MPhil In Cultural Studies The English And Foreign Languages University Model Question Paper : www.efluniversity.ac.in

[hemalathaijt]

THE ENGLISH AND FOREIGN LANGUAGES UNIVERSITY
ADMISSIONS 2009-10
M.PHIL IN CULTURAL STUDIES
MODEL QUESTION PAPER

Time: 3 hours Max. Marks: 100

http://www.efluniversity.ac.in/
http://www.efluniversity.ac.in/model...per%202009.doc

Instructions

1. Write your Admit pass no. in the boxes provided in the answer sheets. Do not write your name anywhere in the answer book.
2. There are three sections in this paper (A, B and C).
3. Write all answers in the answer book provided.


SECTION A
I. Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given at the end in your own words. Each answer should be about 100-150 words in length.
(5x6=30 marks)
Although maps offer themselves as primarily mimetic, functional tools, the inevitable selectivity of what they record and their normal reference to that most vital of individual and national empowerments, land, make them a crucial and fascinating element in the project of Empire. The process of colonial inscription begins even before the arrival of the explorers who prepare maps of the country for subsequent settlement. For their practices, their ways of seeing – and hence selecting – detail to be recorded, are predefined not just by the centuries-old traditions of European map-making but also by the ideology of the expansionist colonialism which they serve.

Despite this inherent relativity, however, conventions concerning the production and interpretation of maps evaluate them almost exclusively in terms of ‘accuracy’ – a concept fraught with problems. Traditionally, historians of cartography have castigated certain categories of maps as compilations of hypotheses and suppositions rather than as veracious representations. This argument implies a progressive, teleological view of mapping, that is, that cartography is working towards perfectly accurate representation, and establishes a valorized hierarchy which privileges one mode of representation (European, mimeticist and realist) over alternate modes. Thus, not only are non-European cartographies such as those used by Polynesians and Aborigines ignored, but those elements within the Western cartographical tradition which can be labeled ‘inaccurate’ are assigned to marginal areas of ‘myth’, ‘imaginary geography’ or simply ‘obsolescence’. This critical stance insists on the anteriority of the ‘real’ while reducing the map to a purely transparent or mimetic representation of this reality. Constructing maps as innocently mimetic ignores the fact that maps are productions of complex social forces; they create and manipulate reality as much as they order it.

The rejection of the reflectionist or mimetic model of cartography renders irrelevant the question of whether certain maps are accurate. Instead of reinscribing the old dialectic of subject/object in empiricist terms it is more useful to see mapping as temporally embedded and transformative of previous discourses, rather than as an innocent transcription started afresh on blank paper. A critical move of this nature avoids comparing maps to a pre-existing normative ‘real’, but instead interrogates the mimetic assumptions they embody. The crucial step in deconstructing mimeticist claims is the realization that the given ‘reality’ is as socially-constructed as the representation, and operates in a way which not only legitimizes the representation but also enables the self-privileging of Western modes of knowledge.

[Extract from Simon Ryan, “Inscribing the Emptiness: Cartography, exploration and the construction of Australia,” (1994, modified)]

1. How does Ryan link cartography to the project of Empire?
2. What does Ryan mean by “progressive, teleological view of mapping”? What are his objections to this view?
3. How does Ryan explain the relation between maps and the ‘reality’ they represent?
4. …………………………………..
5. …………………………………….

[Unregistered]

How can I find previous year question papers of eflu entrance for phd in Indian and world literature and Comparative literature?