The Deconstruction of Imperialist Discourse in the Siege of Krishnapur
DOI: 10.23977/jfar.2021.010317 | Downloads: 2 | Views: 277
Kun Wang 1
1 College of Arts and Humanities, Swansea University, School of English Studies, Xi’an International Studies University, China
Corresponding AuthorKun Wang
As Jonathan Culler notes, deconstruction can be regarded as “a philosophical position, a political or intellectual strategy, and a mode of reading” (Culler, 1982, p. 85). By using deconstruction as a mode of reading, this paper tries to explore how J. G. Farrell deconstructs imperialist discourse in The Siege of Krishnapur (1973) with a post-colonial context. Farrell vividly describes the siege of the British in a fictional town, Krishnapur, which gives him the freedom to imaginatively deal with historical facts in this novel that is based on the Indian Rebellion of 1857. I argue that Farrell has successfully deconstructed imperialist discourse by inverting assumed inviolable binaries of ethical Western superiority/ native barbarism, the “self”/ the “other”, and civilized/ degenerated subjects between the colonizers and the colonized.
KEYWORDSImperialist discourse, Deconstruction, The siege of krishnapur
CITE THIS PAPER
Kun Wang, The Deconstruction of Imperialist Discourse in the Siege of Krishnapur. Journal of Frontiers in Art Research (2021) 1: 93-96. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.23977/jfar.2021.010317
 Bressler, Charles E. (2011). Literary Criticism: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
 Chemmachery, Jaine. (2018). Bricks are Undoubtedly an Essential Ingredient of Civilization: Layers of Reconstructing J.G. Farrell's The Siege of Krishnapur. Commonwealth: Essays and Studies, 40, 97-107.
 Farrell, J. G. (1993). The Siege of Krishnapur, London: Orion.
 Fong, Ryan D. (2017). The Dog Days of Empire: Black Humour and the Bestial in J.G. Farrell’s The Siege of Krishnapur. In Marie-Luise Kohlke & Christian Gutleben (Eds.), Neo-Victorian Humour: Comic Subversions and Unlaughter in Contemporary Historical Re-Visions (pp. 323-341). Leiden & Boston: Brill|Rodopi.
 Goonetilleke, D. C. R. A. (2003). J. G. Farrell's Indian Works: His Majesty's Subjects. Modern Asian Studies, 37.2, 407-427.
 Hartveit, Lars. (1993). The Imprint of Recorded Events in the Narrative Form of J.G. Farrell's The Siege of Krishnapur. English Studies, 74.5, 451-469.
 Hutcheon, Linda. (1985). A Theory of Parody: The Teachings of Twentieth-Century Art Forms. London: Methuen.
 Kipling, Rudyard. (2013). 100 Poems: Old and New. New York: Cambridge University Press.
 Klages, Mary. (2012). Key Terms in Literary Theory. New York: Continuum.
 Kohlke, Marie-Luise. (2017). Neo-Victorian Killing Humour: Laughing at Death in the Opium Wars. In Marie-Luise Kohlke & Christian Gutleben (Eds.), Neo-Victorian Humour: Comic Subversions and Unlaughter in Contemporary Historical Re-Visons (pp. 71-102). Leiden & Boston: Brill|Rodopi.
 McLeod, John. (1994). Exhibiting Empire in J.G. Farrell’s The Siege of Krishnapur. Commonwealth Literature, 29.2, 117-131.
 Ross, Michael L. (2005). Passage to Krishnapur: J.G. Farrell’s Comic Vision of India. Journal of Commonwealth Literature, 40.3, 63-79.
 Tyson, Lois. (2006). Critical Theory Today. New York: Rou tledge.
 Culler, Jonathan. (2007). On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism after Structuralism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.