认识论的(反)信仰与(反)服从:扎克·姆达的《红色之心》与非殖民化的生态转向

Q3 Arts and Humanities Journal of Narrative and Language Studies Pub Date : 2023-05-15 DOI:10.59045/nalans.2023.13
Goutam Karmakar, R. Chetty
{"title":"认识论的(反)信仰与(反)服从:扎克·姆达的《红色之心》与非殖民化的生态转向","authors":"Goutam Karmakar, R. Chetty","doi":"10.59045/nalans.2023.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Heart of Redness (2000) by Zakes Mda deals with an epistemological conflict and exposes the hideousness of colonial epistemology in dismantling indigenous belief systems and commodifying South African land and ecology. The novel revisits the decisive event of cattle killing in 1856–57, following Nongqawuse’s prophecy, and juxtaposes it with the cultural and epistemic clash of two factions, Believers and Unbelievers, in the post-apartheid era. The present article analyses the unresolved breach between the Believers and the Unbelievers and notes how the latter’s appropriation of Western modernity’s notion of progress and civilization perpetuates the interventions of capitalist forces, aggravating serious threats to land protection and indigenous ecology. The article focuses on Mda’s critique of the South Africans’ compliance with the colonial models of civilization and probes how the novel emphasizes delinking and repudiating the patterns and perceptions of development normalized by Western modernity. In so doing, Mda’s novel foregrounds the necessity of indulging in what Mignolo (2009) terms “epistemic disobedience” and endorses critical decolonial thinking and praxis to counter covert forms of colonial oppression and capitalist objectification. The article extends the notion of “decolonial turn” (Maldonado-Torres, 2008; Grosfoguel, 2007) by arguing that the novel elucidates a “decolonial ecological turn” to combat extractivist agendas and exploitative policies, preserve indigenous ecology, and foster alternative ways of sustainable collective living.","PeriodicalId":36955,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Narrative and Language Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Epistemic (dis)belief and (dis)obedience: Zakes Mda s The Heart of Redness and the decolonial ecological turn\",\"authors\":\"Goutam Karmakar, R. Chetty\",\"doi\":\"10.59045/nalans.2023.13\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Heart of Redness (2000) by Zakes Mda deals with an epistemological conflict and exposes the hideousness of colonial epistemology in dismantling indigenous belief systems and commodifying South African land and ecology. The novel revisits the decisive event of cattle killing in 1856–57, following Nongqawuse’s prophecy, and juxtaposes it with the cultural and epistemic clash of two factions, Believers and Unbelievers, in the post-apartheid era. The present article analyses the unresolved breach between the Believers and the Unbelievers and notes how the latter’s appropriation of Western modernity’s notion of progress and civilization perpetuates the interventions of capitalist forces, aggravating serious threats to land protection and indigenous ecology. The article focuses on Mda’s critique of the South Africans’ compliance with the colonial models of civilization and probes how the novel emphasizes delinking and repudiating the patterns and perceptions of development normalized by Western modernity. In so doing, Mda’s novel foregrounds the necessity of indulging in what Mignolo (2009) terms “epistemic disobedience” and endorses critical decolonial thinking and praxis to counter covert forms of colonial oppression and capitalist objectification. The article extends the notion of “decolonial turn” (Maldonado-Torres, 2008; Grosfoguel, 2007) by arguing that the novel elucidates a “decolonial ecological turn” to combat extractivist agendas and exploitative policies, preserve indigenous ecology, and foster alternative ways of sustainable collective living.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36955,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Narrative and Language Studies\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Narrative and Language Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.59045/nalans.2023.13\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Narrative and Language Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.59045/nalans.2023.13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

扎克斯·姆达(Zakes Mda)的《红色之心》(2000)处理了认识论上的冲突,揭露了殖民认识论在拆除土著信仰体系和商品化南非土地和生态方面的丑恶。在农卡乌塞的预言之后,这部小说重新审视了1856年至1857年的决定性事件——杀牛,并将其与后种族隔离时代两个派系——信徒和非信徒——的文化和认知冲突并置。本文分析了信仰者和非信仰者之间尚未解决的分歧,并指出后者如何挪用西方现代性的进步和文明概念,使资本主义势力的干预得以延续,加剧了对土地保护和土著生态的严重威胁。本文关注姆达对南非遵从殖民文明模式的批评,并探讨小说如何强调与西方现代性正常化的发展模式和观念脱钩和否定。在这样做的过程中,姆达的小说强调了沉溺于Mignolo(2009)所说的“认识论上的不服从”的必要性,并支持批判性的非殖民化思想和实践,以反对隐蔽形式的殖民压迫和资本主义的客观化。文章扩展了“非殖民化转向”的概念(Maldonado-Torres, 2008;Grosfoguel, 2007),他认为这部小说阐明了一种“非殖民化的生态转向”,以对抗采掘主义议程和剥削政策,保护土著生态,并促进可持续集体生活的替代方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Epistemic (dis)belief and (dis)obedience: Zakes Mda s The Heart of Redness and the decolonial ecological turn
The Heart of Redness (2000) by Zakes Mda deals with an epistemological conflict and exposes the hideousness of colonial epistemology in dismantling indigenous belief systems and commodifying South African land and ecology. The novel revisits the decisive event of cattle killing in 1856–57, following Nongqawuse’s prophecy, and juxtaposes it with the cultural and epistemic clash of two factions, Believers and Unbelievers, in the post-apartheid era. The present article analyses the unresolved breach between the Believers and the Unbelievers and notes how the latter’s appropriation of Western modernity’s notion of progress and civilization perpetuates the interventions of capitalist forces, aggravating serious threats to land protection and indigenous ecology. The article focuses on Mda’s critique of the South Africans’ compliance with the colonial models of civilization and probes how the novel emphasizes delinking and repudiating the patterns and perceptions of development normalized by Western modernity. In so doing, Mda’s novel foregrounds the necessity of indulging in what Mignolo (2009) terms “epistemic disobedience” and endorses critical decolonial thinking and praxis to counter covert forms of colonial oppression and capitalist objectification. The article extends the notion of “decolonial turn” (Maldonado-Torres, 2008; Grosfoguel, 2007) by arguing that the novel elucidates a “decolonial ecological turn” to combat extractivist agendas and exploitative policies, preserve indigenous ecology, and foster alternative ways of sustainable collective living.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Narrative and Language Studies
Journal of Narrative and Language Studies Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊最新文献
The City is Not the City: Two Approaches of How City Writers Compose Images of Urbanity Reminiscence about the Soviet City: Urban Space in the Ukrainian Fiction of the 21st century Preface: The Narrative Identity of European Cities in Contemporary Literature From the city of heroes to the city of Ilhas: the Ilhíada by Alberto Pimenta Urban Places and the Narrative of the Supreme Power
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1