<p>The genre of Barbary captivity narratives has contributed significantly to the development of a transnational colonial discourse since its inception. This genre has played a crucial role in disseminating knowledge and shaping the Anglo-American imagination by providing information about Barbary and its inhabitants. In this paper, I examine how James Riley’s <i>An Authentic Narrative of the Loss of the American Brig Commerce</i> (1817) serves as a tool for disseminating hegemonic discourse, which reinforces the concept of the Other and legitimizes colonial interventions in Barbary under the pretext of controlling and civilizing the so-called savage Other. Riley’s narrative offers various scenes of description and adventure in Barbary, enriching and fostering the American imagination through an imperial lens. However, a closer investigation of the narrative reveals numerous inconsistencies that undermine colonial authority and present new possibilities for reinterpreting this colonial text.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Barbary revisited: imagined geographies and discursive uncertainties in James Riley’s narrative

  • Omar Moumni

摘要

The genre of Barbary captivity narratives has contributed significantly to the development of a transnational colonial discourse since its inception. This genre has played a crucial role in disseminating knowledge and shaping the Anglo-American imagination by providing information about Barbary and its inhabitants. In this paper, I examine how James Riley’s An Authentic Narrative of the Loss of the American Brig Commerce (1817) serves as a tool for disseminating hegemonic discourse, which reinforces the concept of the Other and legitimizes colonial interventions in Barbary under the pretext of controlling and civilizing the so-called savage Other. Riley’s narrative offers various scenes of description and adventure in Barbary, enriching and fostering the American imagination through an imperial lens. However, a closer investigation of the narrative reveals numerous inconsistencies that undermine colonial authority and present new possibilities for reinterpreting this colonial text.