Chapter 2 offers a deconstructive analysis of Western representational practices by studying some common rhetorical strategies of representation. Chapter 3 is a description of how Western interaction, seen as imperial encounter, has a constitutive relation with the imagination of Tibet. Chapter 4 charts the formation of Tibet as a geopolitical entity within the wider context of Western theory and praxis of sovereignty, imperialism, and foreign policy. Finally, the next two chapters retheorize Tibetanness and argue that Tibet is a reimag(in)ing construct. Thus, a postcolonial analysis of the poetics and the politics of Exotica Tibet underlines the importance of critically studying Western representations of the non-West within a deparochialized IR.
My effort here has been to challenge the geographical parochialism of both the mainstream and critical IR endeavors. "Tibet" here stands not only for those who identify with it (the Tibetans) but also as a challenge to critical endeavors in IR as well as to postcolonial theorizing. My attempt has been not only to promote a dialogue between postcolonial theory and IR theory but, more important, to adopt a postcolonial critical attitude-that is, postcoloniality-to offer new, innovative ways of doing IR analyses. Here I am aware that I am deploying "Tibet" to critique certain ways of thinking, in a manner somewhat similar to Orientalists for whom "Tibet" has been only a category to be used, to be deployed for self-serving purposes. My Orientalizing gesture reflects partly my failure to break out of the pernicious mode of thought set up by the dominant West and partly a failure of postcolonial thinking that is forced to respond to the West and its knowledge in its own language, on terms set by it. Where my use is different is in a self-consciousness and reflexivity about it, in a strategic deployment that seeks to write back at dominant modes of analyses and challenge the provincialism-in-the-guise-of-universalism characterizing these modes. An awareness of ethno-centrism leads to greater self- reflexivity, sensitivity for the Other, and an openness to alternative theoretical perspectives. My own position as a non-Tibetan interested observer is acknowledged.
This work is a call for a postcolonial IR theoretical approach, the space for which has been cleared by the postpositivist debates. It challenges the commonplace ignorance of the history of imperialism and colonialism in the analysis of supposedly "intractable" political problems in the postcolonial world. It highlights the centrality of the concept of representation to the Western enterprise of knowledge production about its Others. It bares the "real" impact of rhetorical utterances and practices. Geopolitical Exotica explores asymmetrical power relations in the discursive production of "Tibet" as a specific site of West-non-West encounter in and beyond the twentieth century. It emphasizes the (re)productive relation between representation and identity and performs a deconstructive cultural analysis of Western images of Tibet by looking at the poetics of representation, which entails recognition of the contingency of identity without giving up the notion of agency. It theorizes Tibetan identity discourses as constitutively and performatively produced in relation to Western imaginaries and imageries, the politics of representation. Though Orientalism finds itself "constantly appropriated, reworked, and re-accentuated in the utterances of others" (Ha 2000, xii), the asymmetrical operation and effect of the power-knowledge nexus remains its chief characteristic.
Postcolonial IR thus offers an effective understanding of the political and productive effect of Western representational practices, especially on non-Western people. The poetics (the "how" question) and politics ("what impact" question) of Western representations are legitimate and vital areas of inquiry for IR because these support particular foreign policy regimes and have a productive effect on the identities of political actors. Postcolonial IR appreciates the importance of popular culture for our understanding of world politics. It alerts us to the fact that what we accept as real is a "changeable and revisable reality… Although this insight does not in itself constitute a political revolution, no political revolution is possible without a radical shift in one's notion of the possible and the real" (Butler 1999, xxiii).
How can we understand more effectively the ways in which Western representations of the Other ("the Exotic") generate vexing political problems in the contemporary postcolonial world? In order to get at this question, I have utilized resources from International Relations, postcolonial and cultural theory, and Tibetan studies to interrogate Exotica Tibet in terms of its poetics (how Tibet is represented) and its politics (what impact these representational regimes have on the represented). I have sustained an empirical study of one specific geopolitical exotica-Exotica Tibet-to substantiate theoretical arguments about the role of representation and identity in the theory and praxis of world politics.
The poetics and politics of Exotica Tibet mark a new way of enculturing political analysis and politicizing cultural criticism, one that seeks to open the endeavor of IR to new vistas. Hybrid endeavors such as postcolonial international relations theory contribute to changing IR from being a "discourse of limits" (Walker 1995, 34) to what I would like to call a discourse of empowering criticality.
Bibliography
Abbots, A. 1997. Naked Spirits: A Journey into Occupied Tibet, London: Canongate Books.
About Tibet. 2006. Available at
Adam, I., and H. Tiffin, eds. 1991. Past the Last Post: Theorizing Post-Colonialism and Post-Modernism, London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Adams, V. 1996. "Karaoke as Modern Lhasa, Tibet: Western Encounters with Cultural Politics." Cultural Anthropology 11, no. 4: 510-46.
____________________. 1998. "Suffering the Winds of Lhasa: Politicized Bodies, Human
Rights, Cultural Difference, and Humanism in Tibet." Medical Anthropology 12, no. 1: 74-102.
Addy, P. 1984. Tibet on the Imperial Chessboard: The Making of British Policy towards Lhasa, 1899-1925. Calcutta: Academic Publishers.
Agathangelou, A. 2004. Global Political Economy of Sex: Desire, Violence, and Insecurity in Mediterranean National State. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Agathangelou, A., and L. H. M. Ling. 2004. "The House of IR: From Family Power Politics to the Poisies of Worldism." International Studies Review 6, no. 4: 31-49.
Ahmad, A. 1994. In Theory: Nations, Classes, Literatures. London: Verso.
Ahmed, S. J. 2006. "Tibetan Folk Opera: Lhamo in Contemporary Cultural Politics." Asian Theatre Journal 23, no. 1: 156-78.
Allen, C. 1999. The Search for Shangri-La: A Journey into Tibetan History. London: Abacus.
Amin, S. 1988. Eurocentrism. London: Zed.
Anand, D. 2000. "(Re)Imagining Nationalism: Identity and Representation in Tibetan Diaspora in South Asia." Contemporary South Asia 9, no. 3: 271-87.
____________________. 2002a. "A Guide to Little Lhasa in India: The Role of Symbolic
Geography of Dharamsala in Constituting Tibetan Diasporic Identity."
In Tibet, Self, and the Tibetan Diaspora: Voices of Difference, ed. P. C.
Klieger. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill.
– -. 2002b. "A Story to Be Told: IR, Postcolonialism, and the Tibetan
(Trans)Nationalism." In Power, Postcolonialism, and International
Relations: Reading Race, Gender, and Class, ed. G. Chowdhry and