Week 4, Postcolonialism and Imperial Motives for Canonization, Jon L. Berquist, (Sugirtharajah)

October 22, 2007

Once again, I came away from reading this article from the Sugirtharahaj text feeling a bit naïve. Not ever in Sunday school class or from the pulpit, have I heard anyone suggest that the formation of the canon was largely influenced by the imperial interests of Persia which sought to propagate among the colonized an ideology that supported the acceptance and hegemony of Persian imperialism. Within this article I was also drawn to ties observed between postcolonial discourse and postmodern philosophy. Berquist makes significant contributions to defining how the canon served as a script or meta-narrative manipulated by those with imperial power to marginalize any alternative narratives. While doing so, he is quite reluctant to make sweeping statements about objective truth in his attempts to avoid “constructing a meta-narrative in competition with other imperializing ones” (89).


One Response to “Week 4, Postcolonialism and Imperial Motives for Canonization, Jon L. Berquist, (Sugirtharajah)”

  1. Beth Says:

    Sara, you put into words exactly what I was struggling with in this particular article regarding Berquist’s unwillingness to talk about “objective truth.” So my thought is why is this article even important? I would love to hear you expand on your thoughts regarding “postcolonial discourse and postmodern philosophy.” Write on!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: