In this article, I take account of the disciplinary, linguistic, and historical differences that determine the various uses of the “creole” concept, whether as “creole,” “creolization,” or “créolité.” Beginning with anthropological critiques of the concept as exclusionary or theoretically flawed, I attempt to clarify these limitations by examining E. K. Brathwaite's, the Creolistes Bernabe, Chamoiseau and Confiant's, and finally Edouard Glissant's contributions to understandings of creolization. My approach attempts to clarify certain overlooked slippages in the language, and through these slippages redefine the “debate” over the concept as a process of continuous translation. Rather than valorize either the impossible negation, or utopian idealization of the possibilities of the creole, I pay particular attention to the discursive life of the term and its “translations,” both linguistic and conceptual.
If you can't find a tool you're looking for, please click the link at the top of the page to "Go to old article view". Alternatively, view our Knowledge Base articles for additional help. Your feedback is important to us, so please let us know if you have comments or ideas for improvement.