fé%.....c+.Jj¥:ç+jÈ®L.

L±i ü# ¥ljËI ÎÈ#

Î ÎJÉæJj ..-.--..-..-.-.. :Ë¥Jg.j,\i3r#+ti\ :.-J, J' ï3ü, ÎiJ,
; L?'jLdl Æ*`k.L/./ ;

CloDSJ± r'A.'- '"

How does the subversive investment of traditional narrative

forms in Seco%% and 773e" yorÆ r#./ogy relate to the pla}
of intertextuality in the twq novels?

Éj C?¢jflLLm Tw;

``Using Englishness as a yardstick-thus almost exclusively attending to the

uniqueness, singularity, and peculiarity of each culture -Forster tends to organize

different cultural behaviors, habits, and values in terms of contrast and
opposition. Even more important, Forster tends to hold on to the belief that the
differences between Englishness and lndianness are not just temporary, not just
time- and space-specific; rather, they are trarËcendental insofar as they are
culturally and racially determined; they go deep into "character," and thus are
absolutely irrevocable".
Lidan Lin Ms, "The lrony of Colonial Humanism: A Passage to
lndia and the Politics of Posthumanism".
-ËËËÊ4 HSTORIOGRAPHY
o2O^6 àl,-
•.....ïÉ.5,-é .

Commentonthetextæfi]11yaspossiblefiomahjiLîgg±Logrî=Pb,igËÊ˱fview
Clinton'§ exceptionali§m promotes an
Cljnton's ard Choiccs
ial candidate's m
"r,
:Ëc£:ng,essds::::
§topiÉpaHgTÈffijurTf;iTaï secret- \ J
~
imp]icit double §tandard that separates the
US ffom the re§t of the world. Consider the
Asia Pivot: according to Clinton, 'we need-

\ i#rËO:î
ofsta[eduri.ng(.b.ej£Obama;ïaË;ï;l-
It,s dc§jgïÆiɱs ed to send a mcssagc [o Asia md the world
that Ameriéa was back' in its `tradidonai

m-
Ï#doiËnï
aa__Fpi_
a host of other world
Presidentjal candidates from
bàthpartic§havelongftltobligedtopphom-
& :::is':ft¥cehg#:::,d#?`Ï;ecs':;;
she wrote Hatd ..c_ho_iç_€s _`ÉÈLÊËrgnÊÆ-
whcre who wor] d€rs whether thc` US stîIJ
es to lead'. She recal]s Mad-
eÈHmfigfitïtHbareinterve_n_ti_ài
lcadershipro]cjnAsia'-managingcompet-
u\ :t,iaob| ii ,fi;.siehïsn:acso.-fi:::raa,tà:::pT.ayiendtadi,Ppi,no:
ÉÈÏÆJ3îiind macy . . . borrowing a term from our
ge;';tÊ::c:::,i;:cï:e:sÈT:Ë:,:!::;Îhe;g:ch?:
shouldn't claim a `leadership rolc' jn its
o`m part of (he wor]d, and the US should,
isoneofthemysteriesofth;S£:E=SP±i9P£!i§£
LËiÈb.
Nothing could bc more appropriate to
an emerging multipoJar world (the wor]d
weactualbinhabj[)thantheideathatnations
haveamore|egitimatejnterestinwhàthap-
pens near their borders than jn events oc-
curring half a world away. Yct exceptional-
is.s dismiss ihe concep[ of sphere§ of in-

Eas'.
LiNTON'{; outlook LÊi)itomises the
bipartisan wisdom of thc Washing-
t909ÆÆ œÆErisËËEFÊTTÆÈTÊËÆÈÊËt,
wirichciaimstocijËÈÆ
•`et the centrists turn out to î9ÎÆ2Æi.
be at least`'as
ideologically driven as the zcalots they dc-
The corc of thcir is the be-
ncccssary
arTaïHs
i9±C=Ta{iç(andjmpliciilycapit-
a]i§t) fiiture. Tb.:: procc§s is forcordainea
but can be helped along through neoliberal
policychoii.es.Tjim_u± of detemin.
Ëïâàng:bîthai:'ci:oa'h:cgi'â:.d.Ï,aî:
Cold War, when American policymakers
L ;Ï:'::ËÏ#:.üÉË
nan spent years trying to convince var-
centrist
iou§ presidents that S[aün's occupation of
EastemEuropewasmotivatedlessbyideo-
logydianbythedesiretoblockiwasionfi.om
the west, which l]ad occurred three time§
over the previous ccntury and a half. 1[
didn'texcusetheSovietoccupationbutdid
heJpexplainit.Coldwarrior§,rejcctingthe
veryideaofaSovietsphereofinfluence,in-
sΧted that Stalïn's occupation of Eastem
Europe was the begïiining of a drive for

provïdentialist Ë`-
i§m and fteedom is a secular rcsidue of
wjth as much
fervour and as ]jttl.e ret;JardJÉt.
1'
``.&
wor]d do
Clinton akes a §imjlar mistakc when
characterise§Nato'sexpansionasabul-

•dJe#P#as;k
warkagainstpuL!n'saggres§ion,ratherthan
a provocation and a bcnpal of a previous
American p]edge. The fir§t Bush admin-
jstration promi§ed Gorbachev that Nato

Æî.tièïne,aonnsË#Ï#; would not move `one inch to the east', in

the ùords of the then sccretary of statc,
y:;rehaag#:Ï#;Tdi:::,::ï':h:adïË: ]ame§ Baker. But Bi!! Clinton ignored the
Russians' wish to keep a cc.vdon sanitaire
natjon§ must align them§elves with it, is a
and his predeces§or's promisc by pushing
relic of the grand histoijcal narratives of
Nato expansion to tie east - betraying a
the igth and 2otii, centuries. Such views are
trt]§L., in Russia'§ view. Thc eastward march
no longer held l)y seriois hisrorians but
of Nato continue§. One can oiùy imagine
and poli`i-
the American response if the roJe§ werc

iEHËEËEE often appc'als ,

reverscd.

'1