faculty and students in the Department of Political Studies at Queen’s University embarked on a project to produce a ‘Resource Bank’ highlighting and centring alternatives to Euro-American epistemologies, pedagogies, and ontologies that have thus far dominated the IR field. Drawing on our experiences as project managers of this Resource Bank project since its inception in 2021, we discuss some of the most salient issues and important challenges that emerged in the course of this work. We employ a postcolonial theoretical framework to tease out and problematize the Eurocentric foundations of the IR field and utilize the Resource Bank to reimagine research and teaching in the IR field.
What if the deepest resources for globalizing IR lie not in capitalist modernity, but in humanity's much older struggles against hierarchy? This Element argues that Global IR cannot become genuinely anti-Eurocentric unless it breaks decisively with 'methodological presentism': the tendency to read the past in terms of the present. Engaging Global IR debates, and drawing on Karl Polanyi, Political Marxism, and evolutionary anthropology, the Element offers a non-presentist macro-historical narrative. It mobilizes deep history to trace the millennia-old human capacities to refuse domination, pursue autonomy, and sustain cooperation, thereby inviting readers to fundamentally rethink the sources of human interconnectedness and solidarity. On this basis, it proposes 'radical modernity', rooted in the prehistoric legacy of 'radical egalitarianism', as an alternative to capitalist modernity. Radical modernity is not a Western achievement later diffused to the non-Western world, but an alternative foundation for rethinking universality, difference, and the 'international' from below.
How did writers reimagine self and nation in the postcolonial moment? After the brutalities of partition and the triumph of Independence, decolonization in South Asia unfolded in a dramatic sense of disillusion and alienation. In this transnational study, Toral Gajarawala explores the cultural afterlife of decolonization in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh and its profound moment of existential reckoning. In new genres and forms, artists registered a growing sense of estrangement from nation and nationalism, and crafted a new aesthetic landscape. This book reconsiders modernism in the subcontinent, charting the unlikely affiliations and aesthetic experiments it generated. Each chapter discusses a distinct artistic experiment- Hindi novels set in snow and ice, and a Pakistani painter's Paris moment; the existential novel of Bengal, and absurdist plays on famine and extinction- in light of key philosophical concepts of the moment: askesis, responsibility, commitment. The result is an illuminating microanalysis of the 1960s that reshapes our understanding of postcolonial aesthetics.
This article analyses how Danish newspapers portray Greenland drawing on Critical Race Theory, focusing on interest convergence and whiteness as a normative framework. Drawing on qualitative and quantitative content analysis of contemporary Danish media coverage of political, economic, and social debates concerning Greenland, the findings reveal a consistent pattern of instrumentalization. Across most articles, Greenland is portrayed less as an autonomous political actor than as a strategic asset, while coverage prioritizes Danish perspectives and only marginally includes Greenlandic voices. This reflects interest convergence, in which recognition of Greenlandic autonomy appears primarily when aligned with broader Danish or Western strategic priorities. By contrast, whiteness as norm operates in more uneven, context-dependent, and subtle ways. The study shows that media discourse not only reflects but also actively reproduces systemic inequalities and colonial power asymmetries, shaping how Greenlandic self-determination is publicly understood and contested.
Poststructuralist theory and postcolonial criticism represented the first major challenge to the institution of literary criticism as it had taken root in Britain and had been transported to Africa through the colonial university. This chapter discusses how the theories of literature, writing, and identity were geared toward a critique of the assumed relationship between language and identity and unsettled older forms of criticism and how this unsettling depended on the adoption of Africa as the quintessential zone of difference. A key question here is whether the notions of difference espoused by the new, poststructuralist criticism could rescue Africa from the old colonial accounts of the continent in which positioned Africa and Africanness as unmodern. Overall, the poststructuralist deconstruction of European systems of thought compelled intellectuals to rethink the location of Africa in global conceptual systems, leading to the rise of postcolonial criticism, a mode of thinking and reading whose goal was to question both the authority of English and American literary criticism and the nationalist foundations of earlier accounts of African literary criticism.
This special issue seeks to probe the nature of the ostensible transition from ‘anticolonial’ to ‘postcolonial’ and its implications, focusing on historical actors who sought to remobilize across multiple political and spatial scales: that is, actors who thought and acted locally and globally. It asks: What discontents did decolonization bring in its wake, and what opportunities persisted for political activism across borders as the world shifted from one of empires to one of (nation-)states? It traces transformations – of imaginaries and networks, of ideas and modes of mobilization – that occurred alongside or because of the formal transfer of power and explores how this transition reshapes the interplay between different scales of decolonization. In other words, how did actors attempt to operate in, and stitch together, international, regional, national, and local spaces in the postcolonial era, and what new limits that they find themselves up against?
Current thinking views the ancient cultures of the Mediterranean as highly interconnected. This contrasts with late twentieth-century ideas of either geographically separate regions or more developed centers that dominated less complex peripheral societies. A major inspiration for the present approach is a post-processual understanding of the complex dimensions of consumption. Elite burial goods at Lefkandi ca. 1100–825 BCE illustrate how imports were used in status strategies. In the eighth century BCE, there is a decrease in valuable grave goods as dedications of imported luxury items in public sanctuaries became the preferred means of elite display. Current views also reflect postcolonial understanding of non-indigenous settlements as sites of hybridity and inbetweenness, not the imposition of a colonizing ethnicity on local identities but new cultural syntheses. Examples include a large number of the early so-called Greek colonies. A recently excavated example is L’Amastuola in Apulia, an indigenous settlement of the late eighth century where Greeks came to live in the early seventh century.
The European Union stands at a crossroads. Its founding promises of peace, convergence, and multilateralism are increasingly strained by debt, migration, sovereignty, and militarization. The introduction to this Special Issue begins with the question: who is the EU for? To stretch this question analytically we move beyond conventional debates on globalization and sovereignty foregrounding the colonial and racialized conditions that shape European integration. Colonialism, we argue, remains operative, structuring the production of race, racism, and anti-Blackness within and beyond Europe. Drawing on radical traditions of thought on colonialism and anti-Blackness, critical political economy, postcolonial theory, and institutional analysis, the introduction reframes the analytic of who the EU is for by showing how the Union’s commitment to universal values coexists with practices that reproduce hierarchies of life and death. We argue that the EU operates as a form of global power that mobilizes race and racism as constitutive mechanisms of legitimacy, authority, mobility, and value. Contemporary militarization, through defense integration, rearmament, and strategic autonomy, intensifies these dynamics by recoding racial hierarchies as security imperatives. Competing responses, from right-wing sovereign internationalism to left critiques of neoliberalism, rarely confront Europe’s colonial and racialized constitutive role in sustaining global inequalities. These unresolved contradictions and failures open up urgent questions about how Europe’s political and economic order continues to reproduce global hierarchies of power. It is precisely this tension that the special issue takes up, responding by engaging the intertwined colonial and racist projects in the EU. The contributors collectively frame crisis as a key site through which colonial violence is reconfigured, displaced, and normalized in contemporary EU governance. In so doing, they reposition the EU not as a neutral arbiter of order, but as an active geopolitical site where racialized and imperial forms of power are continuously produced, contested, and reimagined.
This chapter explores the constructed nature of environmental understanding through colonial, neocolonial, postcolonial and ecofeminist lenses. It begins by dissecting the binary opposition of nature versus civilisation as shaped by colonial narratives, revealing how this dichotomy justified the exploitation of Indigenous populations, women and natural resources. The analysis extends to neocolonial practices – such as land-grabbing and neoliberal economic expansion – and their environmental repercussions. Through literary and filmic examples like Robinson Crusoe and Cast Away, the chapter highlights how survival narratives reinforce human supremacy and commodify nature. It then critically examines the idealisation of Indigenous peoples as ‘noble savages’ and the romanticised notion of nature as a Garden of Eden. Moving towards constructive alternatives, it foregrounds postcolonial and ecofeminist approaches that challenge anthropocentrism, promote interconnectedness and embrace Indigenous cosmologies centred around earth goddesses like Pachamama and Papatūānuku. The chapter concludes with a case study on Brendon Grimshaw’s ecological restoration of Moyenne Island, advocating for grassroots conservation and ethical environmental care. Ultimately, the chapter urges readers to reassess dominant narratives and join collective efforts to protect and regenerate nature.
Third sector organizations (TSOs) increasingly operate in culturally diverse and politically unequal contexts in which global welfare models intersect with local traditions, knowledge systems, and institutional frameworks. This article develops a postcolonial approach to analyzing these dynamics by conceptualizing TSOs as “Third Spaces” in the sense of Homi K. Bhabha. It brings postcolonial theory into dialogue with approaches to organizational hybridity and argues that TSOs can be understood as hybrid contexts in which cultural, organizational, and political-economic dynamics intersect. Drawing on interdisciplinary literature and illustrative examples from Latin America, Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and Europe, the article demonstrates how TSOs mediate between local knowledge and global governance structures, negotiate competing accountability regimes, and produce forms of cultural translation shaped by unequal power relations. The framework contributes to third sector research and highlights practical implications for context-sensitive and culturally grounded social welfare.
This chapter argues that the issue of ‘truth’ has played a foundational role, not only within the discipline of philosophy but also within many different aspects of Australian culture. However, there seems to be little agreement on what it really is, and while some philosophers contend that truth is a meaningless concept – a linguistic mirage – most would argue there’s something of importance there, but what is it? Even if we struggle to determine the real nature of truth – as we did with the real nature of right and wrong in Chapter 14 – at least we structure our culture, our knowledges and our school curricula around stuff we know to be unequivocally true … or do we? Arguably, many of the assumptions we make, often derived from five centuries of European colonialism, do not stand up to close scrutiny. They are often ‘truths’ that suit particular interests of the powerful, and subtly act to reinforce their worldview.
The origins of Arthur are in the Welsh language, and this chapter presents the Welsh Arthur from those origins to the end of the Middle Ages and beyond. While Geoffrey of Monmouth reconfigured the Arthur he found, propelling him into a new trajectory, the Galfridian route does not provide the telos for the Welsh material: the most important manuscripts of the period show court poets and prose writers engaging self-consciously with traditions old and new, aware of the colonial implications of French and English Arthurs, and energetically navigating strategies of irony, satire, postcolonial reimagining and culturally confident re-engagement with the pre-Galfridian (and pre-Chrétien). Arthur is at once signifier of the ‘Britain’ of the bards (a half-imagined Welsh-speaking Britain, inheritor of Romanitas) and a field of signification on which to project contemporary political realities, over the best part of a good millennium.