The category ‘Third World’ has polemical but no theoretical status

Evidence

I too think that there are plenty of very good books written by African, Asian and Latin American writers which are available in English and which must be taught as an antidote to the general ethnocentricity and cultural myopia of the Humanities as they are presently constituted in these United States. If some label is needed for this activity, one may call it ‘Third World Literature’ Conversely, however, I also hold that this term, ‘the Third World’, is, even in its most telling deployments, a polemical one, with no theoretical status whatsoever. Polemic surely has a prominent place in all human discourses, especially in the discourse of politics, so the use of this term in loose, polemical contexts is altogether valid. But to lift it from the register of polemics and claim it as a basis for producing theoretical knowledge, which presumes a certain rigour in constructing the objects of one’s knowledge, is to misconstrue not only the term itself but even the world to which it refers. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 374

Categorization

• DEFINE: Core to the reading purpose: Ahmad’s distinction between polemical and theoretical registers is exactly the kind of materialist critique of essentialist categories the reader wants — ‘Third World’ treated strategically-as-theory collapses into a false essentialism of its own.
• XREF: Directly parallels the reader’s research question: ‘Third World Literature’ as (Spivak-like) strategic essentialism that Ahmad argues cannot ground real theoretical knowledge. Bridges the Ahmad-to-Spivak critique thread. — connects to: The term Third World originally named military non-alignment, not geography or modes of production — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Nations, Classes, Literatures, 564; Third World Literature is a metropolitan fabrication, not a pre-existing category — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures, 192; Poststructuralist Third World theory arose as a substitute for failed nationalist ideology — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures, 274 (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Third World Literature is a metropolitan fabrication, not a pre-existing category #expands (0.78) — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 192
• The term Third World originally named military non-alignment, not geography or modes of production #expands (0.75) — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 564
• Poststructuralist Third World theory arose as a substitute for failed nationalist ideology #complicates (0.72) — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 274
• Third-worldist nationalism regresses from the Marxist critique it displaces #complicates (0.72)
• Eurocentric Marxism could not grasp Third World revolutionary forces #corroborates (0.72)
• Marxian theory is structurally unable to grasp modern imperialism #expands (0.72)