Subaltern insurgency is self-involvement in representation that usually fails to register

Evidence

So, to repeat what I have said before, subaltern insurgency, and this is a moment of that, is an effort to involve oneself in representation, not according to the lines laid down by the official institutional structures of representation. Most often it does not catch. That is the moment that I am calling “not speaking,” distinguishing it from the general condition of subalternity where all the speech acts exchanged in subalternity are only accessible to oral history, or a discursive formation different from the investigation. — Donna Landry and Gerald MacLean, The Spivak Reader, 2428

Categorization

• DEFINE: Spivak precisely demarcates the ‘not speaking’ moment from the general condition of subalternity — sharpening her own earlier formulation of the subaltern.