The idea of westernization has been around for the past couple centuries as more capitalistic countries have risen to higher power over time. The author of ‘Can the Subaltern Speak?’, Gayatri Spivak, presents the example of Sati in India. Sati is an old Indian tradition that began thousands of years ago. When a woman’s husband died before her, she would have to throw herself on a pile of ashes and be burned along with him. However, the British banned this in 1829 when they were in control of India.
Spivak’s point in the story is not that the old Sati tradition itself should still be legal, but that it was a Western nation that took control over her country and created their own rules. Spivak uses the term ‘third world country,’ many times throughout the story, which we already discussed is not an appropriate way to address countries that are run by a colonial or imperialistic government. Regardless, she is pointing out the fact that these powerful nations have a grip on other countries that are suffering. It also reinforces the idea that white people believe they are superior to all other races.. Westernization takes form in ‘Can the Subaltern Speak?’, as the people of India, who are being controlled by the British government in the story, cannot voice their own opinions as they do not have rights. It reflects how for centuries, the desire to control lands that are less rich and powerful is a burning passion of wealthy, abundant nations such as Great Britain.
Awesome Inc. “Cultural Reader: Gayatri Spivak / ‘Can the Subaltern Speak?'” 16 November 2011. https://culturalstudiesnow.blogspot.com/2011/11/gayatri-spivak-can-subaltern-speak.html.
UK National Archives. “British Empire- Living in the British Empire in India.” 2021. https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/empire/usefulnotes/g2cs4s1u.htm.
I think it’s good how you emphasize the fact that Indians are not specifically saying certain things from the past should be legal or illegal now but that they should have the freedom to do so. When they were colonized, they lost the ability to make their choices as country, as a group of people. And as you said, overtime, the white voices begin to sound louder and seem more important because they aren’t letting one else speak. It would be interesting to see how certain countries would be different nowadays if they were given the chance to develop on their own.
I really like how you solidified the fact that giving the name “Third World country” is an inappropriate way for naming countries that aren’t as powerful and wealthy as other countries. It has such a demeaning tone towards these countries, and it allows for other countries to have a superior attitude towards these countries. I also agree with your point on westernization being incorporated into her text. The people of India that didn’t have rights and couldn’t voice their own opinion were the Subaltern. These people of India wouldn’t have been the Subaltern if the British government didn’t interfere with them.
Your take on “third world countries” is spot on. These countries are always classified by the countries that have colonized them for centuries. It is unfair to them that a superpower that they cannot compete with has the ability to take over their land, and when they leave or are forced out they can declare that country as lesser than another. Many of these countries are the way they are economically or politically because they have had less time to develop post-colonialism. The example of India is one of the more unfortunate ones, because India was an incredibly well established and prospering countries for centuries before Great Britain colonized them. I also like how you clarified that while the tradition should not be legal now, it shouldn’t be up to Great Britain what India chooses to do. People in the country should have the right to choose whether or not they want to follow traditions.
It is very important to point out that Spivak said that the idea of sati should still be illegal. When I first read her essay I was a little confused about this at first as well because it did seem like an awful practice. The important thing to mention is that it is not there own culture that made that decision for them and then forced control over them and this was not correct. India should have been able to keep their own power and make that decision for themselves and not allowed even further entrapment by Great Britain.
I think you do a great job of emphasizing that the author is not suggesting the practice of Sati should still be legal, but the way that it was abruptly stopped by a Western nation coming in without any regard for their culture. This is the key takeaway from this idea. These countries colonize nations that have no power and are suffering, which results in them being forced to follow their new laws and rules.
I really liked your blog. This was interesting to me that woman would actually burn themselves with their husband once they passed away. I am happy how you mentioned they banned this from happening any further but it should be up to the woman if she wants to continue this so call “tradition” or “culture” for the sake of her husband.
I really think your blog post was insightful. I like how you were able to connect with our discussion about the words “Third World Country” and how that label is inaccurate. I think it is important to understand that these countries like Britian are seen as First World Countries because of the power they have over other countries. It is sad to see countries who don’t hold the same power as countries like Britian and the United States getting their own cultural practices banned. These countries are already under political power from “First World Countries” and they continue to get their own cultural practices stripped away from them. Almost like these countries in power want to make the citizens of these “Third World Countries” a more first world citizen by taking away their cultural practices.
The blog does a great job of contextualizing the British decision to ban Sati. It is undeniable that Sati was a violation of rights of the widows and it is in no circumstance being defended, however, the use of the ban to establish confidence in the public and then violating that trust to establish their reign over the country is what being questioned in the essay by Spivak. Spivak also identifies with Ahmed in his belief that western ideas are west-central and can not always be used as a dominant theory as it would always lead to a western bias.
Your emphasis on the hold of that colonization has on the countries is a great point when speaking about Sati. Although no one is defending the practice of Sati but how westerners implement their ideas of what is acceptable with no regards to cultures that are not their own. Although the practice of Sati is really unsettling it makes me think about all of the other cultural practices that were made illegal because they did not align culturally with the British.
You brought up a great point explaining colonialization and how powerful nations have strong grip on countries that are powerless. Some countries don’t have the resources to provide for their citizens. Additionally some don’t have a stable government to regulate laws or regulations that would help them progress. As a result, stronger nations come and install a government or for better words a dictatorship that exploits them for their natural resources. When that dictatorship begins people less powerful lose a voice and control of their rights.
You make great points about how Westernization and Western culture has limited the voice of the regions in which they imperialized. Not only in physical attributes, but culturally and mentally, where people were forced to behave and believe certain ways, limiting their own desires to express themselves the way they prefer. Certain rituals, as the one you mentioned about Indians, whether they be unorthodox or not, have been seen to become suppressed in the face of a more powerful self-appointed superior way of life and culture.