Bhagabat
Nayak
Bhagabat
Nayak is a Professor in the Department of English, Rajiv Gandhi University,
Arunachal Pradesh.
Abstract
Theorizing
is a process of building opinions, ideologies and hypotheses in the context of
explanation, imagination and conceptualization. But in theoretical praxis
ontology is the philosophical study of concepts which show how the properties
of the concepts are directly related to being, becoming and understanding of
concept in the subject area. Assessing the ontology of home in the
understanding of theory offers the realisation of the place in its locatedness,
personal knowledge, psychological necessity, and existential and imaginative
practice. ‘Home’ offers space for rest, quietness, health and other requisites
for living a life in happiness and for self development. The purpose of
building or searching ‘home’ is a search for peace or rest that frames a
formative influence on human life. ‘Home’ occupies the meaning and purpose of a
‘purer place’ where individual’s heart gets enshrined with love for its
infrastructural design, conceptual dimensions and formative and nurturing
influences. In diaspora imagination home becomes a metaphor and metonomy for the
retrieval of individual’s past and search for solace in the romantic or
nostalgic imagination. The paper is an attempt to make an analysis of ‘home’ as
a living environment, identity, consolation and solace. In its analysis the
paper raises some fundamental notions about home and highlights its Edenic
dimension in the philosophical plasterings of the immortal marbles and mosaics
of individuals’ domestic myth.
Key
words: performative,
epistemological, anxiety, sensory, affiliation.
Theorizing is a catchword
that brings the collapse of functionalist approach which involves the location
and its environment for analysis. It is perceived that theorizing is different
from theory on the ground that theory is a process of explanation on certain
principles already built but theorising is a process of building. Theorizing ‘home’
involves an understanding, redefining and interpreting the concept of home as a
process of discovery, personal nature, and relationship in thinking and
discussion of one’s locatedness. The concept of ‘home’ does not simply deal
with the meaning of an architectural design in making or imagining rather a
safe place and a comfort zone where one spiritually, ethically, morally and
intellectually grows, becomes, exists and gets oxygenized with emotion, feeling
and sentiment. It makes one’s ontological attachment to members of the family,
social group and wider society in solidarity and collectivity.
Home is the sheltering
place of soul and a “site of the domicile” (Terkenli 327) for its pure and
permanent locale. It provides almost all emotional and aesthetic primers to
life when one feels repressed in his uncanny experience either nurturing
narcissism of childhood or during the creeping horrors in life and
consciousness. Alienation due to migration generates both physical and cultural
distancing from native space, people and culture. Through the ages home has
become the ‘centre’ in diaspora imagination. Home always remains a fixed point in
human life.
The study of home as a physical,
emotional and spiritual landscape has its origin in the great myths of the
world. In Maharishi Valmiki’s The Ramayan
Rama accepts his self exile after leaving his home and enjoys a diaspora life in
forest. In his vairagya (detachment
and renunciation) he nurtures the philosophy of home life. In Veda Vyasa’s The Mahabharat home becomes the cause of
fraternal conflict, identity and existence. The Pandavas during their exile
crave for this and after return claim the space for home from the Kauravas. In
Homer’s Illiad Priam kidnaps Helen
from Menelaus and the woman who becomes the symbol, honour and identity of a
culture becomes the cause of the destruction of Troy, the home of the Greeks.
During the Trojan War Odysseus had joined Agamemnon with other Greek heroes to
siege Troy and to rescue Helen in Odyssey. His long absence had made him
nostalgic for home for which he ended his epic adventure. In Virgil’s The Aeneid the legendary hero Aeneas, a
Trojan, travels to Italy and establishes Rome as his home which was destroyed
by the Greeks. In Milton’s Paradise Lost Adam
and Eve are expelled from Home, the heaven for their First Disobedience but
they fail to forget their eternal home. Every time in literary surface and
poetic references the imagination of home becomes frequent in its sense of loss
or displacement in unwanted way.
Home is vaguely defined
or under-theorized in scholarly conventions and philosophical contexts of
diaspora and expatriate studies. In subjective analysis it is a space to which
individuals are involved in their belongingness and connectedness. In larger
context, “The definition of home rests on a dynamic dialectical relationship
between home and the outside, on which people build their everyday geographical
understanding of the world” (Terkenli 328). In traditional sense home refers to
the understanding of landholding, emotional connection to physical landscape
and a safe place which is always “warm and positive” (Yuval-Davis 10). It is
defined as the centre of culture, language and an instrument of social
engineering for emotional attachment. A desire for home is enhanced by the
presence of family and particularly of children. In Samkhya philosophy it deals with individual’s ‘whatness’ (his
existence and identity) and ‘howness’ (his condition and entity of property).
It is integral to individual’s family, children and social identity. In intellectual
perspective it does not simply remain as a material possession or “as the safe
haven, where people, especially children, are safe” (Fitchen 316) rather
functions as “a feeling which can never be completely and definitely described”
(Dovey 52).
In diaspora writing
‘home’ is used both in intellectual dissemination and imaginative convenience
while focusing retrospectively the countless phenomenons of one’s life. For
diasporas ‘home’ is the place where the ‘compound and substance’ of ‘mind’ and
‘body’ unite, physical constituents become casualty either after losing
validity or responsibility in the science of philosophy. The concept of ‘home’
in diaspora imagination cannot be understood in isolation as it deals with the
physical structure for primal security, adaptation of privacy, financial
investment, territory, identity, a social and cultural unit, and established
importance of rootedness.
Diaspora imagination
articulates the concept of ‘home’ both in traditional way and as a
philosophical category. It covers a wider category of individual’s position in
temporal, spatial, corporeal, epistemological and psychological manifestations.
Both in physical and philosophical performance ‘home’ assimilates individual’s
‘objectivistic’ and ‘subjectivistic’ positions in phenomenal consciousness. In
the ontological study of diaspora imagination ‘home’ relates to individual
being’s becoming, his fundamental nature of existence, reality as well as the
basic categories of his relations and reactions.
The
ontological understanding of ‘home’ relates to many essential aspects of human
life and subject position in diaspora and immigrant writings. The concept of
‘home’ in diaspora writing deals with its nature of existence and structure
distinguishing its ‘constitutive’ and ‘productive’ aspects. In transnational
and immigrant context ‘home’ emphasizes attachment to space or place of
emotional and spatial connectedness. It is the place where one feels
comfortable, secured and intimate in existential sense. In literary carvings
‘home’ is argued as a place that contributes to one’s relationship with family
and society in autobiographical sense, personal history, experience,
relationship, memories, personal and social ties. Home remains a social,
political and territorial boundary with a sort of geo-determination and imagined
as a biophysical container. It is a concept of belonging that anchors one’s
thought, feeling, emotion and circumstances in nostalgic sense. Any connection
or relation to ‘home’ is fluid, chaotic, rhizomatic and not worked in the
multiple facades of attachment. Memory of home haunts the diaspora psyche in individual’s
socio-cultural, political and psychological space.
Diaspora writers have an
emotional and sentimental binding with home, as it expresses their affiliation
and attachment to the place with “multiple belongings” in “nostalgic
exclusivity” (Walters xvi). In their ontological dimension ‘home’ is endorsed
with psychological anxieties as a “historical cultural identity” (Ashcroft
et.al. 425). It is the place of one’s belonging what Wendy Walters writes:
I
now see that I was searching for a location where I ‘belonged’, a safe
intellectual and political space that I could call ‘home’. But how could I
presume to find a home in a system that at best was predicted upon my alleged
inferiority and, at worst, was dedicated to my removal? (xviii).
In diaspora studies:
The notion of home
therefore is much more complex than approaches to diaspora premised on the
power of nostalgia would us believe. It is intrinsically linked with the way in
which the processes of inclusion or exclusion operate and are subjectively
experienced under given circumstances. It relates to the complex political and
personal struggles over the social regulation of ‘belonging’ (Tsagarousianou
52).
Home is not only for living but for
nurturing one’s emotion, feeling and sense of belongingness. It seems a life
without ‘home’ is fragile, isolated and alienated. With the loss of nostalgia
the concept of ‘home’ gets lost both at personal and national levels. Diaspora
community live in the anxiety of ‘home’ both in their search for the lost
geoposition, performance and choice in making. The phenomenon of home as a
tangible structure gets lost with the flux of time but it gains intangible
relationship between people and place in empirical research.
In
diaspora theory ‘home’ is used as a metaphor and metonomy for peace, shelter
and safety in which one’s emotional and psychological data is rooted. In
cultural texts and identity arguments ‘home’ draws attention for contributing
the understanding of locations both in ‘old’ and ‘new’ nation states. Even in
travel writing ‘home’ occupies an imaginary place of individual’s conscious or
unconscious state in displacement, dispossession and migration. Eminent writers
of diasporic identity in Australia, America, Canada and the UK such as Longston
Hughes, China Achebe, Wole Soyinka, Peter Abrahams, Derek Walcott, Aime
Cesaire, Meena Alexander, Kamala Markandaya, Santa Rama Rao, V.S. Naipaul,
Salman Rushdie, Amitav Ghosh, M.G. Vassanji, Shani Mootoo, Bharati Mukherjee,
David Babydeen, Rohinton Mistry and Hanif Kureishi who configure ‘home’ as a
cultural point and nostalgia in their writings.
The African diasporas are
the communities descended from native Africans who had mass dispersion from
Africa between 1500s to 1800s. The Caribbean diasporas, a sizeable
well-educated and affluent demographic category have their common heritage and
strong connections across the region and are located in the United States,
Canada, United Kingdom and countries that were previously colonial empires. The
Caribbean diasporas are a demographic composition of intra-regional migration
and extra-regional migration, have strong sentimental and material links with
their countries of origin or their homelands. The Indian diasporas as
indentured category and qualified professionals in their superdiversity have
their special image for hard work and dedication. However, while theorizing the
diasporas and their condition it can be said that “Diasporas are people who
want to explore the meaning of the hyphen, but perhaps not press the hyphen too
far for fear that this world lead to massive communal schizophrenia” (Mishra 1).
The loss of homeland for
the diasporas constantly haunt their mind and cause trauma when they are caught
between the tensions of ‘culture’ and ‘history’. In theory ‘home’ explains its
complex, multileveled and multi-dimensional construct with specific internal
unity determined by relations at different levels. Home is ‘real’ and ‘ideal’
in form and a physical, psychological and social facade. In empirical and
theoretical understanding ‘home’ becomes a multidisciplinary hybrid approach in
its necessary formulation. Home carries the meaning and purpose of privacy,
identity and familiarity explicating individual’s physical, psychological and
social growth and emotional attachment. Home remains integral to individual’s
consciousness in exile, alienation and migration which cannot be erased.
Theorizing
‘home’ in diaspora imagination is an attempt to search for a ‘locus in space’
with psychological significance. In totality ‘home’ carries “a sense of
belonging” and “rootedness” (Sixsmith 31) and refers to the ‘territoriality’ in
one’s physical search for a spiritual accommodation. In migration, displacement
and dispossession the territory of home gets lost but it anchors the diaspora
imagination, emotion and feeling in the hours of need for peace. It is a
physical need and psychological extension during his spiritual exhaustion. Home
implicitly suggests optimism and reinforces public/private analysis of the
place where one hopes to retreat after finding his position in weaker sense. In
psycho-spiritual sense home is the territory for security and protection, when
it is described as “... a mixture of affection, reciprocated towards the home
as a nurturing environment and resentment towards the demands of the home”
(Darke 11). In diaspora’s physical experience home establishes “intangible
relationship between the people and places” in the “bounded definitions” (Dovey
52) of one’s locatedness.
In their respective
locatedness the diasporas think of their existential reality and comprehend
‘home’ as ‘the centre’ and ‘fixed point’ of their ‘being’ and intellectual
activity. The spatial and corporeal status on the foreign land enables their
intellectual activity to realise
The territory of home as
a type of setting satisfies a number of social and psychological needs; home is
the sole area of control for the individual; home is the most appropriate
physical framework for family and family life; home is a place of
self-expression; and home provides a feeling of security (Rapoport 30).
Home is a necessity for psychological
health, an emotional bond and spiritual epicentre for positive thinking and
doing with a quest for identity, security and stimulation. Mind occupies the
space of home. In diaspora’s displacement home remains as a quest for his
identity. Mr. Biswas in V.S. Naipaul’s House
for Mr. Biswas (1961) narrates nearly every diaspora’s existential crisis
and inability to cope with the place in his search for a house. For Salman
Rushdie his imagination that serves many historical and philosophical
references to his novels. Similar was the case of A.K. Ramanujan whose longing
for ancestral house during his thirty years of Chicago days becomes apparent in
his narrative poem “Small Scale Reflections on a Great House”. In relation to
family ‘home’ is a common site with positive aspects in “domestic power
relationships” (Moore 212). In other words, home becomes “a prison and a place
of terror as well as a haven or place of love...” (ibid) when one negates in
desperation or posits in expectation. In public-private dichotomy home is
economically and politically an experience of dwelling in socio-psychological
consciousness.
In
feminist thinking ‘home’ is often viewed differently. Feminists contradict the
motive and purpose of ‘home’ with the thinking that it is a place of
confinement for women. For them home is not a place for satisfaction and peace
rather a prison and a place of terror as well as a haven or place of love. Home
is the space full of human experiences that covers a variety of meanings from
alternative perspectives. In sociological research and experience
If house and home mean
the confinement of women for the sake of nourishing male projects, then
feminists have good reason to reject home as a value. But it is difficult even
for feminists to exorcise a positive valence to the idea of home. We often look
forward to going home and invite others to make themselves at home. House and
home are deeply ambivalent values (Young 749).
In many literary and poetic references
‘home’ has been written either in exile or when it is in danger of being lost
or changed in unwanted circumstances. Homelessness causes physical and
psychological impairedness and a homeless diaspora never finds a ‘place of
secure retreat’. In diaspora writing ‘home’ is assessed through the person’s
involuntary or forced exile for many years or in preferred homelessness. Home
is an inclusive space in mind and an essential space for the identity and
development of the individual. In one’s historical progress ‘home’ is
constructed but in the diaspora memory it is a lost territory revisited only in
retrievals.
Feminist writers
deconstruct the ideal image of ‘home’ that makes woman into ‘less of a person’
almost in captivity and isolation which makes her a person with ‘mental myopia’
for her drudgery of domestic work and victim of domestic violence. ‘Home’ for
some women becomes “less of a castle, and more of a cage” (Goldsack 121). Home
as a physical design of dwelling for ‘body zone’, and function not only becomes the place for caring
body through washing, dressing, and caring but creating a domestic environment
for physical and emotional nurture as well as mental recuperation. The social
and cultural aspects of ‘home’ constitute the appropriate domestic space and
physiological and psychological needs and functions. Feminist thinkers believe
home a problematic social or personal space in Virginia Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own (1929) and Alice
Walker’s nonfiction In Search of our
Mother’s Garden (1983). Many writers of twentieth century think home is
‘the central site of the oppression of women’. Feminist theorists like Mary
Wollstonecraft, Simone de Beauvoir and Judith Butler consider home a feminised
space. They consider home as a space for their children and it serves as an
anchor of their memory, emotion and love for family. It is
Because women were so
often associated with family, home space becomes seen as a private, feminized
space that is distinct from the public, masculinised space that lies outside
its borders ... within this gendered sphere of private and public space, women
and men assume distinctive roles. Women are expected to remain in their home
“place”. Avoiding the dangerous space of public streets allows women to take
care for children, the sick, and the elderly, and other dependent family
members. Men are expected to support and defend the private, feminized space
that houses their families (Collins 67).
For women diaspora ‘home’ stands for “the
happiness of the family group” and “meaning and value” (Beauvoir 449) of life. In
the novels of Bharati Mukherjee the portrayal of home is a feminine space which
the Indian women diasporas have left behind. Home remains a cultural space for
women diasporas in Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni’s novels. Similarly in Jhumpa
Lahiri’s narrations home remains the cultural centre for which diaspora Bengali
women struggle to bridge their relationship between India and the U.S. in
hyphenatedness. In fact, the identity of
Indian woman at home is usually determined in terms of a daughter, a wife or a
home maker, and a mother. Domestic home is codified with psychological space
and coherent familial relationship.
In
diaspora imagination ‘home’ operates on several planes in cultural, domestic
and gender aspects. When these aspects are in disruption or convulsion, the
living place becomes like a hotel or rented room. The second and third
generation diasporas from Africa and South Asia to America, Canada and Europe
fail to bridge the gap between the ancestral land and the adopted one for which
they struggle. While for their parents home becomes nostalgia, the new
generation view it in heteroglossia. ‘Home’ provides a romantic nostalgia which
the first generation diasporas cannot alternate or depersonalize in a new place
of settlement or habitation. In diaspora narratives or travel writings
Homes become symbols of
selves or cultures. Whereas the residential landscape, for example, undoubtedly
conveys symbolic notions of the house ... the idea of home itself becomes a
symbol of the feelings, circumstances, or types of relationships that it has
come to represent in distinct epochs or cultures, such as people ... a local
way of life ... a family ... or sentiments of ease, relaxation, comfort and
familiarity (Terkenli 327).
In diaspora imagination home is a private
and personal space bustles with intense domestic activity of warming, cooking,
nurturing and interacting with inmates. In social structure home is
Formed through a
combination of marital and blood time, ideal families consist of heterosexual
couples that produce their own biological children. Such families have a
specific authority structure, namely, a father-head earning an adequate family
wage, a stay-at-home wife, and children ... held together by primary emotional
bonds of love and caring (Collins 62).
The location of “Home regions are
culturally constructed and geographically and culturally contingent” (Terkenli
324). This makes the diasporas a psychological category who live in the status
of “Trishanku”, a middle ground between their goals or desires and current
state or possessions. The location of home space gains importance as it
provides material comfort, rest and security from the perils that lurks outside
heel hooks. It provides the feeling of safety, warmth, comfort and feeding to
nurture our bodies.
The
diaspora writers of African, Asian and the Caribbean origins explicitly
conceptualise home in their phenomenological and ontological perspectives
either while romanticising or retrieving their memories of the past. ‘Home’ as
“a site of privacy and autonomy for occupiers” (Fitchen 318) remains constant.
When one is evicted or voluntarily gets displaced he analyses its attributes.
The psychological concept of ‘home as a symbol of one’s self’, ‘self-identity’,
‘extension of the psyche’ and an illustration of identity one experiences in
alienation. Diaspora and migrant communities imagine ‘home’ as an ‘identity
shell’ while acting upon their dreams. Their ‘voluntary’ or “involuntary loss
of home” (Dovey 43) make them feel the losers of personal and cultural
identity, and enjoy life in an emptiness and vacuum in host land’s plenitude.
Although the tendency to imagine home becomes an outcome of romantic nostalgia
or neurotic heteroglossia they potentially highlight it in the facades of
“psychological and sociological exploration” (Moore 207).
Diasporas
in their unhappiness explicitly evaluate home environment for their sustenance,
emotional protection, security and cultural representation. In analysis home is
made as a cultural epitome and a cherished institution with its practical and
psychological impact on the individuals. In empirical studies they realise its
psychological dimension in emotional loss, alienation and dispossession. Loss
of home enables one for its tangible claim in expatriation. When ‘home’ is lost
either voluntarily or under compulsion it invites the dangers of wilderness for
life. The understanding of home remains simply a physical structure or a unit
of construction without socio-cultural connection and other additional values. Diasporas
as disposed individuals always develop the somatic symptoms in distress due to their
loss of homeland which evolves their “tendencies to idealise the lost place”
(Duhl 151). The diasporas, expatriates, immigrants and refugees in their
dislocation and migration to other locality, country or continent think, brood,
reminisce and engross with the memory of home as a social, familial and
psychological space. The ‘pathology’ of diaspora psychology reveals one’s long
period of involvement, attachment and close association with home without which,
one feels insecure and uncertain.
The
paper assimilates diasporas as an ‘imaginary’ community that suffers from
trauma for identity. Their love and longing for home in nostalgia serves as a
metaphor of emotion and feeling in diaspora aesthetic. Diaspora writers narrate
these transnational communities, their individual and philosophical dimensions
in Weberian social context, Kantian ethical template and existential surreality.
The meaning and characteristics of ‘home’ is experienced ontologically in one’s
craving for it in a definite socio-cultural environment where he struggles to
carve the feelings in dispossession. Home is the nurturing ground of feelings
that “encompass a wide range and variety of responses” (Gurney 8) in diaspora
writings. Experiencing the feelings on home is always unique that gets revealed
in imagination, cultural expression and variety of responses. Through retrieving
and retrospecting home in their emotions, feelings, affiliation and attachment
the diaspora writers focus it as a psychological space. In their narrative
parlence they experiment the concept of home in their fragmented self and
homeless existence. Labouring with their fragmented self in the new location
they search for a home either in settler colonies or metropolitan centres.
These
.... exiles or immigrants
or expatriates are haunted by some sense of loss, some urge to reclaim, to look
back, even at the risk of being muted into pillars of salt. But if we look back
... our physical alienation ... almost inevitably means that we will not be
capable of reclaiming precisely the thing that was lost; that we will ...
create fictions, not actual cities or villages, but invisible ones, imaginary
home lands ... of the mind (Naipaul 10).
The uncanny truth for them is that their
sense of return is in devastation or denied in suppression of the fact in
history, but it psychologically becomes “a symptom of the repressed truth and
concerning the alienating results of private ownership” (Freud 69).
The
study of diaspora grapples with the meaning of ‘home’ as a belonging, a nation,
and an identity in the writings of diaspora writers. Both in epistemological
shifts, theoretical frameworks and modes of analysis ‘home’ has been analysed
as a cultural and philosophical production in intellectual traditions. The diasporas as “homeless wanderers,
nomads, vagrants” (Said 407) inherit home as a label of identity in their “cultural
insiderism” (Gilroy 3) and in “complex form of signification” (Bhabha 172). For
diaspora community home may be a terminal loss but in the midst of
heterogeneity, diversity and dispersement ‘home’ becomes a Saussurean ‘sign’, ‘signifier’
and ‘signified’ for their ‘rootedness’ and identity. ‘Home’ is an awareness of
‘root’ that the diasporas search and demonstrate from ‘imaginary homelands’ either
in performance or perspective.
While living in host
country’s ‘New World’ the diasporas struggle to assimilate and assert the
homeliness of home and try to secure their “sacred homeland” in their “out of
placeness” (Naipaul 19). In the matrix of home “Nations evoke feelings of
belonging” (McLeod 74). For them the concept of ‘home’ functions as a constant
stimulant in their thinking and imagining of ‘root’, ‘origin’, shelter,
stability, security and comfort. For them ‘home’, the land of their birth,
growth, and motivation remains forever. Returning ‘home’ is difficult for them
spatially because of their profession, aspiration and association with the
people of the new world. Compromising between the love and affiliation for the
new world and comprehending attachment to the root becomes the central focus of
their intellectual strategy for a consolation.
To
conclude, it can be said that ‘home’ is an extensive body of experiential
phenomenon which diaspora writers encompass in wide range and variety of
responses. ‘Home’ is an extensive body of research in literature, culture,
feminist studies and social sciences where it has a complex and
multi-dimensional amalgam. The formulation and surrounding of ‘home’ as
identity has familial, cultural and nostalgic connotations within the broader
concept of nation and identity. The socio-cultural facets of ‘home’ have the
direct association with family life. Although ‘home’ as a ‘place’ and ‘space’
is idealized conceptually in literary, cultural and national paradigms; in
legislation and judicial policy, it conveys different connotations. In
pluralistic and functional approach ‘home’ claims more in doing with everyday
living and thinking. It is the only territory that enhances memory, dream, aspiration,
privacy and nostalgia for family and nation.
Home
remains the centre of enlightenment where one grows intellectually with free
spirits, ideologies and consciousness. In the imagination of home a diaspora
remains engrossed in his past and visualises his future. Researchers, home
lovers, home makers, policy makers, legal experts and social scientists agree
to the view that ‘home’ is an “affective anchor” and “sacred connotation”
(Fitchen 317) in individual’s cultural moorings and ‘stream of consciousness’. Although
the migrant and diaspora professionals work on fat packages in different
sectors at distant places they romanticise their homelands and ‘home’ as the
Edenic world of their imagination.
Works
cited
Ashcroft,
Bill, Helen Tiffin, Gareth Griffith. The
Post-colonial Studies Reader. Routledge, 2005.
Beavoir,
Simone de. The Second Sex. Edited and
translated by H.M. Parshley. Vintage Book, 1984.
Bhabha,
Homi K. The Location of Culture.
Routledge, 1994.
Collins,
Wilkie. The Woman in White. All the
year Round, 1859.
Darke,
J. “Women and the Meaning of Home”. Housing
Women. Edited by R. Gilory and R. Woods. Routledge, 1994, pp. 11-30.
Dovey,
Kimberly. “Home and Homelessness”. Home
Environments. Edited by Irwin Altman and Carol M. Werner, Plenum Press,
1985; pp. 33-64.
Duhl,
Leonard J. The Urban Condition-people and
Policy in the Metropolis. Basic
Books Inc, 1963.
Fitchen,
Janet. M. Rural Homelessness: Issues,
Experiences and Policy Responses: Bristol University Press, 2002.
Freud,
Sigmund. The Psychopathology of Everyday
Life. Digireeds. Com, 2005.
Gilory,
Paul. The Black Atlantic Modernity and
Double Consciousness. Verso, 1993.
Goldsack,
L. “A Heaven in a Heartless Home? Women and Domestic Violence”. Ideal Home?: Social Change and Domestic
Life. Edited by T. Chapman and J. Hockey. Routledge, 1999, pp. 121-132.
Gurney,
Craig. “The Meaning of Home in the Decade
of owner occupation: Towards an Experiential Perspective. University of Briston, 1990.
McLeod,
John. Beginning Postcolonialsim. Viva
Books, 2010.
Mishra,
Vijay. The Diasporic Imaginary and the
Indian Diaspora. Victoria University of Wellington, 1996.
Moore,
Jeanne. “Placing Home in Context”. Journal
of Environmental Psychology. vol. 20, no.3. 2000, pp. 207-217.
Naipaul,
V.S. The Enigma of Aurival. Knopf,
1987.
Prarameswan,
Uma. Trishanku. Tsar Publications, 1988.
Rapoport,
Anatol. “A critical Look at the concept of ‘Home’”. The Home: Words, Interpretations, Meanings, Environments. Edited by
David Benjamin. Ashgate, 1995.
Said,
Edward. Culture and Imperialism.
Chatto & Windus, 1993.
Sixsmith,
Judith. “The Essential Qualities of a Home”. Journal of Environmental Psychology. vol. 6, 1994, pp. 31-46.
Terkenli,
Theano S. “Home as Region”. Geographical
Review. vol. 85; no. 3, July
1995, pp. 324-334.
Tsagarousianou,
Roza. “Rethinking the concept of Diaspora: Mobility, Connectivity and
communication in a Globalised World”.
Westminister Papers in Communication and Culture. vol. 1, no.1, 2004, pp.
52-65.
Walters,
Wendy W. At Home in Diaspora: Black
International Writing. University of Minesota Press, 2005.
Young,
A. H. “The Changing Family, Rights Discourse and the Supreme Court of Canada”. Canadian Bar Review. vol. 80, 2001, pp.
749-792.
Yuval-Davis,
Nira. The Politics of Belonging:
Intersectional Contestations. Sage, 2011.
*********