Government College University, Lahore
Department of Philosophy & Interdisciplinary Studies
Programme: Master of Philosophy in Philosophy
Course Convenor: Doctor Muhammad Afzal Khan
Course Name: Post-Colonial Theory
Course Code: PHIL: 7104 (PLE1)
Session: 2022-2024
Credit Hour: 3
Semester: II
Response Paper No.2 on Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak
Can the Subaltern Speak
Name: Junaid Faizan
Roll Number: 0755-MPHIL-PHIL-22
Can the Subaltern Speak
Spivak addresses issues complexities and of representation, power and agency
within the context of postcolonial studies in this essay. Spivak's work critically engages
with the writings of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Louis Althusser and Michel Foucault and
Antonio Gramsci while investigating the implications of Western academic discourse for
subaltern (Gramsci’s concept of referring to groups that lack political agency and are
subjected to dominant hegemonic control) referring to historically subordinate,
marginalized and oppressed groups. Spivak questions whether they can effectively
articulate their own experiences and demands for social change or if they are silenced
and denied a voice by dominant structures of power.
Drawing from Foucault's insights on discourse, power, knowledge and Gramsci’s
concept of hegemony, Spivak critiques Western academic especially Marx’s and
Engels’s discourse for their limited understanding of colonial understanding and saw their
discourse as a tool of domination. Spivak expands analysis of Foucauldian relationship
of power and knowledge to promulgate how knowledge produced within dominant
discourses often excludes subaltern voices. Gramsci's notion of hegemony is also crucial
in understanding how dominant groups maintain their control by shaping societal norms
and values. She identifies how colonial power structures impose epistemic violence on
the subaltern by controlling the means of knowledge production. The colonizers assert
their authority by constructing knowledge about the subaltern without allowing them a
genuine platform to articulate their own experiences. She critiques Western
representations of the colonized "Other," which tend to essentialize and dehumanize
them, reducing their complex realities to simplistic and distorted stereotypes. In this
context, the subaltern is rendered voiceless, unable to represent themselves within the
dominant discourse. This power dynamic perpetuates the subaltern's silencing, making
it difficult for them to speak authentically. She argues that their Eurocentric perspective
leads to an oversimplified analysis of colonialism and fails to address the experiences of
the subaltern.
Spivak argues that the question, "Can the subaltern speak?" is paradoxical. Apart
from the fact that subaltern is often denied the means of self-representation due to
various factors, including illiteracy, lack of access to the dominant language, and the
complex power dynamics that suppress their voices. In the context of colonialism, the
subaltern is relegated to the periphery, and their experiences are distorted or dismissed
in favour of the colonial narrative. While it highlights the need for marginalized voices to
be heard, it also reveals the inherent difficulties in their representation within the Western
epistemic framework. The very act of speaking may involve translation and mediation
through existing discourses, leading to potential misinterpretation and dilution of their
experiences. She examines how the dominant discourse, often propagated by
intellectuals and scholars from the West, appropriates the voice and agency of the
subaltern, leading to epistemic violence. This form of violence occurs when the dominant
culture misrepresents or silences the experiences and knowledge of marginalized
groups. Hence, the subaltern's authentic voice risks being lost in translation or being co-
opted by the dominant discourse, further marginalizing them.
Spivak criticizes essentialist and totalitarian approaches that homogenize and
simplify the subaltern experience. She argues that these groups are diverse and
complex, and their experiences cannot be reduced to a single, unified voice. She warns
against imposing a singular identity upon subaltern communities, as it erases their
diversity and perpetuates the very forms of oppression they seek to challenge. At the
same time, she acknowledges the difficulty of avoiding representation altogether, as
representation is an inherent aspect of language and communication.
Spivak delves into the issue of gender within the subaltern context and examines
the representation of the subaltern woman. Spivak illustrates her arguments through a
critical examination of the historical practice of "sati" in colonial India. "Sati" was the
immolation of widows on their husband's funeral pyres. Spivak analyses how British
colonial authorities used the issue of "sati" to advance their own imperial interests and
justify their civilizing mission, thereby silencing the voices of Indian women and
reinforcing their subaltern status. She critiques the tendency in feminist discourse to
homogenize the experiences of women across cultures, neglecting the complexities of
intersectionality. Subaltern women, she argues, face multiple layers of oppression that
go beyond their gender identity. They encounter not only patriarchal subjugation but also
colonial and racial oppression, making their experiences unique and challenging to
represent accurately. Spivak offers a critique of Western feminism, particularly its
tendency to assume the universal applicability of its theories without considering the
specificity of subaltern contexts. She calls for a more self-reflective approach in which
Western feminists question their own positionality and engage in cross-cultural dialogue
to better understand the struggles of subaltern women. Without such reflexivity, Western
feminist interventions risk imposing their own worldview on non-Western women, further
marginalizing them.
Spivak contends that even when subaltern individuals or groups attempt to speak
out, their voices are often co-opted or misrepresented by the dominant discourses.
Subaltern subjects are caught in a double bind, as they are not allowed to speak on their
own terms nor escape the influence of dominant power structures. She introduces the
concept of "strategic essentialism" (a concept which suggests that oppressed groups
may temporarily adopt essentialist identities) as a means for the subaltern to challenge
and resist and gain agency. While acknowledging the limitations and dangers of
essentializing identities, she suggests with caution that temporarily embracing a
collective identity can be a strategic move to foster solidarity and empower marginalized
groups. This tactic enables subaltern communities to speak with a united voice against
oppression, even if it requires oversimplification.
Spivak suggests that the subaltern can only be recognized as a subject-in-
process, not in the same way as the Western subject. The subaltern's agency is more
challenging to perceive because it exists within a context of multiple oppressions and
power dynamics. Despite the grim analysis, Spivak does not advocate for passivity or
fatalism. She explores the importance of creating spaces of solidarity and allowing the
subaltern to represent themselves actively, even if this representation may not align with
Western paradigms.
While Spivak engages with poststructuralist thinkers, she also critiques some
aspects of poststructuralism, particularly the tendency to focus on language and
representation without adequately addressing the material conditions of the oppressed.
She argues that abstract theorizing should be complemented with practical engagement
and activism. She argues that a singular feminist or postcolonial theory cannot
adequately represent the diverse experiences of women and subaltern groups
worldwide. Instead, she advocates for a more pluralistic approach that acknowledges
and embraces difference. Spivak emphasizes the responsibility of the intellectual,
particularly those from privileged positions, to engage in genuine solidarity with the
subaltern calls upon intellectuals and scholars to reconsider representation of
marginalised voices. and take on a responsible role when engaging with the experiences
of the subaltern. She calls for a more ethical engagement that recognizes and respects
the agency of the subaltern and involves collaboration with local intellectuals and
activists. This entails listening to their voices and facilitating the conditions for their self-
representation. The intellectual must be aware of their own biases and limitations while
analysing and recognizing the agency of the subaltern to articulate their experiences in
their own terms. Spivak cautioned postcolonial scholars of oversimplifications and
generalisations. Spivak particularly highlights the need for feminists to critically examine
their own positions and consider how their interventions may impact marginalized groups.
She emphasizes the importance of centring the experiences and agency of women from
different cultural, social, and economic backgrounds in feminist activism and scholarship.
In concluding remarks, it would be said that this essay of Spivak challenges the
dominant narratives of essentialism, representation, voice and power within academia.
This essay has tendency of being overtly diffused complex and impenetrable and her
over emphasis on the limits of representation risks essentialising the subaltern as forever
silenced. Be as it may Spivak's work forces us to confront the complexities of subaltern
agency, the dangers of essentialism, and the ethical responsibility of intellectuals in
fostering equitable dialogue to be cautious of epistemic violence. By critically engaging
with Foucault and Althusser, she offers a unique philosophical perspective on the
struggles of the historically marginalized and opens avenues for further exploration and
understanding in the realms of postcolonial and feminist thought. She urges for more
inclusive critical engagement with the voices of those who have been historically
marginalized, oppressed and silenced in the interest of social equity and justice and
transformative change. Furthermore, she stressed that one should be aware of one’s
own positionality and to strive for more inclusive and ethical ways of understanding and
representing the experiences of the subaltern. She calls for a more inclusive and
engaged intellectual practice that empowers the subaltern to speak for themselves and
contribute to shaping their own narratives. By doing so, she encourages us to confront
and dismantle the structures of oppression that continue to affect marginalized
communities globally.
Total Word Count: 1457
Peace Out
