The Third World Literature canon marginalizes texts outside its authorized questions

Evidence

What is disconcerting, nevertheless, is that a whole range of texts which do not ask those particular questions in any foregrounded manner would then have to be excluded from or pushed to the margins of this emerging counter-canon. Worse still, a whole range of other kinds of questionings – pertaining to other sorts of literary influences and experiential locations, the political affiliations of the author, representations of classes and genders within the text, and myriad such issues – would then have to be subordinated to the primacy of the authorized questions: about ‘nation’, and so on. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 211

Categorization

• QUESTION: Which ‘Third World’ texts get pushed out of the counter-canon because they don’t foreground nationhood and colonialism? Worth chasing the specific examples.
• XREF: connects to: ‘Third World Literature’ functions as a counter-canon that limits admissible questions. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures, 485; Even marginal texts suffer whenever nation-theme questions dominate Third World reading. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures, 486; Postmodernism’s dominance frames both critics and canonized Third World authors. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures, 488 (+7 more)

Related

• Even marginal texts suffer whenever nation-theme questions dominate Third World reading. (similarity 0.95)
• ‘Third World Literature’ functions as a counter-canon that limits admissible questions. (similarity 0.92)
• Postmodernism’s dominance frames both critics and canonized Third World authors. (similarity 0.87)
• Postmodernist critical fashion increasingly frames how Third World texts get canonized (similarity 0.87)
• Graduate students weaponize home-country texts as anti-canonical counter-documents (similarity 0.85)
• Canon formation works by excluding certain questions from being asked (similarity 0.85)
• Third World Literature as a category is built on Western language archives (similarity 0.85)
• Third World Literature is a metropolitan fabrication, not a pre-existing category (similarity 0.83)
• Claims that homogenize ‘Third World Literature’ obscure the imperialist-determined fortunes of its producing bourgeoisie (similarity 0.82)
• Non-Western literature’s exclusion from the canon is a translation problem, not literary exclusion (similarity 0.82)
• Third-world writers have achieved real canonical standing in US academia. (similarity 0.82)
• Third World Literature emerged only through the mediating archive of Western languages (similarity 0.82)
• The original Third World canon meant pre-colonial texts produced outside the West (similarity 0.82)
• The category ‘Third World’ has polemical but no theoretical status (similarity 0.82)
• A counter-canon arises only from an ideological cement, not aggregation (similarity 0.82)