be accepted by a growing number of the younger generation of sociologists. Yet there is less agreement on what should and could be done to rectify this. Some argue for a rethinking of sociology from the ground up, as it were, while others argue for a genuinely global sociology that would maintain existing perspectives and theories, while also engaging more systematically with scholars based in the Global South.
In sociology’s defence, it can be noted that sociologists have always been interested in global inequalities, comparative development, nationalism, global politics and international conflict, which demonstrates that the discipline is perhaps not as insular as it is sometimes portrayed. Similarly, sociology is often seen as a discipline that is so open to ideas and theories from outside its existing disciplinary boundaries as to hinder its acceptance as a ‘scientific’ subject. Finally, McLennan has argued that it is unrealistic to imagine that any academic enterprise could escape its material and institutional location, and sociology is no different. He argues that ‘all thought systems are inevitably ethnocentric in focus, style and available expertise. Moreover, what it even means to “decolonize” or to “postcolonialize” sociology is far from crystal clear’ (McLennan 2010: 119).
Continuing Relevance
Unlike many other concepts in this book, the ‘postcolonial turn’ (Olukoshi and Nyamnjoh 2011) is relatively recent and is still developing in sociology. As a result, it is too early to say with any certainty exactly how the engagement between sociology and postcolonialism will develop. What is clear is that the postcolonial intervention has disrupted ‘business as usual’ and that there are many insightful studies emerging from within this perspective, particularly on what ‘decolonizing sociology’ might actually require.
Connell (2018) outlines some key issues and possible solutions. She points out that sociologists working in the Global North tend to read and cite only other Northern scholars and theorists. The discipline is also institutionally based in elite European and North American universities, where high-ranking journals and research funding agencies are focused. Social theory is similarly placed, and many of these theories speak in terms of their application to humanity as such, demonstrating the powerful position of Western sociologists to shape the discipline. A rational choice, then, is for Global South scholars simply to adopt the methods and theories of the more powerful groups and to aim their work at mainstream journals, a strategy Connell calls ‘extraversion’. Yet this extraverted sociology may simply reproduce, not challenge, the existing global division of academic labour.
Addressing McLennan’s criticism above, Connell suggests that, in practice, decolonizing sociology would involve ‘correcting the distortions and exclusions produced by empire and global inequality and reshaping the discipline in a democratic direction on a world scale’ (Connell 2018: 402). A decolonizing project would entail reshaping the curriculum and rewriting textbooks and courses in a more balanced way to include the experience of postcolonial countries. It also demands challenging the established institutional power base, changing the composition of the global sociology workforce and redistributing research funding in more equal ways.
References and Further Reading
Bhabha, H. K. (1994) The Location of Culture (London: Routledge).
Bhambra, G. K. (2014a) Connected Sociologies (London: Bloomsbury).
— (2014b) ‘Postcolonial and Decolonial Dialogues’, Postcolonial Studies, 17(2): 115–21.
Connell, R. (2018) ‘Decolonizing Sociology’, Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, 47(4): 399–407.
Go, J. (2016) ‘Globalizing Sociology, Turning South: Perspectival Realism and the Southern Standpoint’, Sociologica, 2: 1–42.
McLennan, G. (2010) ‘Eurocentrism, Sociology, Secularity’, in E. G. Rodríguez, M. Boatcă and S. Costa (eds), Decolonizing European Sociology: Transdisciplinary Approaches (Farnham: Ashgate): 119–34.
Olukoshi, A., and Nyamnjoh, F. (2011) ‘The Postcolonial Turn: An Introduction’, in R. Devisch and F. Nyamnjoh (eds) The Postcolonial Turn: Re-Imagining Anthropology and Africa (Bamenda, Cameroon: Langaa Research and Publishing Common Initiative Group): 1–28.
Said, E. (1978) Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul).
Spivak, G. K. (1988) ‘Can the Subaltern Speak?’, in C. Nelson and L. Grossberg (eds) Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture (Chicago: University of Illinois Press): 271–316.
Postmodernity
Working Definition
An historical period, following modernity, which is less clearly defined, pluralistic and socially diverse than the modernity that preceded it. Postmodernity is said to have developed from the early 1970s onwards.
Origins of the Concept
The ‘postmodern turn’ in social theory began in the mid-1980s, though the concept of the postmodern lies a decade earlier in culture and the arts. In architecture, for instance, a new style emerged that took elements from a range of existing genres to produce strange-looking buildings – such as the Lloyd’s building in London – that somehow ‘worked’. This method of playfully mixing and matching genres and styles was described as postmodern. In film, the strange worlds created by the director David Lynch (see, for instance, Blue Velvet, 1986) mixed historical periods, combining extreme violence and sexual ‘deviance’ with old-fashioned tales of romance and morality. In many other areas of artistic work and culture the postmodern trend continued, and in the late 1980s the social sciences finally caught up.
The single key work which launched postmodern ideas in sociology was Jean-François Lyotard’s (1984) The Postmodern Condition, in which the author outlined his thesis that some of the main planks of modern society were losing their central place. In particular, Lyotard saw science, which had been the dominant form of knowledge during the modern period, losing legitimacy as people began to seek out local forms of knowledge, such as older folk knowledge and religious and common-sense beliefs. The decentring of scientific thinking, argued Lyotard, was a symptom of the emerging postmodern society. Other theorists whose work has had a major impact on theories of postmodernity include Zygmunt Bauman (1992, 1997) and Jean Baudrillard (1983, 1995).
Meaning and Interpretation
Postmodern thinking is diverse, and theorists prioritize different elements associated with the suggested shift to a postmodern society. One target of most postmodernists is the attempt by social theorists, from Comte and Marx to Giddens, to discern the direction and shape of history. For these theorists, the process of historical change is structured and ‘goes somewhere’ – it makes progress. In Marxist theory, for example, this progressive movement is from capitalism to the more egalitarian societies of socialism and communism. However, postmodern thinkers reject such grand theorizing.
The trust people invested previously in science, politicians and human progress in history has been eroded as fears of nuclear war or environmental catastrophe, along with continuing conflicts and episodes of genocide, puncture the civilized veneer of modern societies. Lyotard described this process as the collapse of ‘metanarratives’, those
