“While in Britain cultural studies evolved on the margins of sociology departments, in the U.S. such study has been prominent in literature departments. More and more ensconced within the postcolonial field, it has come to be increasingly indebted to psychoanalytic, especially Lacanian, methodologies. At least in its U.S. housing the division between cultural studies and postcolonial studies is not evident. In many cases postcolonialism is seen as a subfield of cultural studies. If Critical Fanonism is a weathervane then we should be wary of the way the cultural studies of Fanon have shied away from engaging politically or philosophically with Fanon as a revolutionary and political actor. Additionally, the image of the “Birmingham School” of cultural studies as rooted in Marx and Gramsci is not entirely correct. As Colin Sparks argues in his essay “Stuart Hall, Cultural Studies and Marxism,” the identification of Marxism and cultural studies “lasted about four years” (1996, 72) and was “more contingent and transitory than it once appeared to its main actors” (1996, 97). In its present-day poststructualist phase, cultural studies finds a closer affinity with the insights from postcolonialism that have developed through a Lacanian frame than through Marxism. And, even if he wants to bring additional issues to the table, Stuart Hall (an earlier advocate of a Gramscian cultural studies) agrees with Homi Bhabha’s approach to Fanon (see Hall 1996). The context of an elective affinity between cultural studies (i.e., Hall) and postcolonial theory (i.e., Bhabha) is also particularly important for any study of the recent dispersion of “Black British cultural studies” into the U.S. academy. Postcolonialism blossomed as a field of enquiry in the 1980s, having less to do with developments in post-colonial societies themselves than with a reflection of the restructuring of the American national cultural identity in the universities (see King 1997, 7 n. 1). The new Fanon of postcoloniality, reflects, as Kobena Mercer has put it, the “fading fortunes of the independent left in the 1980s” (Hall 1996, 16). It is a Fanon that, as Bhabha does, emphasizes uncertainty and fragmentation, almost replacing social analysis with psychoanalysis.”