Spatial and Temporal Dislocations of Theory, Subjectivity, and Post()Reason in the Geocolonial Politics of Subaltern Studies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay examines some prominent conceptualizations of “subalternity” and “the subaltern” in the literature on subaltern studies. A predominant history of Subaltern Studies has emerged that narrates the theorization, and materialist, national-historical and political tracking of “the subaltern” through the work of Antonio Gramsci, Ranajit Guha, Gayatri Spivak, and the South Asian Subaltern Studies collective. I investigation how the South Asian Subaltern Studies Group (SASS) came to achieve its celebrated postcolonial status, how it inspired the formation of the Latin American Subaltern Studies Group (LASS), and why nevertheless the two circles remained more or less discrete. At the fore are issues concerning the constitution of “subalternity” and the agency of “the subaltern,” as well as those related to the politics of academe. The secondary task of the article is to acknowledge the geographies of colonialism and how they respectively and collectively inform the distinct particularities in, as well as resemblances between the research interests of each group. It is then to account for the asymmetry between profiles of SASS and LASS within academe, and to discuss the hierarchy of epistemic privilege implicit/explicit in this relation and the implications it has held for institutional subjectivity. The reading concludes on an important note about how knowledge formation of Western modernity occurs within a spatio-temporal cartography of metropolitan-peripheral relations that erases a significant part of Occidental history, a history holding fundamental implications for how we conceive of certain crucial European originaries and thus hegemonic European realms of conceptual authority.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.086 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it