This article contributes to recent discussions of temporality in relation to the concept of “world,” and especially, to how thinking “world” with “time” can rejuvenate postcolonial figurations of futurity. The theoretical texts I discuss include Pheng Cheah’s What Is a World?, Darieck Scott’s Extravagant Abjection, and Dipesh Chakrabarty’s Provincializing Europe. I retrieve the distinction in these works between the structural dislocations that “found” human being and decompose linear time, and more properly historical decenterings in which the heterotemporal is an effect of social processes of exploitation and (colonial-capitalist) domination. To honor this distinction, I place recent thinkers into dialogue with Walter Benjamin and Herbert Marcuse, suggesting that a post-poststructuralist reclamation of the latter is particularly overdue. The article culminates in an explication of Zoë Wicomb’s David’s Story—a work that asks us to live through its form that postcolonial mode of the nonsynchronous with which my argument is concerned.

中文翻译：

---

足够的世界和时间：佐伊·威科姆的大卫与马尔库塞、本杰明和查克拉巴蒂的故事

本文有助于最近讨论与“世界”概念相关的时间性，尤其是思考“世界”与“时间”如何能够使后殖民的未来形象焕发活力。我讨论的理论文本包括 Pheng Cheah 的什么是世界？, 达里克·斯科特的奢侈的落魄, 和 Dipesh Chakrabarty 的地方化欧洲. 我检索了这些作品中“发现”人类和分解线性时间的结构错位与更恰当的历史去中心化之间的区别，其中异时性是社会剥削和（殖民资本主义）统治过程的影响。为了尊重这一区别，我让最近的思想家与沃尔特·本雅明和赫伯特·马尔库塞进行对话，表明对后者的后结构主义改造尤其迟到。这篇文章的高潮是对 Zoë Wicomb 的解释大卫的故事——一部要求我们经历它的作品形式我的论点所关注的非同步的后殖民模式。