Child's Post-colonial Theory

     Child's theory on post-colonialism is an interesting read that goes in depth to analyze the true meaning of the post-colonial period. The book definition refers to post-colonial as a, "time after colonialism has come to an end". The reading was intriguing because the idea of post-colonial can be interpreted in many different ways. In the reading, the author quotes Anne McClintok's different take on the word post-colonial. She says, "All territorial aggressions ever undertaken in human history are included under the same heading, thus rendering the term useless." She basically says that everyone in history has experienced some sort of post-colonial era, thus they all experienced a post-colonial phase. This can be one way to look at the idea of the term, however the word relates to a state of being after something. As a result, I find that it is not right to say that all of time and all of Earth has always been in a state of post-colonialism

On the other hand, Aijaz Ahmad states, "It is worth remarking though, that in periodizing our history in the triadic terms of pre-colonial, colonial, and post-colonial, the conceptual apparatus of "post-colonial criticism" privileges as primary the roll of colonialism as then principle of structuration in that history, so that all that came before colonialism becomes its own prehistory and whatever comes after becomes infinite aftermath. As Amaze says, there is a definite definition of what is pre, present, and post colonialism. I find that this is the definition of the time structure that I agree with. Anything that is post-colonial can go on forever, although we make other names for eras and time periods, but by definition it goes on forever. I believe though, that there is a definite start and time where there is a colonial period, thus making the triadic structure a definition of post-colonialism that I concur with.