This paper mainly explores the Australian Aboriginal-white relationship in two novels： The Secret River （2005） by non-Indigenous writer Kate Grenville, and Carpentaria （2006） by Indigenous novelist Alexis Wright,...This paper mainly explores the Australian Aboriginal-white relationship in two novels： The Secret River （2005） by non-Indigenous writer Kate Grenville, and Carpentaria （2006） by Indigenous novelist Alexis Wright, and compares the discursive strategies and narrative devices the authors have adopted to represent whiteness and Indigeneity, one from the European settlers＇ point of view, the other from the standpoint of an Aboriginal author. In The Secret River, Grenville resorts to the genre of historical novel as a way of reconciling the past. Though the novel challenges the racialised stereotypes of the Aboriginal people by adopting a double perspective （a reconfigured white perspective to refute the colonists＇ views）, the moral ambiguity of the settler identity is still complicit with the colonial discourse. On the other hand, Carpentaria rejects a narrow, essentialist categorization of the Aboriginal people and defamiliarises the concept of whiteness by foregrounding it in a critique rather than as the default norm. Set in a narrative related to the oral tradition, the novel brings Aboriginal cosmology into full play A comparison of the two novels provides a panoramic view of how the Aboriginal-white relationships are presented through the literary imaginary in Australia.展开更多
The purpose of this paper is to synthesize a conception of inquiry from the insights of Paul Feyerabend and C.S.Peirce.Here,I contend that Peirce's account of inquiry is overly narrow.More poignantly,I show how Pe...The purpose of this paper is to synthesize a conception of inquiry from the insights of Paul Feyerabend and C.S.Peirce.Here,I contend that Peirce's account of inquiry is overly narrow.More poignantly,I show how Peirce's motto that one should not block the road of inquiry is in conflict with his rejection of skepticism.This is shown using Feyerabend's arguments for pluralism.Nevertheless,I sketch an alternative position that borrows insights from both Peirce and Feyerabend.This position,I contend,retains the crucial elements of each position that drove them while critically developing them in a coherent fashion.This synthesized position offers the beginning of a novel approach to modelling divisions of epistemic labor.展开更多
文摘This paper mainly explores the Australian Aboriginal-white relationship in two novels： The Secret River （2005） by non-Indigenous writer Kate Grenville, and Carpentaria （2006） by Indigenous novelist Alexis Wright, and compares the discursive strategies and narrative devices the authors have adopted to represent whiteness and Indigeneity, one from the European settlers＇ point of view, the other from the standpoint of an Aboriginal author. In The Secret River, Grenville resorts to the genre of historical novel as a way of reconciling the past. Though the novel challenges the racialised stereotypes of the Aboriginal people by adopting a double perspective （a reconfigured white perspective to refute the colonists＇ views）, the moral ambiguity of the settler identity is still complicit with the colonial discourse. On the other hand, Carpentaria rejects a narrow, essentialist categorization of the Aboriginal people and defamiliarises the concept of whiteness by foregrounding it in a critique rather than as the default norm. Set in a narrative related to the oral tradition, the novel brings Aboriginal cosmology into full play A comparison of the two novels provides a panoramic view of how the Aboriginal-white relationships are presented through the literary imaginary in Australia.
文摘The purpose of this paper is to synthesize a conception of inquiry from the insights of Paul Feyerabend and C.S.Peirce.Here,I contend that Peirce's account of inquiry is overly narrow.More poignantly,I show how Peirce's motto that one should not block the road of inquiry is in conflict with his rejection of skepticism.This is shown using Feyerabend's arguments for pluralism.Nevertheless,I sketch an alternative position that borrows insights from both Peirce and Feyerabend.This position,I contend,retains the crucial elements of each position that drove them while critically developing them in a coherent fashion.This synthesized position offers the beginning of a novel approach to modelling divisions of epistemic labor.
