ABSTRACT
In this chapter, I consider the relationship between gender iss ues and the study of colonial discourse. I analyse the work of several theorists and point to some of the theoretical and analytical problems arising from their work in order to show that it is difficult to use their work as it stands for an analysis of women’s travel writing. I deal with four main areas of difficulty with the study of colonial discourse: firstly, the potentiality of personal statements as a form of ‘escape’ from Orientalism, since women’s texts often tend towards the personal; secondly, the supposed homogeneity of Orientalism, because although colonial discourse is described in a unified way, women’s texts cannot easily be accommodated within its descriptive framework; thirdly, the truthvalue of colonial discourse, since women’s writing has a very problematic relation with authoritative status, particularly within the colonial context; and finally, the lack of address to women’s writing and gender issues as a whole. Each of these problems is important for the analysis of women’s travel writing. edIt is not simply a case of adding on gender to make colonial discourse analysis better, but thoroughly reformulating the model of textuality which is employed in critical colonial discourse analysis.1
