What the fuck is "postcolonial literature"? I've seen this term several times recently

What the fuck is "postcolonial literature"? I've seen this term several times recently.

Stay away from it. It's PoC stuff SJWs wank about.

If you want to convince yourself, I suggest you should read Frantz Fanon.

Can't you use Google?

Stuff written after colonial rule ended. To put it very simply.

It's stuff that portrays cultures and ways of life more accurately than what some white dude at some outpost writes. White dudes tend to either dismiss such cultures as inferior savagery, take a condescending paternalistic attitude or superficially praise them to the skies (which is more to indict their own culture than to appraise any benefits in the culture that is commented on) Simply put, post-colonial literature (or any post-colonial enterprise) revives the Dead White Male and tells him to take a hike

So what the third worlders have to say about themselves? Okay. Why is it necessary to be read again?

Basically it's a category of fiction, usually referring to works written in English after the end of the British empire's domination of its colonies, more or less.

Usually it refers to fiction from former colonial nations, written by people from those nations and often about postcolonial identity.

Midnight's Children by Salman Rushdie is a good example (or any of his books, really)

Even a lot of Australian fiction is thought of as postcolonial.

Postcolonial theory, on the other hand, often deals with racial theory, is intermixed with marxism and postmodern/post-structuralist theory, and concerns the way we type the colonial 'other'. Richard Dyer is a good example of cultural theorist who writes about postcolonialism.

Don't listen to: , this user's view is ignorant and reductive.

It's kinda necessary if you want to understand their experience.

Other than that, I don't know. It's a good way to broaden you horizons. But calling something "necessary reading" alone is kinda strange in itself.

>I will dismiss an entire category of literature because some people I don't like enjoy it

Eat shit, you fucking Cro Magnon.

More than just third world countries friend. Australia and Canada are both post-colonial nations and a lot of fiction produced since their independence can certianly be read as post-colonial texts, but so can classics like The Tempest. Even Lolita can be seen as an examination of American cultural "colonialism" in Europe and vice-versa.

oh wow, people are giving actual answers

>reductive
While it may not be inductive, it is most certainly deductive.

It's supposed to be literature about areas which were colonized.
It's actually propaganda.

Lol. Australian fiction about its convict past is propaganda?

Literature written after a country's colonial period.

>Okay. Why is it necessary to be read again?
Read it if you want to, don't if you don't. Nobody's forcing you.

Sometimes it's interesting to get another perspective which is why I like it, but you can get that from historical literature too, so do whatever the fuck you want pham

it's chinua fucking achebe bitching on about everything being racist and how everything was so much better before white people showed up. because being illiterate and dying in a tribal feud about a stolen goat is just awesome

Equating Canada and Africa here is stupid. Australia and Canada are nations of the colonizers, not of the colonized.

its phenomenology to negros

This is all a little backwards. Post colonial literature isn't any specific books it is an area of study where literature is studied from a post colonial perspective.

You could consider pretty much any work in light of post colonial thought. Why is Dracula on an Namibian school's syllabus, does it have post colonial overtones? How does Harry Potter reflect Britain's post colonial history? Obviously books dealing with the central theme of colonialism and based in a former colony are the core of the subject but it isn't limited to any particular book.

The way you people always use the term "white dudes" to refer to white men is pretty condescending desu.

>fucking Cro Magnon
>casually dismissing an incredibly advanced ancient culture by using its name as an insult
Really, user? In 2016? Why don't you tell us what YOU identify with, you supreme shitlord, so I can casually dismiss your entire ancestry too? No, let me guess: you're a western white male who likes to pose as "progressive".

This isn't true. Both countries had and have indigenous people.

Also, Australians were mostly all convicts. They were essentially white slaves.

It is a category of fiction though, there are books and authors who are identified by both academics and readers as postcolonial writers and books.

Their indigenous people are as irrelevant as native americans in the USA. And equating convicts and slaves is pure ideology.

Cro Magnon's were not a culture, Learn to insult someone properly you fucking nigger

>Their indigenous people are as irrelevant as native americans in the USA

I don't know how relevant indigenous people are in USA and Canada, but I know that in Australia, aborigines are the focus of and inform a huge chunk of Australia fiction, film, and national identity. Keep in mind that aborigines were the most populous people in Australia until about 140 years ago.

>incredibly advanced ancient culture

Cro Magnons were neither a culture nor ancient, senpai. The term literally just refers to paleolithic humans. Then again, you're probably just being facetious.

Yes of course, some books are all about colonialism and it is difficult to read them any other way but the area of study isn't limited to books by africans. Just as feminist literature has come core texts but any book can be considered in light of a feminist perspective. And let's not forget, interpreting white guy books from a feminist, colonial or any other differing perspective is a great way to piss them off.