Hybridity and Nationhood: Deconstructing the Post-Colonial Myth

Abstract

Two of the most discussed topics in post-colonial theory are hybridity and nationhood .Hybridity is an essential part of post-colonial identity where being ‘hybrid' refers to having a mixture of two or more identities located in the self where there is a constant and perpetual longing for one's pre-colonial identity as well as the pressure of embracing the identity of the present circumstance ,leading the self to a in-between state. Hybridity in the post-colonial society today may be considered to be a rejuvenation of the folk or tribal identity  amidst the growing usurpation by globalization and multiculturism. Nation in the post-colonial sense means  definitely a constructed reality and imagined to bring together people of different geographical location under a common cause. The term ‘nation' becomes more complicated as we approach later developments in post-colonial theory where comments are often made on how the nation comes into being with the help of colonial and post-colonial literature.

The assertions of post-colonial theorists like Gayatri Chakraborty Spivak, Frederic Jameson, Benedict Anderson and Homi Bhabha have come under the scrutiny of Marxist theorists who are more  interested in the working of capitalism the post-colonial nations rather than in the post-colonial identity of the nations  coming under this banner. Theorists like Aijaz Ahmad believe that post-coloniality is only a camouflage to international capitalism and the celebration of hybridity is nothing but a drug to hide the naked reality of capitalism.