This is a straw man with an easy answer: you've made up lots of things and called them "decolonization", but you've not actually asked what the people in the countries calling for decolonization want.
Did you miss the part where the person you're replying to is from Bangladesh? I suspect that he knows better than most "what the people in the countries calling for decolonization want".
Perhaps because his lived experience has given him relevant, if subjective, perspective? And because people tend to prioritize learning about things that have more direct relevance to their lives?
I believe their argument is that there is no coherent, practical position that can be described as decolonization in this modern sense. Both the dictionary and wikipedia only define decolonization in a conventional, imperial power withdrawing sense.
Are you aware of a clear, practical definition which a society or state could implement? And does it have no overlap with OP’s concerns.
Absent there being any clear definition of the concept I am not sure the onus is on OP to define it.
Decolonization, as we call it, is rather a modern phenomenon that has been bubbling up since the late twentieth century. There are calls for decolonizing everything, art history included.
The concept of decolonization is twofold. First, it means the end of colonization—being
independent politically and administratively... The more important aspect began after that point, that of countering the influences of colonization that remained in the society and culture.
If that is so, looking for answers in past glory, or only rectifying the purity that was denounced or distorted by the imperialistic process, is not sustainable. We need to create new vocabularies and new understandings, but not running in only one direction, rejecting everything that is Eurocentric.
Then there is the question of: where do you stop decolonizing? Before the British there were the Mughals, who introduced much of the basic culture, food, etc. Before that the Sena, who introduced Islam. Before that, the Pala, who where Buddhists.)
Comments
This is a straw man with an easy answer: you've made up lots of things and called them "decolonization", but you've not actually asked what the people in the countries calling for decolonization want.
Did you miss the part where the person you're replying to is from Bangladesh? I suspect that he knows better than most "what the people in the countries calling for decolonization want".
Because countries are monocultures, and all ex-colonies are identical?
Perhaps because his lived experience has given him relevant, if subjective, perspective? And because people tend to prioritize learning about things that have more direct relevance to their lives?
I believe their argument is that there is no coherent, practical position that can be described as decolonization in this modern sense. Both the dictionary and wikipedia only define decolonization in a conventional, imperial power withdrawing sense.
Are you aware of a clear, practical definition which a society or state could implement? And does it have no overlap with OP’s concerns.
Absent there being any clear definition of the concept I am not sure the onus is on OP to define it.
Here is a good paper by a Bangladeshi art historian: https://www.collegeart.org/pdf/programs/international/haque....
Then there is the question of: where do you stop decolonizing? Before the British there were the Mughals, who introduced much of the basic culture, food, etc. Before that the Sena, who introduced Islam. Before that, the Pala, who where Buddhists.)
What do you think the list is then?