Poststructural literary theory’s nationalism critique tracked the national-bourgeois state’s rise and fall

Evidence

We thus have a specific conjunction of elements: a radical literary theory in the moment of repudiating the Marxist component of its own past; the rise and fall of the national-bourgeois state in the ‘Third World’ as the object of this radicalism’s passion; capitalism’s global offensive and, by the late 1980s, its global triumph; the ascendancy, in the theoretical realm, of poststructuralism. The rise and fall of nationalist ideology in the recent history of this literary theory is thus conjoined w~th other theoretical developments as well as with more directly political developments in the world. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 184

Categorization

  • XREF: Directly relevant to the reader’s project: Ahmad locates poststructural theory’s anti-nationalism in material conjunctural terms rather than internal necessity — the bind loosens when the conjuncture changes. — connects to: Poststructuralism’s rise in colonial literary theory conceals rather than explains its material-economic context — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures, 163; Literary theory’s rejection of nationalism mirrors poststructuralism’s rise — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Nations, Classes, Literatures, 62; Postcolonial national bourgeoisies consolidated while nationalism evaporated or caused havoc — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures, 150 (+4 more)
  • ADDENDUM: Connects to the reader’s tracing of strategic essentialism’s collapse: Ahmad argues the Marxist component was repudiated before poststructuralism became the anti-nationalist answer, anticipating why essentialism must be held strategically rather than affirmed.

Broader Connections