@article{article_878057, title={FROM PERIPHERY TO THE CENTRE: POST-COLONIAL FICTION VS. COLONIALIST FICTION}, journal={Toplum ve Kültür Araştırmaları Dergisi}, pages={71–87}, year={2021}, DOI={10.48131/jscs.878057}, url={https://izlik.org/JA22FE63AT}, author={Çelikel, Mehmet}, keywords={söylem, ideoloji, sömürgecilik sonrası kültür, sömürgecilik kültürü}, abstract={Postcolonial discourse written in the aftermath of the colonial practice reverts the colonial discourse of the British authors of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries during which the colonial venture was in its highest peak. The colonialist discourse that used to be in the cultural centre of the literatures written in English marginalised the discourse of the colonised peoples, their language and culture; and pushed it to the peripheries. However, postcolonial discourse in the fiction of postcolonial writers who wrote in the aftermath of colonization forces the limits and comes to the centre from the peripheries. By due references to the traditional colonial novels, postcolonial texts create a reverse structure of novels in ideological opposition to the imperial centre. This study examines two postcolonial novels: Midnight’s Children, as one of the exemplary postcolonial texts by Salman Rushdie with its numerous allusions to the colonial past and the colonialist novels and The God of Small Things by Arundhati Roy who, despite being a younger writer, powerfully put forward a postcolonial discourse that functions as an anti-colonial rhetoric. This paper aims to compare the discourse of these postcolonial novels to the discourse of two colonial novels: A Passage to India by E. M. Forster and Kim by Rudyard Kipling.}, number={7}