canagarajah on publication and the third world

Canagarajah’s initial case was straightforward, if large: “though many in composition research had given voice to the discursive differences in the writing of periphery/bilingual scholars, few had considered the nondiscursive constraints” (21). Put simply, language is only one of many (dare I say one of the lesser?) obstacles facing scholars on the periphery. (I say lesser because, in Canagarajah’s case for instance, it certainly wasn’t his fluent grasp of academic English that interfered with his ability to physically get to the conference he wanted to attend. All the languages in the world will get a scholar nowhere if the government says “no;” all the great ideas in the world will get a scholar nowhere if there is technology with which to record them.) Sri Lankan scholars lack the physical materials necessary to stay current with the field—there is little to no access to scholarly journals in most places; traveling to conferences is complicated by the interference of governmental bureaucracy; the available technology associated with writing and the production of texts is outdated; and, finally, access to publication is limited, if not entirely nonexistent.

This issue of publication appears to have grown in importance to Canagarajah since his initial, broad argument about nondiscursive constraints. He specifically states that “Third World scholars experience exclusion from academic publishing and communication; therefore the knowledge of Third World communities is marginalized or appropriated by the West…” (6). He seems to have narrowed in on publication specifically, perhaps because it is the most complex of the issues on the list of nondiscursive barriers to Third World scholarship: not only is publication impaired by the lack of physical materials available to Third World scholars, but publishing conventions also seem (are?) specifically designed to keep Third World voices out. “Galtung insightfully mentions that whereas the colonialism of the seventeenth century was effected through military means, in later periods imperialist domination has been achieved through the more subtle imposition of values and ideologies” (39)—publication is implicated in this. Further, not only is publication difficult for Third World scholars, but once a periphery scholar’s voice appears in a center publication, the authenticity of his peripheral voice (please take that as it’s intended) becomes questionable: “It is because I moved to the center that I am able to publish about the scholarly deprivation and exclusion I suffered while teaching at UJ, but in the process of moving my status has changed, calling into question my ability to represent my periphery colleagues” (11).

So….yeah. Publication. Center/periphery. Power and disempowerment. These are some big thought bubbles in my head that have yet to intersect. In what ways would periphery voices be threatening to center publications' interests? What is the center's role in enabling periphery publication? We make a big deal about language barriers, but why isn't more attention paid to the material needs of disadvantaged scholars? Does it make us uncomfortable to think about this? Why?

Canagarajah, A. Suresh. A Geopolitics of Academic Writing. University of Pittsburgh Press: Pittsburgh, PA, 2002.