她也许可以被归类为“国际诗人”或“后殖民诗人”或“亚裔诗人”什么的,但这里之所以仍把她算作印度英语诗人,是因为她毕竟是第一代移民,对本土仍有一定的记忆,更重要的是,她并没有完全忘记自己的母语和文化,而这些素质在她的作品中有明显的表现。当然,她的英语是地道的,诗歌手法和风格是现代西化的, 或更准确地说,是美国化的。这些都保证她在西方会受欢迎。后殖民地作家一般都是骑墙派、精神分裂者、文化杂种,他们对从前的宗主国殖民者总是爱恨参半的——恨他们的政治、经济和军事压迫,却或多或少乐于接受他们的文化侵略。例如叶芝、希内、沃尔科特等,在某种程度上而言,他们都是殖民文化的受益者。他们都面临着如何摆放自己的姿态的两难问题:是有意暴露以迎合“他者”的猎奇心理呢,还是有分寸地保持自我的尊严呢?这个尺度把握好了似乎并不太容易。 She may be categorized as “International Poet ” or “Post-Colonial Poet ” or “Asian Poet ”, but here she still counts her as an Indian English poet because she is, after all, The first generation of immigrants still have a certain memory of the local community. More importantly, she did not completely forget her native language and culture, and these qualities are clearly reflected in her works. Of course, her English is authentic, the style and style of poetry is modernized, or more accurately, Americanized. These are all guarantees that she will be popular in the West. Post-colonial writers are generally cavalry, schizophrenic, and cultural hybrids who often love and indulge in their former sovereign colonists - hating their political, economic, and military oppression, more or less willing to accept them cultural invasion. For example, Yeats, Hine, Walcott, etc., to some extent, they are the beneficiaries of colonial culture. They all face the dilemma of how to position themselves: intentional exposure to the curiosity of the Other, or discretional self-esteem? It does not seem that easy to grasp at this scale .