Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorTwigg, George William
dc.date.accessioned2016-06-07T15:35:04Z
dc.date.issued2016-11-26
dc.description.abstractThe twenty-first century has seen a resurgence of academic interest in biopolitics: the often oppressive political power over human biology, human bodies and their actions that emerges when political technologies concern themselves with and act upon a population as a species rather than as a group of individuals. The publication of new works by theorists including Michel Foucault, Giorgio Agamben, Roberto Esposito, Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri has furthered academic understanding of biopolitical attempts to ensure an orderly, productive society. Biopolitics bases these attempts upon optimising the majority population’s health and well-being while constructing simultaneously a subrace of unruly, unproductive bodies against which the majority requires securitising. However, despite the still-proliferating and increasingly diverse recent theoretical work on the subject, little material has appeared examining how literature represents biopolitics or how theories of biopolitics may inform literary criticism. This thesis argues for Salman Rushdie’s novels as an exemplary site of fictional engagement with biopower in their portrayal of the increasingly intense and pervasive biopolitical technologies used in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Rushdie has been considered frequently as a novelist who explores political discourses of race and culture. However, analysis of the ways in which he depicts these discourses animating recent biopolitical practices has proven scarcer in Rushdie Studies. This thesis asserts that Rushdie’s novels affirm consistently the desirability of non-racialising polities, but almost always suggest little possibility of constructing such communities. In the process, it will reveal that he represents more numerous and varied forms of racialisation than has been supposed previously. This study considers how Rushdie describes biopolitical racialisation by state and superrace alike, the massacres of subraces that often ensue, how biopower operates and is resisted in space, and the discursive and practical forms this resistance takes. Contrasting Rushdie’s early fiction with his less-studied more recent works, this analysis deploys, critiques and augments canonical theories of biopower in order to chart his generally growing disinclination to depict this resistance’s potential success. This study thus works towards a new biopolitical literary criticism which argues that although the theories of Foucault and others illuminate the ways in which literature represents power and resistance in contemporary politics, narrative fiction indicates simultaneously the limitations of these theories and the practices of resistance they advocate.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipArts and Humanities Research Councilen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/21884
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherUniversity of Exeteren_GB
dc.rights.embargoreasonI wish to publish my thesis as a monograph.en_GB
dc.subjectRushdieen_GB
dc.subjectFoucaulten_GB
dc.subjectRaceen_GB
dc.subjectRacismen_GB
dc.subjectBiopoliticsen_GB
dc.subjectResistanceen_GB
dc.subjectHardt and Negrien_GB
dc.subjectEspositoen_GB
dc.subjectAgambenen_GB
dc.subjectHomo Saceren_GB
dc.subjectSpaceen_GB
dc.subjectDeleuze and Guattarien_GB
dc.subjectThanatopoliticsen_GB
dc.subjectColonialismen_GB
dc.subjectSovereigntyen_GB
dc.subjectDiscourseen_GB
dc.titleBiopolitics, Race and Resistance in the Novels of Salman Rushdieen_GB
dc.typeThesis or dissertationen_GB
dc.contributor.advisorStadtler, Florian
dc.contributor.advisorMaclean, Gerald
dc.contributor.advisorRyan, Derek
dc.publisher.departmentDepartment of English and Filmen_GB
dc.type.degreetitlePhD in Englishen_GB
dc.type.qualificationlevelDoctoralen_GB
dc.type.qualificationnamePhDen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record