Notes
introduction
This book is based on a group of interrelated essays about the relation of Latin
American cultural theory and poltics that I wrote between 2002 and 2009. I have
revised all of them, so they differ, sometimes substantially, from previously pub-
lished versions in both Spanish and Eng lish.
1. Santí, “Latinamericanism and Restitution,” Latin American Literary Review
40 (1992): 88–96; “Sor Juana, Octavio Paz, and the Poetics of Restitution,” Indi-
ana Journal of Hispanic Languages 1.2 (1993): 101–39. Both are reprinted in Santí,
Ciphers of History, which I use as a reference here.
2. De la Campa, Latin Americanism, vii.
3. Moreiras, The Exhaustion of Difference, 1. Elsewhere, he writes: “Latin Ameri-
canism is university discourse: the conflicted discourse of the principle of reason
concerning Latin America.”
4. Castro- Goméz and Mendieta, Teorías sin disciplina.
5. The proceedings are in Beasley- Murray, Towards a New Latin Americanism.
6. “Latin- Americanism at least as practiced in humanistic disciplines within
the North American university exists today as a strange kind of ritualized enclave,
outwardly cosmopolitan, but, beneath the surface, increasingly provincial and
sectarian. It has become a form of ‘study’ that, over the last couple of decades, has
succeeded in inventing for itself a theoretically ‘regional’ object with almost no
remaining connection to any real place” (Larsen, “Latin- Americanism without
Latin America,” 37).
7. Mendieta, “Remapping Latin American Studies,” 287. One might, in turn,
pluralize each of these Latinamericanisms by adding those of indigenous peoples,
Afro- Latinos, women, Latin American Jews and Muslims, lGBts, and others.
8. Santí speaks of “the stand of most Liberal Latinamericanists, both in Europe
Previous Page Next Page