Artikel Tentang Jameson The Third World in Jameson's Posmodernism or The Cultural Logic of Lata Capitalism

The Third World in Jameson's Postmodernism or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism
Author(s): Santiago Colás

Source: Social Text, No. 31/32, Third World and Post-Colonial Issues (1992), pp. 258-270
Published by: Duke University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/466230
Accessed: 19-12-2017 10:45 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/466230?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Duke University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Social Text
This content downloaded from 202.43.93.14 on Tue, 19 Dec 2017 10:45:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
The Third World in Jameson's
Postmodernism or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism'
SANTIAGO COLAS
The "Third World" performs a paradoxical double function in Fredric

Jameson's theory of postmodernism. It is both the space whose final
elimination by the inexorable logic of capitalist development consolidates
the social moment - late capitalism - whose cultural dominant is
postmodernism, and the space that remains somehow untainted by and
oppositional to those repressive social processes which have
homogenized the real and imaginative terrain of the "First World" sub-
ject. The latter function then secretly makes possible that subject's at-
tempts to gain a historical foothold through which to recall the past out
of which the seemingly etqjnal, postmodern, present emerged; that is, to
think the present historically and thus to think the possibility of trans-
forming it.
I want in this essay to focus on this characteristic of Jameson's theory.
It should be said, in light of this apparently rather narrow focus, that
Jameson's various interventions in the postmodernism debate (some of
which are collected - most with revisions - in this volume,2 along with
four additional pieces) have already occasioned extensive review and
critique.3 These responses have more often been specifically directed
toward the more well known features of his description: his analysis of
the Bonaventure Hotel in Los Angeles, of the nostalgia mode in fiction
and film, of schizophrenia, intensities and the postmodern sublime, of the
"waning of affect," and so on. Nevertheless, I have elected to look
specifically at the function of the "Third World" in the theory. Why?
Because I believe it is at the heart of Jameson's pathbreaking assertion
that postmodernism is "the cultural logic of late capitalism." For late
capitalism itself only comes into being with the disappearance of the
"Third World." From this link between cultural processes and transforma-
tions within a mode of production follow Jameson's thoroughgoing
analyses of the various cultural artifacts in his canon of postmodern
culture. On the "other end" of the theory, Jameson predicates his vision
of the possibility of a transformative politics in postmodernism - hing-
ing on the double imperative that the present be thought historically and
that utopia remain an operative category - on the continued existence of
the "Third World" as a space recalling our own, "First World," history.
Thus, it is my contention that neither Jameson's description of postmoder-
258
Santiago Colds 259
nism, nor his prescr

tion without the pa
In the first part of
the "Third World,"
and utopia in postm
the very social pro
capitalism itself - th
makes possible (and
paradoxical vision of
part of my essay,
World" in postmode
social process, late c
This critical explorat
to the concluding se
suggestions toward u
ship between "Third
ments gathered unde
I want at this point
World" and "First W
utility or desirabilit
they can be used on
most important am
exists within those
of course, not only
there are also "Third Worlds" within the "First World" and vice-versa.
These, then, are some of the pitfalls that attend the use of this termino
ogy. But deconstructing the false oppositions these terms designate re
quires something more than the one-time revelation of their inadequacie
The reader, then, will have noted that I have used these terms only with
quotation marks. The quotation marks represent my (typographical
limited) attempt to place the terms sous rature. For Derrida, the impera
tive to write sous rature governs a discourse which "borrows from
heritage the resources necessary for the deconstruction of that herita
itself."5 Placing terms like "Third World" and "First World" sous ratur
thus marks both the inadequacy and the indispensability of the terms an
the system of geo-political designations to which they belong. If w
cannot yet do without such unsatisfactory terms, then we need not resig
ourselves to an unreflexive use of them.
We can approach the two poles of Jameson's vision of the "Third

World" by way of, on the one hand, his understanding of the consolidation
of late capitalism and its relationship to what he calls "Nature" and the
"Third World" and, on the other hand, the so-called "crisis in historicity"
260 The Third World in Jameson
(22) and the need for a conc

purer capitalism of our tim
eliminates the enclaves of precapitalist organization it had hitherto
tolerated and exploited in a tributary way. One is tempted to speak in this
connection of a new and historically original penetration and colonization
of Nature and the Unconscious: that is the destruction of precapitalist
Third World agriculture by the Green Revolution, and the rise of the
media and the advertising industry" (36). Compare this to Jameson's
description of the constitutive feature of late capitalism in another essay:
"Late capitalism can therefore be described as the moment in which the
last vestiges of Nature which survived on into classical capitalism are at
length eliminated: namely the third world and the unconscious"
("Periodizing the 60s," 207).
The disappearance of the "Third World" manifests the onset of late
capitalism in Jameson's account. He does not claim that the disappearance
of the "Third World" brings on late capitalism. The latter proceeds, of
course, from the logic of capitalism's internal development which
prompts technological "revolutions," and it is the latest one of these that
has brought on - via the Green Revolution and the mass media - those
visible symptoms of late capitalism such as the disappearance of the
"Third World." Nevertheless, it is safe to consider the disappearance of
the "Third World" as a constitutive feature of late capitalism, as Jameson
describes it. That is to say in other words, if the description is accurate,
that we can distinguish late capitalism from other stages by the disap-
pearance of the "Third World." Indeed, this disappearance of the "Third
World" ranks first among the other visible manifestations of late
capitalism:
What marks the development of the new concept [of late capitalism -
SC] over the older one [employed by the Frankfurt School - SC]
(which was still roughly consistent with Lenin's notion of a 'monopo-
ly stage' of capitalism) is not merely an emphasis on the emergence of
new forms of business organization (multinationals, transnationals)
beyond the monopoly stage but, above all, the vision of a world
capitalist system fundamentally distinct from the older imperialism,
which was little more than a rivalry between the various colonial
powers (xix).
It is then - "above all" - a change in the status of the "Third World"
with respect to capital that distinguishes late capitalism, namely
capitalism's final saturation of the previously colonized, but presumably
untransformed, "agricultural" spaces of the "Third World."
This is late capitalism as described by Jameson. The features of the
cultural logic of late capitalism are familiar by now:
a new depthlessness, which finds its prolongation both in contem-
porary 'theory' and in a whole new culture of the image or the
simulacrum; a consequent weakening of historicity, both in our
Santiago Colds 261
relationship to publi
temporality, whose
determine new type
more temporal arts;
what I will call 'inte
to older theories of t
As I noted above, th
of Jameson's analys
features are register
its relationship to th
the "Third World," i
In part, my attenti
insistence, througho
historicize!" - the famous "slogan" and opening line of The Political
Unconscious6 - returns in modified form at the beginning of Postmoder-
nism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism: "It is safest," Jameson
writes, "to grasp the concept of the postmodern as an attempt to think the
present historically in an age that has forgotten how to think historically
in the first place" (ix). These are the first words of the book and their
centrality should remind us that, after all his timely invectives against
moralizing denunciations and obsequious celebrations of the postmodern,
Jameson sees his own theoretical intervention in the debate as an attempt
to think through the phenomenon historically; in particular to think
through its "crisis in historicity." It might be helpful, prior to spelling out
the connection between the disappearance of the "Third World" and this
crisis of historicity, to provide a sense of what Jameson means by his-
toricity. "Historicity is," he writes, "neither a representation of the past
nor a representation of the future (although its various forms use such
representations): it can first and foremost be defined as a perception of
the present as history; that is as relationship to the present which some-
how defamiliarizes it and allows us that distance from immediacy which
is at length characterized as historical perspective" (284).
The weakening of historicity is linked to the disappearance of the
"Third World." Let me establish this connection with a passage from the
earlier published version of Chapter Six of Postmodernism, or, The Cul-
tural Logic of Late Capitalism. According to Jameson, our experience of
time is distinguishable from that of "the 'moderns' [who] lived in a space
in which the technologically (or the socially) modern was still little more
than an enclave; in which the country still coexists with the city and still
largely outweighs it" ("Postmodernism and Utopia," 13; see Postmoder-
nism 307-11 for a similar discussion of the modern experience of time and
history). The uncolonized space of what Jameson calls "Nature" (to return
to the book) "is related to memory.. . because it throws up the concept
and the image of an older mode of agricultural production..."
(Postmodernism, 366). "In modernism ... some residual zones of 'nature'
or 'being,' of the old, the olde

"Historicity - the 'sense of
period, then, the lived coexis
the existential experience, wi
multiple 'alternate' historical
However, this experience is "
who inhabit the same 'one-di
ization that has abolished Natu
modes of production" ("Postm
in the book, "Implicit in all th
namely, the effacement of na
the postmodern, the essentia
perience now uniformly mod
nism is what you have when
nature is gone for good" (ix).
In the postmodern, then, the pa
well-known 'sense of the past'
Where its buildings still rema
them to be transferred to the p
very different and postmodern
now organized and planned; nat
along with peasants, petit-bou
aristocracies and imperial bureaucracies. Ours is a more
homogeneously modernized condition; we no longer are encumbered
with the embarrassment of non-simultaneities and non-
synchronicities. Everything has reached the same hour on the
clock of development or rationalization (at least from the persp
of the 'West'). (309-10)
Thus, the loss of historicity posits as its precondition the e

late capitalism and, as we have already seen, the latter's
abolition of the Nature of the "Third World."
This incapacity to think history has grave political consequences in
Jameson's account. Its importance could already have been gauged by the
fact that his entire theoretical project with respect to the postmodern
could be seen as an attempt to recover it. "The breakdown of temporality,"
Jameson writes, speaking of the individual subject, "suddenly releases
this present of time from all the activities and intentionalities that might
focus it and make it a space of praxis" (27). Without a sense of the present
as a moment in a historical continuum ranging from past to future - that
is, without "historicity" - we eternalize it, and lose our capacity to
imagine alternatives to it. And, while it is this capacity that forms the
indispensable precondition to political practice, it is precisely this
capacity that appears to have been eclipsed in the postmodern. Jameson's
account is thus filled with images of the "abolition of critical distance"
(46): our total immersion in the hyperspace of postmodern architecture
Santiago Colds 263
(43), the final penetr

spaces" and the "swee
is not unaware of the f
of constructing a pol
discussed above. He r
logic" in which "the m
system or logic .. the
as the theorist wins,
terrifying machine, t
of his work is thereb
not to speak of those
as vain and trivial in
It is at this point th
very return, since it
the one discussed abo
For now it is the "Th
sions of opposition to
World" subject can b
think the present his
feeling that all cultu
sense I will be confe
escapes the cultural lo
book: "various forms
those of radically dis
These are the "resista
nism - SC] has a voc
ment is made in the c
work of sculptor Han
tion which is clearly
tional - something th
not seem to have bee
the aforementioned "
politically oppositiona
the ineluctable logic
eliminated all such "A
It is such marginal
which we in the "Fi
cultural politics of a
looked like; and there
and therefore change
If historicity and s
politics, they are bot
impulse to preserve a
lines - forms perhap
toricity and the "Third World

insist very strongly on the n
vision in any contemporary
taught us, is part of the legac
doned in any reevaluation of
(159). Read against our prev
"historicity" and the "emerg
that the concept of utopia ta
involve paradoxes. There is, o
represented by the paradoxica
ly in an age that has forgotten
And, on the other hand, ther
World" culture from which e
ture" in spite of the fact that
those very precapitalist encla
offered extraterritorial and Archimedean footholds for critical effec-
tivity" (49). But these two utopias are also linked in that it is precisely
loss of the "Third World" - as representative of our own bygone mod
of production - which brings on the crisis in historicity. It seems then,
summarize, that when Jameson's "First World" subject looks out beyo
his or her borders, he or she sees both an extension of "First World"
homogeneity where "Third World" difference used to be, and a
"heterogeneity" of forces constructing opposition in the face of what
might only be a tendential suffusion of "Third World" space by multina-
tional capitalism.
Before reflecting on the objective conditions of contemporary
capitalism that might determine the character of Jameson's account, I
want to provide a different sort of "explanation." Jameson writes, in his
critique of Walter Benn Michaels' The Gold Standard and the Logic of
Naturalism, that within the range of forms taken by utopian thought "it is
thus the limits, the systemic restrictions and repressions, or empty places,
in the Utopian blueprint that are the most interesting, for these alone
testify to the ways a culture or a system marks the most visionary mind
and contains its movement toward transcendence" (208). What I want to
say about this is that perhaps Jameson's paradoxical calls for postmodern
cultural politics function as indices of precisely such "empty spaces in the
Utopian blueprint" for our own time. That is, only by insisting on the
necessity of doing that - namely, thinking the present historically -
which precisely it seems is excluded from the matrix of possible respon-
ses to/within contemporary culture, only in this way can the concept of a
utopian future be kept alive. This said, I will now move to a different way
of thinking the conditions of Jameson's paradoxical vision of the "Third
World."
Santiago Col&s 265
I propose that this pa

the logic of late capi
differential. And I am
development" often in
nist) sense of "the de
and unchanging regio
following passage fro
the twentieth century
of the historical proc
'underdeveloped' coun
trary, the gap betwee
trary, I have in mind Neil Smith's concept of uneven development
described, if rather dramatically, here: "capital is like a plague of locusts.
It settles on one place, devours it, then moves on to plague another place.
Better, in the process of restoring itself after one plague the region makes
itself ripe for anothert .... Differentiation as the means to a spatial fix
becomes itself the problem to be fixed."8 In this conceptualization,
capitalism becomes a mobile process rather than a lumbering, if methodi-
cal, leviathan. This capital does not lend itself to a binary conceptual
structure of regions easily and permanently identified as "penetrated or
unpenetrated," "First World or Third World," "metropolis or satellite,"
"developed or underdeveloped." As Arjun Appadurai writes, "The new
global cultural economy has to be seen as a complex, overlapping, dis-
junctive order, which cannot any longer be understood in terms of existing
center-periphery models (even those which might account for multiple
centers and peripheries)."9 Even Ernest Mandel, from whom Jameson
takes his economic model, describes late capitalism as "an integrated
unity, but . . . an integrated unity of non-homogeneous parts, and it is
precisely the unity that here determines their lack of homogeneity."'0
The groundwork for this concept is already laid in Marx's Grundrisse."
Marx writes, on the one hand, that capital: "is therefore the constant
impulse to exceed its quantitative limits: an endless process" (28: 201)
and that it "is destructive towards, and constantly revolutionises . . . tear-
ing down all barriers which impede the development of the productive
forces, the extension of the range of needs, the differentiation of produc-
tion, and the exploitation and exchange of all natural and spiritual
powers" (28: 337). On the other hand, from the fact that "capital posits
every such limit as a barrier which it has ideally overcome, it does not at
all follow that capital has really overcome it; and since every such limit
contradicts the determination of capital, its production is subject to
contradictions which are constantly overcome but just as constantly
posited" (28: 337, his italics, boldface added).
But I also want to emphasize t

constructed logical tendency
description until two interre
capitalism itself had to develop
tendencies for the full effects
second, theory itself had to d
component of capitalism's logic.
sophisticated theorization of lat
of radical geography, whose ow
mulations of the logic of conte
was Smith's own teacher, the g
that "geographic differentiation
are not: mere historical residua
tures within the capitalist mo
explain how the "Third World"
patible roles in Jameson's acc
"flexible" capitalism.
III
But all this also demands that we realize that not only the respect
internal characteristics of the "First World" and a whole set of "Third
World" Others have been transformed recently, but also that the very
dialectical relations between "First World" and "Third World" - be-
tween "the external" and "the internal" - have been reconfigure
these reconfigurations, the shifting movements of global capital, i
way signify, as Octavio Paz suggested, that "we are all on the m
because there is no center," thereby implying that we are all equall
the margin.14
Indeed this fetishization of marginality has been a recurrent the
among some of the more apocalyptic postmodernisms, not least am
"Latin American" writers.15 Severo Sarduy articulates such a vision i
theory of an essentially "Latin American" "neo-baroque" in whic
loss of a central signifier or referent generates an endless circulati
signifiers; or in his vision of a fundamental historical break with t
elaboration of a heliocentric theory of the universe whereby the mod
the earth as the center of a set of concentric circles was replaced b
model of the earth and the sun as the double foci of an ellipsis; or in
theory of simulation and transvestism in which the tranvestite copi
the female (the absent signified or center), but "femaleness."'6 And i
reminds us of Baudrillard's simulacrum, it may be because Baudrill
himself constructs a similar vision of the present oriented around th
of a center in his elogy to the flat surfaces of the deserts and highw
"Am6rique." In fact his very assessment of contemporary geo-polit
almost an echo of Paz: "But if America is now no longer the monopo
Santiago Colis 267
centre of world pow

because there is no ce
Though Baudrillard
Paz's analysis, I think
No such radical equ
occupying it still car
may allow us to say
center-margin relati
figured and disperse
something very diff
longer inhabit a wor
axis - imperialist cen
laborer - we equally
quality have disappe
we now recognize fo
structures, practices
If it is a matter of a
ships, then this has
artistic practice. I w
An understanding of
the heterogeneity th
places itself) among t
social conditions and aesthetic traditions. But second, such an under-
standing demands that the "original," "native" or "unique" elements iden-
tified in those artifacts be interpreted not only in the light of those local
phenomena, but also in light of the differentiating, global processes of
capitalism and other structures of domination which, while not immedi-
ately present, exert (along with a variety of other forces) an ineluctable
pressure on them. In practice, this involves the disentangling of the
various local and global, socio-political, cultural and aesthetic discourses
that are sedimented and transformed in the formal and technical activity
of the text. What are the political implications of this practice?
Global structures of domination survive a differentiation that requires
us to grasp the various, local postmodernities, as related, but not therefore
homogeneous or identical. Our task as critics must be to retain a tension
between what will remain an unsatisfactorily homogenizing term -
postmodernism - and the heterogeneous local forms produced within
and sometimes against its logic. To this extent, I should acknowledge that
something of this spirit motivates Jameson's own seemingly "totalizing"
argument: "At any rate, this has been the political spirit in which the
following analysis was devised: to project some concept of a new sys-
tematic cultural norm and its reproduction in order to reflect more ade-
quately on the most effective forms of any radical cultural politics today"
(6). I would suggest that if Jameson has successfully projected the "con-
cept of a new systematic cultura

more adequately on the most
politics today." So that, for exa
tension between local differ
politics in postmodernism. On
confront his projected concep
various local forms of cultural
whose existence and various sp
this way, certain global catego
other global models of postmo
with greater flexibility, to ass
heterogeneous forms of resist
today.
Let me end with a very brief example. The 1980's saw the emergence,
in the Southern Cone of Latin America, of a body of fiction interweaving
figures and events from Latin American history with private narratives of
individuals living the tragedies of the military dictatorships in the
Southern Cone region in the early 70s. Applying the pregiven categories
of Jameson's model, we might call these texts "postmodern fantastic
historiography" (see 364-76), a form Jameson sees as symptomatic of the
"weakening of historicity." I do consider these narratives postmodern in
that they respond to local structures of oppression which were partly
manifestations of the kind of restructuring of global capital described by
Jameson and those other theorists cited above, but their distance from
Jameson's genre, or from what Linda Hutcheon calls "historiographic
metafiction,,)'8 can only be grasped by attending to the local social and
cultural circumstances out of which they emerge. As a response to the
appropriation of historical discourse by the military regimes in the region,
these texts are fundamentally resistant in their interrogation of the proces-
ses by which private narratives of historical change are universalized and
employed as justification for exclusive and repressive political prac-
tices.19 If modern philosophies of history understood the repressive char-
acter of historical thought, they still saw themselves as enlightened,
outside the enchanting power of dominant history, capable of disarming
it from the outside and of narrating a new history whose veracity would
be self-evident, and upon which a new utopian future could be forged. In
the Southern Cone, after the decimation of democracy and history, that
space of immunity, along with its claims to truth, is untenable. The history
that is narrated there today must be the history of the violent
problematization of historical narration. This brief example may first
illustrate the dangers of applying the broad concepts of Jameson's model,
produced in North America, to cultural artifacts produced in other
regions. But more importantly it demonstrates the kind of inscription of
detail to which I referred above, an inscription by which the suggestive
Santiago Colas 269
categories of a global th
invigorated through a
postmodern responses t
and on the other, the in
tion with the diverse lo
today.
Notes
1. Fredric Jameson, Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism (Durham,
N.C.: Duke University Press, 1990).
2. Chapter One as "Postmodemism, or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism," New Left
Review 146 (July - August, 1984): 53-92; Chapter Two as "The Politics of Theory:
Ideological Positions in the Postmodernism Debate," New German Critique 33 (Fall, 1984),
53-65; Chapter Four as "Spatial Equivalents: Postmodernist Architecture and the World
System," The States of "Theory": History, Art, and Critical Discourse, Ed. David Carroll
(New York: Columbia University Press, 1990), 12548; Chapter Six as "Postmodernism and
Utopia," Utopia Post-Utopia: Configurations of Nature and Culture in Recent Sculpture
and Photography (Boston: Institute of Contemporary Art, 1988), 11-32; Chapter Eight as
"Postmodemism and the Market," The Retreat of the Intellectuals: Socialist Register 1990,
Ed. Ralph Miliband and Leo Panitch (London: Merlin, 1990), 95-110; and Chapter Nine as
"Nostalgia for the Present," SAQ 38.2 (Spring, 1989): 517-37.
See also, though they do not appear in the book: the "pendant" to the New Left Review
essay entitled "Third-World Literature in the Era of Multinational Capitalism," Social Text
15 (Fall, 1986): 65-88; "Cognitive Mapping," 1983, Marxism and the Interpretation of
Culture, Ed. Cary Nelson and Lawrence Grossberg (Urbana: University of Illinois Press,
1988), 347-60; "Periodizing the 60s," The 60s Without Apology, Ed. Sohnya Sayres et al
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press and Social Text, 1984), 178-209; "Regarding
Postmodernism - A Conversation with Fredric Jameson," by Anders Stephanson, Social
Text 17 (Fall, 1987): 29-54; "Foreword," Jean-Frangois Lyotard, The Postmodern Condi-
tion: A Report on Knowledge, 1979, Trans. Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi (1984;
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1986), vii-xxi; and "Postmodernism and
Consumer Society," 1982, The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture, Ed. Hal
Foster (1983; Port Townsend, Wa.: Bay Press, 1986), 111-25.
3. See, for example, Mike Davis, "Urban Renaissance and the Spirit of Postmodernism,"
New Left Review 151 (May - June, 1985): 106-13; Terry Eagleton, "Capitalism, Moder-
nism, and Postmodemism," New Left Review 152 (July - August, 1985): 60-73; Aijaz
Ahmad, "Jameson's Rhetoric of Otherness and the 'National Allegory'," Social Text 17
(Fall, 1987): 3-25; Donald Preziosi, "La Vi(ll)e en Rose: Reading Jameson Mapping Space,"
Strategies 1 (Fall, 1988): 82-99; and, of course, Douglas Kellner, ed., Postmoder-
nism/Jameson/Critique (Washington, D.C.: Maisonneuve Press, 1989).
4. See, for example, Ahmad, "Jameson's."
5. Jacques Derrida, Writing and Difference, 1967, Trans. Alan Bass (1978; Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1989).
6. Fredric Jameson, The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act
(Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1981), 9.
7. Samir Amin, Unequal Development: An Essay on the Social Formations of Peripheral
Capitalism, 1973, Trans. Brian Pearce (New York: Monthly Review, 1976), 9.
8.Neil Smith, Uneven Development: Nature, Capital and the Production of Space (Ox-
ford: Basil Blackwell, 1984), 152.
9. Arjun Appadurai, "Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy," Public
Culture 2.2 (Spring, 1990), 6.
10. Ernest Mandel, Late Capitalism, 1972, Trans. Joris DeBres (1975; London: Verso,
1987), 102.
11. Karl Marx, Grundrisse, 1857, Karl Marx -Frederick Engels, Collected Works, 50
vols, (New York: International Publishers, 1986), vols. 28-9,
12. See Edward Soja, Postmodern Geographies: The Reassertion of Space in Critical
Social Theory (London: Verso, 1989). For example, Soja writes, introducing his set of
essays, that "Today, however, it may b

us, the 'making of geography' more th
revealing tactical and theoretical world
13. David Harvey, The Limits to Cap
416, italics added.
14. Octavio Paz, El laberinto de la so
152. Quoted in George Yddice, "Puede
Revista de critica literaria latinoamer
15. For a critique of the contemporary
"Marginality and the Ethics of Surviva
nism, Ed. Andrew Ross (Minneapolis:
also his "Postmodernity and Transna
manuscript).
16. Severo Sarduy, "The Baroque a
America in its Literature, Ed. C6sar
1980), 115-132; Barroco (Buenos Aire
Monte Avila, 1982).
17. Jean Baudrillard, America, 1986, T
18. Linda Hutcheon, A Poetics of Pos
Routledge, 1988).
19. See my "Un postmodernismo resis
y la historia," forthcoming in Nuevo
second part of a special double issue
Latina."

Artikel Tentang Jameson The Third World in Jameson's Posmodernism or The Cultural Logic of Lata Capitalism

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Artikel Tentang Jameson The Third World in Jameson's Posmodernism or The Cultural Logic of Lata Capitalism

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Third World in Jameson's Postmodernism or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism

Author(s): Santiago Colás

The "Third World" performs a paradoxical double function in Fredric

nism, nor his prescr

We can approach the two poles of Jameson's vision of the "Third

(22) and the need for a conc

or 'being,' of the old, the olde

Thus, the loss of historicity posits as its precondition the e

(43), the final penetr

toricity and the "Third World

I propose that this pa

But I also want to emphasize t

centre of world pow

cept of a new systematic cultura

essays, that "Today, however, it may b

You might also like