This article is an attempt to explore the issues of online representations of orphans in China and India in the intersection of power, voice, and placement. Textual and visual representations of orphans at www.homeofhopeindia.org and www.homeofhope.org are analyzed using the theoretical frameworks of voicings, Whiteness, and the colonial (technological) gaze. We examine how online networks are spaces for discursive reproduction of existing offline hegemonies. We pay particular attention to the reproduction and representation of the so-called voiceless Other in online settings.
AlcoffL. (1992). The problem of speaking for others. Cultural Critique, 36 (11), 5-32.
2.
Alley-YoungG. (2008). Articulating identity: Refining postcolonial and whiteness perspectives on race within Communication Studies. Review of Communication, 8, 307-321.
3.
ApterE. (1999). Continental drift: From national characters to virtual subjects. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
4.
BhabhaH. K. (2001). Of mimicry and man: The ambivalence of colonial discourse. In McQuillanM. (Ed.), Deconstruction: A reader (pp. 421-423). New York, NY: Routledge. (Original work published 1994)
5.
BiaforaF.EspositoD. (2007). Adoption data and statistical trends. In JavierR. A.BadenA. L.BiaforaF. A.Camacho-GingerichA. (Eds.), Handbook of adoption: Implications for researchers, practitioners, and families (pp. 32-43). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
6.
BonsuS. K. (2009). Colonial images in global times: Consumer interpretations of Africa and Africans in advertising. Consumption Markets & Culture, 12, 1-25.
7.
ButlerJ. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY: Routledge.
8.
ButlerJ. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of ‘‘sex.”New York, NY: Routledge.
9.
CoxJ. (2002). Imperial fault lines: Christianity and colonial power in India, 1818-1940. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
10.
DelpitL. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York, NY: New York Press.
11.
DyerR. (1997). White. London, UK: Routledge.
12.
EndresD.GouldM. (2009). “I am also in the position to use my Whiteness to help them out”: The communication of whiteness in service learning. Western Journal of Communication, 73, 418-436.
13.
EnteenJ. (2006). Spatial conceptions of URLs: Tamil Eelam networks on the World Wide Web. New Media & Society, 8, 229-249.
14.
FoucaultM. (1991). Governmentality. In BurchellG.GordonC.MillerP. (Eds.), The foucault effect: Studies in governmentality (pp. 87-104). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
15.
GajjalaR. (2004). Cyber selves: Feminist ethnographies of South Asian women. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira.
16.
GajjalaR. (2012). Weavings of the Virtual and Real: Cyberculture and the Subaltern. Lexington Press.
17.
GajjalaR.BirzescuA. (2010). Voicing and placement in online networks. In LevinaM.KienG. (Eds.), Denoting danger, connoting freedom: Everyday life in the [post]global network. New York, NY: PeterLang.
18.
GoffmanE. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Anchor.
19.
GoldbergD. T. (1996). In/visibility and super/vision: Fanon on race, veils, and discourses of resistance. In GordonL.Sharpley-WhitingT. D.WhiteR. T. (Eds.), Fanon: A critical reader (pp. 179-200). Maiden, MA: Blackwell.
20.
HallS. (1999). Whose heritage? Unsettling the heritage, re-imagining the post nation. Third Text, 49, 3-13.
21.
HarrisonH. (2008). A penny for the little Chinese: The French Holy Childhood Association in China, 1843-1951. American Historical Review, 113, 72-92.
22.
HobsonJ. (2008). Digital Whiteness, primitive Blackness: Racializing the “digital divide” in film and new media. Feminist Media Studies, 8(2), 111-125.
PosterM. (2007). Postcolonial theory in the age of planetary communications. Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 24, 379-393.
49.
SaidE. W. (1978). Orientalism: Western conceptions of the Orient. New York, NY: Pantheon.
50.
Sharpley-WhitingT. D. (1999). Black Venus: Sexualized Savages, Primal Fears, and Primitive Narratives in French. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
51.
ShohatE. (1999). By the bitstream of Babylon: Cyberfrontiers and diasporic vistas. In NaficyH. (Ed.), Home, exile, homeland: Film, media, & the politics of place (pp. 213-232). New York, NY: Routledge.
52.
SpivakG. C. (1988). Can the subaltern speak? In GrossbergL.NelsonC. (Eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture (pp. 271-313). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
53.
SpivakG. (1999). A Critique of postcolonial thought. Toward a history of the vanishing present. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
54.
SrebernyA. (2001). Gender, globalization and communications: Women and the Transnational. Feminist Media Studies, 1(1), 61-65.
55.
SwigerM. (2002). Sally Struthers, Christian Children’s Fund, and the construction of whiteness. Journal of American & Comparative Cultures, 25, 199-208.
