Hi, my name is Sri (He/him), and today I am going to be providing some context to the excerpt of Aijaz Ahmad’s work on Jameson. Specifically, I am going to be looking into the Three Worlds Theory which is referenced several times in Ahmad’s work, and then I will be providing some more specific reference towards Jameson. Within both areas, the theme of Self vs. Other is prevalent and understanding its use in the Three Worlds theory and then Jameson’s use of the Three World theory helps connect to what Ahmad discusses.
The origins of the Three Words Theory lie in the cold war and the allies of the U.S. and the Soviet Union. The specific usage of the word ‘Third World’ is credited to Alfred Sauvy in a French paper. Sauvy references the idea of a First World that was the U.S. and its allies, a Second World which was the Soviet Union and the communist allies, and lastly the Third world which was all remaining nations. Due to the lower socioeconomic class of many countries in the defined Third World, the term gained new meaning as undeveloped, or poorer nations. Already, we can see the idea of Self vs. Other driving these concepts. In an effort to separate out a large other to strength the Self for each side of the Cold War, an Other was made in the Third World. After the context of the Cold War becomes less relevant the Other remains, and now misclassifies numerous ‘Third World’ countries as impoverished and undeveloped. Ahmad looks at this impact on Jameson’s classification of literature from these Third Worlds as lower than that from the First or Second world. Jameson’s work focused postmodernism, which is a philosophy that looks at our current state after modernizing and criticizes our current state. He laid the basis of his work in the economic impacts of modernism and capitalism. This directly leads into what Ahmad sees in Jameson’s rhetoric regarding Third World literature. As when viewed from a purely western, capitalist point of view the Third World countries have been defined into an Other, that when set up had a lack of development on the scale Western countries were measuring. Ahmad connects many of these so called Third World countries through the colonialism that often caused them to change their development to a Western standard and thus be considered undeveloped. Overall, we can see how a system that was made to define a Self vs. Other for the Cold War helped perpetuate the effects of colonialism to modern day.
Citations:
Silver, Marc. “If You Shouldn’t Call It The Third World, What Should You Call It?” NPR, NPR, 4 Jan. 2015, www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2015/01/04/372684438/if-you-shouldnt-call-it-the-third-world-what-should-you-call-it.
Felluga, Dino. “Modules on Jameson: On Postmodernity.” Introductory Guide to Critical Theory. Jan. 31, 2011. Purdue U. 8/28/2020. <http://www.purdue.edu/guidetotheory/postmodernism/modules/jamesonpostmodernity.html>.
I find that what you wrote about is closely related to how I interpreted the writing. It never occurred to me the cold war relation, though, when I was reading through. I was aware of this, but it was in the back of my mind and it never occurred to me, that as it became farther away, that this notion of a Third World would remain, and would cause misclassification later on with other countries. It is crazy to me how a classification such as Third World, that was used to classify remaining nations, would become a word that seemingly means poor, or undercivilized. Overall, I enjoyed reading this blog post as it helped clarify information that I had already read, and is definitely useful for anyone confused.
This was a well-articulated description of the origin of the Three World Theory! Reading this and Ahmad’s passage has made me realize how much I’ve been influenced by these categorizations myself. Perhaps not recently, but I remember being younger and having the idea that “third world countries” were all impoverished and/or underdeveloped. It is interesting how these definitions stemmed from a period of time where the world was deeply divided, with groups of countries teaming up against those who opposed them. With this context, it is easy to see how the subjective nationalist ideas of allies could compartmentalize the rest of the world this way. In hindsight, it is clear that blanketing large groups of countries under one term is problematic and counter-productive.
For some reason, I could not find any sort of icon to click on that would allow me to reply to the original post, but I was able to post this as a reply to another comment.
Your insight on the Three World Theory is very detailed and brings many great points to the table. After reading the Ahmed excerpt myself, it has shown that categorizing societies based on first, second and third world countries dependent on region, race, income, religion, etc. has become a different term as they used to be defined as. I feel Ahmed brought such power and strength into his words trying to override Jameson’s ideology of third world countries being underprivileged and lower class. Your thought process is very detailed and has further improved my understanding and knowledge on Ahmed and his interpretation to First, Second ad Third World countries.
Understanding where the “Three World Theory” came from was not only interesting, but also helpful in getting better background information. Through news, politics, and literature, the idea of the Three World Theory is very well known and is referenced to a lot. It was fascinating to me that I could hear references to “third world countries” many times and only now actually know the origin of the theory. This background made me more interested in Ahmad`s argument to Jameson`s ideas. Jameson`s depiction of third world countries do not accurately represent these countries and need to be refuted. I feel it is important that people get a better understanding on this topic to see that there is more to these countries than what is primarily discussed.
Sri
I am so glad that you chose to dive deeper into the three world theory. This is something from Aijaz Ahmad’s expert that I really felt interested in. I loved seeing the push back of Ahmad regarding Jameson’s three world theory. He really gave light to the first and second world but almost had a secret password that the writers had to know in order to submit their writing into the third world theory. I love the point you made about the Self vs Other implications in this reading. I can see how Self was made out to be the two worlds with the higher social status and the Other was made out to be the third world or made to be seen as less. It is almost as if the third world was not even given a chance to make a name for itself. It is truly sad that the term third world is now looked upon as a lesser of the other two an it is seen as a world of less physical value.
I think your points and thoughts on this is very well-organized and interesting. After reading Ahmad’s article, I think I really got something more new and deeper related to the theme third world. I simply thought that things from third world are just undeveloped and poor, but your detailed words just refresh my mind and I really learnt something from your contexts. Now I know what’s wrong about this word and also others like what’s the origin of Third World.
As I was reading this, I couldn’t help but to further agree with m belief that the idea of third world countries is ubsurd. In middle school, I was very active in my church but I soon realized that the countries we were “helping” didn’t need help. They are percieved as underdeveloped. I didn’t blame it on the country rather I blamed it on the idea that the Western culture has a tendency to classify other countries as Other. Based on their standards, not the culture or anything in relation to the location of the said country, First World countries set up standards for others to reach and if they aren’t they’re percieved as barbaric, hunter/gatherer societies. I really like how you mentioned the Cold War and why there was three so called classifications westerners used. This topic is very important and I can see the need for the idea of the other can be damaging in more ways than one.
Hi Sri!
You did a really good job of previewing this information! I really like the insight you included about how the definition of “Third World” countries came about and how it has failed to accurately describe these countries now. It really shows how First World countries took it upon themselves to give themselves the upper hand in power over the “Third World others”. By self-declaring this power, we have categorized these countries into the concept of single stories, and fail to truly understand the individual characteristics of the overgeneralized group as a whole.
Hi Sri, thank you for the background information about this week’s reading. Through your introduction, I have a better understanding of the concept of ” third country”. The concept of the “third country” originated during the Cold War. Later, the concept was extended to refer to poor and undeveloped countries. This makes me feel that this concept has a sense of discrimination and hierarchy, separating people from people, which is contrary to the concept advocated by world peace today.
Your presentation gave me a better understanding of the context information of Ahmad’s claims of the viewpoint of Jameson. I know that the source of the word “Three World”. Due to the background Cold War, people created the definition of Three World, which always represents the countries that do not develop and poor. But Jameson classified the Three World by literature, which is refuted by Ahmad. Also, the articles explained the meanings of First World and Second World more explicitly, like First World prone to capitalism, Second World prone to socialism. When I read our reading assignment, honestly I cannot understand totally of some professional terms. However, I can figure out the article that Ahmad refutes to Jameson’s view with the help of the context information above.
li.10766
I am taken aback by the actual history of the meaning of the Third World Country. I had never known that, but thinking about it more it makes complete sense that his would be the thing that sticks in human minds after an event like that. Such a simple comment by one man shaped the view of the entire world.
The miss-classification of countries as Third World makes me think of Adichie’s The Danger of a Single Story. Because these other countries didn’t contribute as much as countries like the U.S. or France, this meant those countries were unable, or unworthy, in the eyes of the more powerful and more populated countries. But that’s just one side of the story. Many “Third World” countries our bountiful and full of life and culture and very necessary textile works.
Thank you for the sources citing why you should not call these countries Third World. As of recently I just discovered some of the wealth of knowledge many countries have that have been considered Third World. As someone who really enjoys history I had no idea that the classification started with the Cold War and I also did not know that the classification mainly meant the governing systems that the country used, such as Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism. As we know now there are many “Third World” countries that clearly operate in a capitalist ideology yet there are classified as Third World. This obviously goes back to the danger of telling a singular story as Adichie spoke about and also the classification of One of The Other. However, what if some of these countries do not strive towards a Western view and are striving for development in their own right? What classification do we give to that? How do we undo the labels we have given these countries which has inadvertently lead many nations to a imperialistic viewpoint in saving them? At what point do we being enlightening ourselves as equals?
Hi Sri!
Thank you for creating such a great for context post to get us started off for the semester! I really enjoyed reading your post and learning more background information of the reading assigned this week. I had never really thought much about third world countries before reading your post. I, unknowingly, always just classified them as poor and pover-ish without knowing the background from the Cold War. It was also very interesting learning more about how these countries and how First World countries, like the United States was originally classified as, are more prone the capitalism ways. Versus this idea, Second
World countries, like the once powerful Soviet Union, are viewed as being socialists where everything is controlled and uniform. It is kind of complex in my mind to think about how this idea of the “Other” can relate back to these terms and how humanity always feel the need for someone to feel superior, while classifying others as inferior. Western culture and idealistic thinking has definitely, in turn, shaped the term of “Third World” into a more negative connotation and how it is often thought of in todays society.
Thank you, your background information gave me a better understanding on the topic. I liked how you incorporated that the first world was the United States and its allies, the second world which was the soviet union and their allies, and the third world with the remaining nations. I’m not much of a history person and that really gave me an understanding of who I should be thinking of when I continue reading the text. With the term “third world” it makes me think of social class, that we are classified into specific groups. In many concepts in life we are classified into various groups.
Hi Sri! Thank you so much for writing this post. It helped me to better understand the readings quite a bit. This is very interesting to take a closer look at. I’ve known the term “third world” in regards to its more modern connotation of countries with lower socioeconomic status for awhile now. However, never before had I stopped to question where this term came from. Adding context to the term will certainly help me going forward in this week’s assignments.
Great insight Sri. Your post makes me think about how the terms we use to understand the world around us can lead to false assumptions and misunderstandings. It really is important to question the way we categorize the world before we make claims about those categorizations, like Jameson did. I have never deeply questioned the origins of the terms first, second and third world, and how the terms may be outdated and even insulting. I was interested to learn more about this and so I read the NPR article you cited and heard about how other terms are coming about such as the Global South, developing countries, and Majority World, and I am truly fascinated by the practice of being very particular with language and really analyzing all the implications that a term can have. Thank you for sharing your post.
I thoroughly enjoyed your context research presentation Sri. Learning about the history of the word and where it was derived from provides interesting context to our reading and how we use the word today. If I had to have guessed, I would have made the assumption that the term “Third World” has been around for much longer than the Cold War. It is also interesting to think about how words and phrases evolve with time.
The way you have explained the Three World Theory is very helpful to me. During the reading I was able to interpret it in the same way but you put it in much simpler terms to understand. Your post made me think about how giving one thing an identity can turn it into something completely different. The “Third world” displayed the other nations excluding the US and Soviet Union. However, the term third world became something else and it is now used to describe nations that are underdeveloped. I think it is really interesting how this term once meant one thing and now means something else. This just goes to show how our world is constantly evolving and there are new discoveries all the time. I think it’s really neat how terms can be analyzed and have so much power and meaning behind them. Thank you for sharing!!
Hello Sri! Thank you so much for the information on the Third Worlds Theory. I never knew that the first world was the US and its allies, the second world was the communist allies and Soviet Union, and the third world was the remaining nations. I will definitely be looking more into this know that I know the term “third world countries” and their lower socioeconomic status came from this theory. I am excited to read again with this new interpretation in mind. It is so interesting how these terms came about after this war, and I am interested to learn about how and what other concepts and ideas came to be popular. Thanks for a great first post of the semester!
Thank you so much for providing this summarized, but also elaborated, information. Before the reading, I though of first world countries as any high functioning, highly populated country that provides for the rest of the world. The second and third world countries had less production and “relevance” in the global setting. After reading, I know the true meaning and history of the formation of the names. Additionally, I am now aware of how the rankings can place a heavy emphasis on the “one and other” ideas because the first and second world do not want to be viewed as an other so there is a constant power struggle between them, but the third world will always be viewed as the other. Thank you for sharing and starting the semester off strong!
Hi Sri,
Your presented great insight about the Three World Theory because reading the article was the first time I learned about this theory. Jameson’s view of this theory is an example how we sometimes around the world look at one point of view and try to judge a whole country based on that. I like how Ahmad took the time to explain and go in detail about what the Three World Theory should be about and not trying to build a division on the poor and the wealthy. Many countries lived their own lifestyle that was different but normal for them but it came out to be undeveloped. The assumptions of the past Ahmad did a great job of trying to correct Jamson’s view. Thank you for explaining self vs other as its a new concept that I am becoming familiar with. I am glad we have come a long way into accepting every country and the different lifestyles to get more knowledge about it.
This analysis was a very strong start to this class blog. I had never even considered that something like the Cold War had anything to do with what we consider to be Third World Countries. Sri did an amazing job relating the self vs Other to this topic. Not only did he relate the topic to the explanation of “the third world” but I truly feel like the overall explanation would be severely weakened with out the self- other theory integrated in. It really does show that if a group is singled out that they can develop negative descriptions over time.
Sri, reading your presentation was very insightful. Today, in the 21st century, I feel I most commonly hear the term “third world” in reference to a lack of access to medical care and medical advancements that are present in other countries. To read about the research you have done on the background and the origin of this term taught me a lot. You presented the information in a clear and concise way that made it easy for me to learn that this separation of “worlds” was created during the time of the cold war. Having this new knowledge of the separation of worlds by first, second, and third brings about a better understanding of the claims Ahmad makes in his essay. I begin to agree with Ahmad, that literature should not have a main classification based on geographical location, especially when these coined terms have very little relevance to the literature that is presented.
Hi Sri,
I found your background information to be informative and open up a different perspective in this week’s excerpt. I now have a better understanding of the text from reading the excerpt and reading the additional information you included. The way that writing and others perspective about the world doesn’t fully give off the true meaning of the “worlds.” Using the Self vs. Other concept helped me understand both concepts as well!
Hi, Sri! Thank you so much for providing us with the wonderful presentation. I think your article is very well-organized and insightful. Before you mentioned the relationship of “third world” and Cold War, I do not know the origin of “third world”. What I heard about “third world” is like poor area that lacks of resources, medical services, education and so on. Giving the knowledge of the earliest first, second, and third worlds countries, I can understand Ahmad’s thoughts better.
Hi Sri, thank you so much for posting the presentation. It is very helpful. First of all, I understand the definition of thirld world. That’s the word during the Cold War between United States anf Soviet Union. Secondly, I understand what the third world means in current day. It represents those countries which is imporvished and undeveloped. Finally, I know how Self vs. Others cause the third world.
Hi Sri,
Thanks for posting this background informaiton on the Ahmed reading this week. I found this all very informative and helpful to understanding the reading better. I didn’t actually know the origins of first world, second world, and third world countries until you presented it for us. I also think this almost confirms how our narrow minded views on what third world countries is. I had always thought that third world countries meant developing and didn’t realize it was a actually reference to neutral nations in the cold war. “The One” and “The Other” makes a lot more sense to me in this context too since it almost seems like first world countries are bitter towards them for not teaming against the Soviet union. Thanks again for sharing this information and enhancing my learning experience!
Hi Sri,
I liked the background information you provided to help give better understanding of the reading this week. I was the discussion post starter for the week, so I also had to take a stab at understanding the text prior to the aid of this blog post and other classmates input! I found the reading this week to be very interesting and I liked the context you provided to give even further background.
It is a relevant topic, as this way of describing the world is still used today. And I can now see how first, second and third world has now evolved to the meaning we give it today. The association to the Cold War and where these terms came from I was surprised about.
Thanks for your research and help better understanding the reading this week!
As an American, we are taught of the less fortunate which we consider third world countries. The Third World, as I know it is undeveloped, or the poorer nations. I have never thought about the word “third world” beyond that until now. It has separated the fortunate to the less fortunate. You dive right into the reasoning behind it. I enjoyed your writing.
Hello Sri,
You did a great job with your post it really furthered my understanding of the concept of “third world”. I think you really grasped the key points from the reading to really explain the concept well. Your post really shows how the idea of a “third world” started and what it has evolved into today. I, along with I am sure many others hear third world and just know what we have been told in todays world. Now, I have a better understanding of the history behind the labeling of a third world country.
Hello Sri,
You have made this even more insightful. The cold war relation in this discussion was definitely intriguing and I am glad to learn about its impact. This article has led me to deeply understand the terminology when it comes to the first, second, and third world and its origin.
Hello Sri,
I totally agree with your point that due to the social and economic aggregates of many countries in the definition of the third world, the term has gained a new meaning in undeveloped countries or poorer countries. And now many “third world” countries are mistaken for poor and underdeveloped countries.I think the Third World is also developing rapidly. Cannot define them with this narrow understanding。
Hello Sri,
I found it very interesting the background of the where first world, second world, and third world came to be and how it has developed over time into the idea of first class being superior which has led to the self verse other idea. And I really like that you mentioned how Jameson’s based his ideas off economic status, which I feel like it still used today whether it be discussing nations or induvuduals it seems like someone’s so called importance is based on economic status. Instead of looking at other factors everything in todays world is based on money and if you had money then you have this sense of importance which leads into the idea of self verses other.
I find it not right that people refer to things as first, second, or third world. I can see by economics standpoint but other than that there really should not be a label. Especially when it comes to extracurricular things. For example, literature is perfect example because this only makes people judge the literate before you even read it. There is no reason to put a label on something when it actually has nothing to do with it.