“For, if it’s in Hegelian manifestation, the master-slave paradigm limits the field of recognition (or mutuality, reciprocity, equality) to the narcissistic gaze between similars, Ghosh exhumes, in the medieval exposition of slavery, a contesting form of recognition (of mutuality, equality, reciprocity) between radical dissimilars. The slim ‘facts’ of Ghosh’s medieval story testify to the complexity of such recognition.” (Gandhi 2003: 70)
In his novel, In an Antique Land, Amitav Ghosh attempts to reconstruct history by presenting it not as an absolute truth, but rather as a means of organising instance by imperial powers. Ghosh presents history as a narrative that is closely tied up in relations of power, arguing that the narrative is written to reinforce the dominance of those who wrote it (Sha Begum 2014: 95). According to Leela Gandhi, Ghosh challenges and reconstructs the Hegelian master-slave narrative (Gandhi 2003: 70). He opposes such a paradigm as a means of exposing the representational strategies used to reinforce Western ideologies and maintain cultural difference (Huttunen 2011: 5). Gandhi points out that although Ghosh …show more content…
The text rather has characteristics of different genres, including Biography, Autobiography, Travel writing, Historiography and Ethnography, to name a few. As Javed Majeed points out in Ozawa 2006: 247, there has been criticism of the fact that Ghosh’s text lacks the mutual exchange between ethnographer and informants (Ozawa 2006: 247). However, as Ghosh points out, “Shaikh Musa’s son Ahmed… was a great deal more heedful of my duties as a gatherer of information than I.” (Ghosh 1992: 26). Ghosh, however, distances himself from the position of ethnographer, to limit his authoritative image (Ozawa 2006: 246). Rather, he shares his personal, subjective experiences as a traveller (Ozawa 2006:
In his novel, In an Antique Land, Amitav Ghosh attempts to reconstruct history by presenting it not as an absolute truth, but rather as a means of organising instance by imperial powers. Ghosh presents history as a narrative that is closely tied up in relations of power, arguing that the narrative is written to reinforce the dominance of those who wrote it (Sha Begum 2014: 95). According to Leela Gandhi, Ghosh challenges and reconstructs the Hegelian master-slave narrative (Gandhi 2003: 70). He opposes such a paradigm as a means of exposing the representational strategies used to reinforce Western ideologies and maintain cultural difference (Huttunen 2011: 5). Gandhi points out that although Ghosh …show more content…
The text rather has characteristics of different genres, including Biography, Autobiography, Travel writing, Historiography and Ethnography, to name a few. As Javed Majeed points out in Ozawa 2006: 247, there has been criticism of the fact that Ghosh’s text lacks the mutual exchange between ethnographer and informants (Ozawa 2006: 247). However, as Ghosh points out, “Shaikh Musa’s son Ahmed… was a great deal more heedful of my duties as a gatherer of information than I.” (Ghosh 1992: 26). Ghosh, however, distances himself from the position of ethnographer, to limit his authoritative image (Ozawa 2006: 246). Rather, he shares his personal, subjective experiences as a traveller (Ozawa 2006: