In the beginning of the article, Katrak raises the responsibility of postcolonial critics and theorists. She argues that though writers are sensitive to the changes which take place in the society and they respond to these issues immediately, the same response is missing from the critics and theorists. She continues her paper with asking questions in connection with what should be done in order to change the situation. She asks how could theory be useful for the writers and how can "theory and interpretation of postcolonial texts challenge the hegemony of the Western canon" (255) and become a means of resistance. She uses the notions of Barbara Harlow, according to whom, theory should be thought of as strategy and relationships between theory and practice should be examined. Katrak wishes to propose such clearly described and understandable theoretical models which could help expanding the boundaries of theory and raise enthusiasm in the people and make them fight for a change.
Katrak examines several trends in recent postcolonial theory which she finds worrying. First of all, theoretical works about postcolonial writers do not get the amount of attention they deserve and the reason why these texts are dismissed is that they are "not theoretical enough by Western standards" (256). Another disquieting trend is that postcolonial texts are used as "raw materials" by Western theorists and not as texts valid and viable on their own. Maybe the most disconcerting trend is that new theoretical works are written with the help of and out of already existing theoretical works in a language which is so obscure that it cannot be understood and which only a privileged class uses - those who write these theories. Another characteristics of the contemporary theory is that it freely ignores and excludes certain postcolonial writers" texts at will while it endlessly continues the discussion of concepts like "Other" or "difference".