Passage Two

Many，many people have pointed out the dilemmas and complicities in the academic institutionalization of radical movements and discourses．Like academic feminism，postcolonialism is rife with contradictions that reside in the often unquestioned and rarely contested hierarchies and relations of power in the university or college．Our analyses，often trenchant and astute，of cultural texts，seems so often not to pertain to our institutional texts，discourses，and processes:to our relationships with our colleagues，students，support staff，administrators and the like．In our institutional lives，we can clearly see and frequently encourage the replication of the very structures colonialism and imperialism were based on and thrived on．

One of the paths I have chosen in my travels through the universities I have worked in is anti-racism，specifically in my classrooms．Antiracist pedagogy，whether classroom，collegial，or otherwise institutional，seems to me to be an essential component of the postcolonial，of postcolonial pedagogy．Yet—andthisiswheremyprofoundest uneasiness and conflict with postcolonialism lies—the project of anti-racism seems in many cases to be elided by，or anathema to，those of us who“do”postcolonialism．The project of theorizing our pedagogies seems to be marginal even to us，with the consequence that those people and bodies of people who evaluate the postcolonial academic's progress can say with complete sincerity，“what does anti-racist pedagogy have to do with your research into postcolonial literatures”?While it is easy to attribute this kind of comment to outsider ignorance，I suspect the fault lies equally with those of us who profess the postcolonial，without professing the role of race and racism，and without resisting the role of race and racism in our methods of teaching，the texts and subjects we choose，and so on．I have certainly argued elsewhere，and often enough，for us postcolonialists to scrutinize the place that pedagogy(postcolonial pedagogy)has in our theorizing of the postcolonial，and argued that we must also write about it，talk about it，deprivatize the almost pathological isolation in which we teach，interrogate for ourselves，colleagues，and students how we privilege and institutionalize certain knowledges;critique even the most trivial of our assumptions about good teaching，important teaching，and important learning．The postcolonial academic，it seems to me，must work out her reasons for silence，for certain kinds of grading strategies and types of assignments，for certain modes of transmitting knowledge，for her defensiveness and ignorance on certain occasions，for her position on advocating for students and colleagues alike，her position on what constitutes academic freedom，“proper”scholarship，and the like．And quite simply，not enough of us do that well—unlearning colonialist，racist，nationalist attitudes is not a simple task，and is perhaps doubly complex for those of us who have a vested interest in doing postcolonial work，as if that naturally exempts us from the real work required for that unlearning．It is as if we too have accepted that learning is based on a model of consumption，that to be a postcolonialist is to have instantly jumped fromdarkness to enlightenment without the long and difficult work—the research if you like—which is in fact required．

With this in mind，I wonder how many of us examine our students' progress through the academy as both allegories and histories of colonialism;in Canada，how the position of“international students”is racialized through that history，in terms of funding，our oftenunexamined attitudes about them，ESL^[11]examinations，their choice of research areas，even their freedom of movement from nation to nation．It is here that we tend，even as we profess the importance of history and of historicizing，to become resolutely ahistorical，and in the fine tradition of liberal individualism，see these events as individual cases，as problems with personality conflicts，and as aberrant;at any rate，as something in which we cannot intervene．

Postcolonial scholars，at all places in the academic hierarchies，must intervene，must take on the anti-oppression work that is，to my mind，an integral part of the postcolonial project．Such work discomfits and discomforts many of us，and involves indeed a certain amount of risk，a certain blurring and redefining of boundaries that many of us hold very dear to our sense of academic selfhood．As Rey Chow^[12]points out，very uncomfortably for me，the hold of white supremacy can be seen on both sides of the debates around“political correctness”—debates，again，that are easier sometimes to ignore than to contest．I suggest，too，that we intervene as postcolonial pedagogues by critiquing，for example，in our classrooms(and outside of them)the particularly entrenched ideologies of multiculturalism that，particularly in Canadawhere it is established as an official political discourse and policy，are so effective that any anti-racist work in the university classroom must involve a discussion and unpacking of multiculturalism as a form of racism．Both Deepika Bahri^[13]and Kalpana Sesahdri-Crooks^[14]discuss these issues in the US context，and their own critiques serve as useful starting points for positing a pedagogical strategy for a solid critique not only of multiculturalism，but many of the concomitant debates about equity，affirmative action，representation in various cultural texts，academic freedom，and the like．

As many have suggested in these two issues on postcolonialism，the field，perhaps more accurately called now a discipline，can at times be(and is often perceived to be)monolithic and universalizing，recapitulating the very colonizing strategies it seeks to critique;certainly those of us who practice it are often guilty of not allowing for plurality and specificity，guilty，in the tradition of multiculturalism，of merely tolerating dissenting views while guarding our own postcolonial territory．Or，as with multiculturalism，there are many who dabble in the field，hungry for song-dance-food-costume，who create of postcolonialism a secondary specialization，without sufficient regard for theoretical，political，and cultural homework．

In an earlier paper，I suggested that part of a shift in thinking might be a rhetorical one．At what point did postcoloniality become the discipline of postcolonialism，an-ism that competes with others for attention and forvalidation?If postcoloniality，like postmodernity，is conceived of as a cultural condition，a state of being，then the other-isms—feminism，antiracism，racism，and so on are very clearly strands within a larger cultural project，and not，more narrowly，only an intellectual one．Here，I may be being idealistic—predictable counterpoint to postcolonial discontentment and cynicism—what use，after all，in playing with the master's words in his house?As students of imperialism，however，we know that discursive resistance is real resistance，and that identity politics often circulate in and through our languages．

The field of the postcolonial is enormous and complicated，more than many of our other literary fields and specializations．It is of necessity political;and for myself the politics inherent in it must in part define it．As with other political debates within the academy，I fear that we postcolonialists permit ourselves to accept the politics of ignorance，and the perpetuation of ignorance-as-knowledge，especially in our classrooms，especially when the issues we face and debate are controversial and emotional．The first step in my postcolonial pedagogy is to own up to ignorance，to point out that the will to know is not conducive to understanding，in essence to humble myself and my students into recognizing how our ways of knowing，thinking，and reading are defined by their own limits．Easier said than done，when the discourses of freedom，individuality，and tolerance sustain a cultural ignorance that is sometimes astounding and always frightening．Easier said than done，when the enormity of the task of cultural critique works directly against the interests of our disciplinary areas and assumptions．

I hope to suggest what I see as the biggest hurdle to overcome in establishing postcolonial studies as a truly intellectual，liberatory project．The atomization of our academic practices，the institutional imperative to elide what at times must be obvious to all of us—that the academy is based on relationships which are identical to and indeed aconsequence of the imperialist impulse—is what we must tackle in our postcolonial work，so that we can never deny the real impact of postcoloniality，never relegate it to a simple reading of texts，never find ourselves theorizing in the service of our vested interests，theorizing against those who challenge us，never deny that current social and institutional oppressions，and active resistance to them，has to be an integral part of what it means to be a postcolonial intellectual．Until this occurs，even for myself，my discontentment with the postcolonial，even as I define myself and my intellectual activity around and through it，will remain profound．

True or False Statements

1．The title for this passage，if you are required to provide one，is The Discontents of Postcolonialism．

2．Colonialism never comes to an end and exists everywhere even in the classroom．

3．The author seems to complain that her/his colleagues don't have a sense of postcolonialism．

4．The author is a pedagogic postcolonialist．

5．The author intends to bring home the idea that postcolonialism must start with routinely activities of people．