Suchergebnisse

The discourse research, which was reduced to analysing such linguistic problems as the text and the conditions of its generation, gradually gave way to analysing discourse as a social phenomenon. In the 90s of the last century, the status of discourse analysis was determined as an interdisciplinary science. In all fundamental research, the central theme is the concept of discourse as a derivative of social practice and its connection with the social structure.

This paper has its genesis in concerns about the return to "the real" in social and political theory and analysis. This trend is linked to a reaction against the "linguistic turn", on the grounds that an exclusive focus on language undercuts political analysis by refusing to engage with "material reality". Foucault and "discourse" are common targets of this critique. Against this interpretation, the authors direct attention to the analytic and political usefulness of Foucault's concept of "discursive practices", which, it argues, has been much misunderstood. Discursive practices, as developed by Foucault, refers to the practices (or operations) of discourses, meaning knowledge formations, not to linguistic practices or language use. The focus is on how knowledge is produced through plural and contingent practices across different sites. Such an approach bridges a symbolic-material distinction and signals the always political nature of "the real".

After a brief contextualization of the figure of Sartjie Baartman – the Khoisan woman displayed in London and Paris at the beginning of the nineteenth century as the "Hottentot Venus" – this contribution addresses the issue of contemporary discursive practices making use of Baartman's icon. Starting from Thabo Mbeki's speech at the 'funeral' of Saartjie Baartman as an introduction, the article focuses on the analysis of two very different novels, Zoë Wicomb's "David's Story" (2000) and Barbara Chase-Riboud's "Hottentot Venus. A Novel" (2003). Their very dissimilarity can tell us much on the discursive practices concerning Baartman's figure; yet, the two works permit comparison because they share the same wish to shed light on the relationship between past and present by means of an overall structural complexity. Both novels make use of the postmodern features of a multi-voiced and multi-layered narration, and avoid granting authority to a single version of history. Moreover, both "David's Story" and "Hottentot Venus" engage in a narrative relating to individual and collective trauma; that is why the article briefly introduces the ongoing discussion focused on the application of Western trauma theories to the South African historical and political situation. The literary investigation provided here takes into consideration the aesthetic aspect of both books; I contend that Chase-Riboud's narrative is unsatisfactory as a novel, and that its literary weakness diminishes the strength of its socio-political stances.

After a brief contextualization of the figure of Sartjie Baartman – the Khoisan woman displayed in London and Paris at the beginning of the nineteenth century as the "Hottentot Venus" – this contribution addresses the issue of contemporary discursive practices making use of Baartman's icon. Starting from Thabo Mbeki's speech at the 'funeral' of Saartjie Baartman as an introduction, the article focuses on the analysis of two very different novels, Zoë Wicomb's David's Story (2000) and Barbara Chase-Riboud's Hottentot Venus. A Novel (2003). Their very dissimilarity can tell us much on the discursive practices concerning Baartman's figure; yet, the two works permit comparison because they share the same wish to shed light on the relationship between past and present by means of an overall structural complexity. Both novels make use of the postmodern features of a multi-voiced and multi-layered narration, and avoid granting authority to a single version of history. Moreover, both David's Story and Hottentot Venus engage in a narrative relating to individual and collective trauma; that is why the article briefly introduces the ongoing discussion focused on the application of Western trauma theories to the South African historical and political situation. The literary investigation provided here takes into consideration the aesthetic aspect of both books; I contend that Chase-Riboud's narrative is unsatisfactory as a novel, and that its literary weakness diminishes the strength of its socio-political stances.

In this article I utilise critical discourse analysis to investigate the discursive practices evident in the Gillard Government's 2011 'Closing the Gap' speech. The speech is interpreted as a performative activity which normalises the racialised privilege/disadvantage divide in contemporary Australia by framing this divide as meritocratic. Inherently contradictory discourses are used to position both the government and Indigenes in antithetical ways. The government is constructed as a benevolent authority, yet is excused from responsibility for 'closing the gap'. Indigenous peoples are framed as culturally deficient while simultaneously held responsible to 'close the gap'. The contentiousness of these discourses is minimised by their portrayal as hegemonic commonsense.

In this article I utilise critical discourse analysis to investigate the discursive practices evident in the Gillard Government's 2011 'Closing the Gap' speech. The speech is interpreted as a performative activity which normalises the racialised privilege/disadvantage divide in contemporary Australia by framing this divide as meritocratic. Inherently contradictory discourses are used to position both the government and Indigenes in antithetical ways. The government is constructed as a benevolent authority, yet is excused from responsibility for 'closing the gap'. Indigenous peoples are framed as culturally deficient while simultaneously held responsible to 'close the gap'. The contentiousness of these discourses is minimised by their portrayal as hegemonic commonsense.

The author argues that the security situation of the Baltic countries cannot be separated from the way the Balts themselves speak of security. This is a discourse of danger producing insecurity in pursuit of security. Moreover, this article is a study of identity by demonstrating how Baltic security issues are constituted by discourses of danger revolving around Russian Otherness and European Sameness. In conclusion, the following aspects are addressed: the prospects for the coming together of East and West in the Baltic Sea Region – and NATO's role in this process – and whether this process will come to ease with a parallel between sovereignty and regionality as organising principles for political space, or whether the one will succumb to the other in the course of a prolonged contest.