Usos de Fanon. Un recorrido por tres lecturas

Abstract

La circulación de la escritura de Frantz Fanon en Argentina, en medios intelectuales y políticos de los años sesenta y setenta, ofrece la oportunidad de analizar dos dimensiones centrales de sus tesis sobre el colonialismo: por un lado, el carácter revisionista que ellas tienen con respecto a visiones eurocéntricas de la modernidad y, por otro, las formas específicas en que se articularon con algunas posiciones intelectuales del período. Recorremos algunos aspectos de tres lecturas de Fanon, la de Francisco Delich, José Sazbón y Carlos Fernández Pardo y las ponemos en relación con los debates poscoloniales y descoloniales acerca de la colonialidad del saber y la diferencia colonial. Palabras clave: Fanon- Colonialidad- Filosofía latinoamericana-Poscolonial-Descolonial Abstract The circulation of Frantz Fanon`s writings in the political and intellectual milieu of the sixties and seventies in Argentina offers the opportunity to analyze two central dimensions of his theses about colonialism: first, their revisionist nature in relation to Eurocentric visions of modernity, and second, the specific ways in which they articulated with some intellectual points of view from that period. We visit here three readings of Fanon, by Francisco Delich, Carlos Fernández Pardo, and José Sazbón, and place them in relation to postcolonial and decolonial debates about the coloniality of knowledge and colonial difference.

The circulation of Frantz Fanon`s writings in the political and intellectual milieu of the sixties and seventies in Argentina offers the opportunity to analyze two central dimensions of his theses about colonialism: first, their revisionist nature in relation to Eurocentric visions of modernity, and second, the specific ways in which they articulated with some intellectual points of view from that period. We visit here three readings of Fanon, by Francisco Delich, José Sazbón and Carlos Fernández Pardo, and place them in relation to postcolonial and decolonial debates about the coloniality of knowledge and colonial difference.