Ideologies of the Self: Chicano Autobiography

Saldívar, Ramón; Rodríguez, Richard; Galarza, Ernesto

doi:10.2307/464620

Cited by 11 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In its academic capacity, postmodernism provided the necessary theoretical tools for students to deconstruct and challenge the essentializing and reductivist tendencies of both nationalist discourse and social scientific paradigms. In particular, scholars trained in a variety of "postmodern" interpretations effectively deconstructed homogenized principles of race and ethnicity, and offered new readings of subjects, truth, and rationality as decentered, non-foundational and thoroughly contextualized phenomena (Saldívar, 1985). In short, postmodernism substituted coherence and consistency for an endless spectrum of "difference, distance, and determinate complexity" (Pfeil, 1994).…”

Section: Postmodernismmentioning

confidence: 99%

"Crossing Disciplinary Borders: Re-examining Latino/a Studies and Latin American Studies in the 1990s"

Sampaio¹

2003

Journal of Latino/Latin American Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the 30 years of their existence, studies of Latinos/as in the U.S. and the field of Latin American Studies have emerged largely as divided disciplines. That is, despite what would appear to be similar sensibilities including comparable criticisms of Western hegemony and the neocolonial practices of the U.S., as well as the political, economic, and cultural displacement of similar populations, the two areas of study have more often regarded each other as competitive colleagues rather than complimentary practices. In the following study, I examine the nature of the two disciplines paying particular attention to the political context surrounding their formations and the foundations of their discursive frameworks. I examine changes to these disciplines in the methodological and ideological shifts surrounding the emergence of empirical and postmodern studies, and the relationship between these theoretical shifts and the expansion of globalization. Finally, I conclude with a discussion of the emerging field of transnational and bi-national studies and the opportunities for crossing the disciplinary borders between Latino/studies in the U.S. and Latin American Studies presented in this literature.In 1997 The National Association for Chicano and Chicana Studies (NACCS) significantly expanded the scope of Chicano/a and Latino/a Studies by crossing national borders to hold its annual meeting in Mexico City. In a comparable move a few years earlier, the Latin American Studies Association (LASA) inaugurated a new section to its host of specialties; the section was appropriately devoted to studies of Latinos and Latinas in the U.S. On the surface both of these gestures appear obvious, if not insignificant, academic unions; however, when we examine them in the larger scope of disciplinary developments and recent transnational economic formations they signal a new and transformative dialogue between marginalized populations in the U.S. and Latin America.Specifically, over the 30 years of their existence, studies of Latinos/as in the U.S. and the field of Latin American Studies have emerged largely as divided disciplines. Despite what would appear to be similar sensibilities including comparable criticisms of Western hegemony and the neo-colonial practices of the U.S. as well as the political, economic, and cultural displacement of similar populations, the two areas of study have more often regarded each other as competitive colleagues (struggling for scare university

show abstract

Section: Postmodernismmentioning

confidence: 99%