The prestigious Holberg Prize 2025 has been won by our very own Professor Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. It is a triumph not only for India but the entire South-East Asia. She is a stalwart in the field of postcolonial studies, feminist critiques, and deconstruction theory. Her work has shaped our understanding of the interrelated flux between power, knowledge, and marginality. But to have a deep understanding of her work we must look beyond the accolades received by her. We need to take a critical look at the complexity of her work and not downplay it at the same time.
Spivak has started her journey as a student of the University of Calcutta and today she is one of the renowned professor at the Columbia University, USA. She is also a founding member of the Institute for Comparative Literature and Society at the University. She gained recognition in the critical theory circles by translating Jacques Derrida’s “Of Grammatology” (1976). But she came to be recognized as a powerhouse intellectual scholar through her seminal essay “Can the Subaltern Speak?” (1988). In her long academic journey as a scholar she has probed into imperialism, neocolonialism, gender, and knowledge production. She has consistently challenged the operation of power in the global order.
The Holberg Prize, also known as the Norwegian Nobel Prize for the Humanities and Social Sciences, is awarded annually by the Norwegian government to scholars who have made outstanding contributions in these fields. This recognition demonstrates that postcolonial ideas remain relevant in a society where power and information are still structured in a colonial manner. This acknowledgment encourages us to contemplate the institutionalization of radical critique. As Spivak goes on to receive acclaim from the elite academic circle, one wonders more deeply whether the mechanisms she aimed to challenge have incorporated her work. Can critique still be revolutionary when it becomes part of the establishment?
The Contradictions of Spivak’s Work
Spivak’s research is not intended for the apathetic reader. Her work is frequently inaccessible to the people she aims to represent due to its notoriously complex layers of Derridean deconstruction, Marxist critique, and poststructuralist rigor. Her essay, “Can the Subaltern Speak?” questions whether the most marginalized can speak for themselves about their own experiences. However, the irony is that it is written in a language that is virtually incomprehensible to the subaltern. Critiques have pointed out that her work is flawed. They raise the question: Can her academic theories about the subaltern make them less vocal? Is she supporting the elites she is writing against? Spivak claims that knowledge is inherently political. Therefore, it follows that its expression must also be mindful of accessibility.
To dismiss Spivak because of this paradox would be an injustice, as her work has facilitated tremendous developments. The Global South in today’s times of unbridled globalization continues to be dictated by the economic and cultural imperialism of the West. Now, more than ever, Spivak’s critiques of neocolonialism are particularly pertinent. In her development discourse, Spivak sheds light on how the rhetoric of progress frequently conceals exploitation. The humanitarian drive that we observe is often intertwined with corporate and political agendas. She compels us to consider: When the West talks about saving women from the Third World, we must ask ourselves – who is actually being heard? Whose freedom is being ignored?
Spivak’s Legacy and the Future of Postcolonial Thought
Spivak’s critiques hasn’t been very kind to her. But still she refuses to accept any simplistic solution. She always kept emphasizing about critical thinking. Knowledge is not neutral, from historic times it has never been. Knowledge is produced, distributed and weaponized in a way to perpetuate global imbalances. Today’s academic discourse being under threat from populist rhetoric, dismisses critical theory as irrelevant or elitist.
Spivak’s work provide us with food for thought about where postcolonial studies are headed. Many universities are now trying to “decolonize’” their curricula. There stands a risk that Spivak’s will be celebrated in intellectual circles without truly challenging the system. The real test is whether we practice her ideas in a way that pushes boundaries and sparks real change.
Spivak continues to inspire and challenge scholars today. Those working in postcolonial studies, feminism, and global justice cannot just accept her ideas at face value. Our job is to build on them, rethink them, and make them relevant in today’s times. The subaltern of today differs from the subaltern of Spivak’s earlier work due to economic changes, the digital revolution, and geopolitical developments that have reshaped the mechanisms of marginalization.
One of the most essential qualities that future scholars can pick from her is her stress on the value of intellectual self-reflection. She does not allow scholars to take easy moral stands. Instead, she makes them confront their privileges, biases, and limitations. Spivak motivates us to continually question the process of knowledge production.
Spivak’s work is a true example of how academic research and activism can intersect. She is also involved in grassroots education programs in rural India. Her dense theoretical texts overshadow this aspect of her work. This shows that she does not criticize power structures from afar, but works to break them down, even imperfectly at times.
A Challenge for the Future
As inheritors of her intellectual legacy, it is our work to continue speaking, writing, and acting in ways that disrupt power. As a nation, as we celebrate Spivak’s Holberg prize, we must not allow ourselves to be passive admirers. Our intellectual and ethical obligation is to give voice to the subaltern. We must do more than listen. We must also reevaluate the systems that dictate who is heard and who is often overlooked. Today, as we honor Spivak’s contributions, we must nurture the radical possibilities she has opened up for us to continue inspiring a new generation of scholars and activists.