ABSTRACT
It has been the aim of this book to bring together various theoretical frameworks, in order to develop a form of analysis which would account for the similarities and diversity of women’s travel writing within a particular historical and political period. I have shown that Foucauldian analysis can be grafted on to feminist analysis to produce a gendered colonial discourse study. Whilst aware of the difficulties of using the work of a male theorist, it is clear that Foucault’s work is now part of feminist theory, because of the work of theorists like Morris, Weedon and Haug (Morris and Patton (eds), 1979; Weedon, 1987; Haug (ed.), 1987). A feminist study of colonial discourse is concerned with gender issues, but sets those issues within other discursive frameworks and conflicts as critics like Gayatri Spivak and Trinh Minh-ha have shown (Spivak, 1987; Minh-ha, 1989). This type of framework can describe each text in its specificity without having to resort to the biography of the author (yet another text) to explain those elements which are peculiar to that text. Although each text is different from other texts, as is clear from the analyses of the texts by David-Neel, Kingsley and Mazuchelli, these differences occur within larger discursive frameworks. This type of discourse analysis enables the reader to examine the whole text in its complexity, rather than offering more cohesive but partial readings. The reading which is produced is more unwieldy, each assertion being constantly modified by other evidence, and ultimately it is more difficult to make generalisations about texts. However, it is hoped that it holds potential for the analysis of other types of texts, both literary and non-literary.
