The concepts and work of Bhabha transformed the research of colonialism. This is because of the application of methodologies related to post-structuralism in the texts of colonialism. He considered using the term “difference” referring to various writing pieces. Hence, he focused on exploring and extending the significant of post-structuralism for the difference of culture. It is stated by Bhabha that the dominating colonization is highly dependent on asserting the difference. The colonized have inferior qualities when compared to the colonizers (Bhabha, 2010). Bhabha also held the belief that it is acknowledged by colonial authority that there is undermining of this supposed difference from the literal similarity in colonized people.
Bhabha further investigated the concept of nation leaving a long term impact on cultural and literary studies. This was done by improving the excerpts of Nation and Narration (1990). His work was pushing across the borderline discourse of history, crossing the limits of gender and race. This was not for the purpose of formulating a general theory, but for considering the productive challenges of perplexed language in several areas (Bhabha, 1994). There is an exhilarated understand of alternate chances in which there is permanent incompleteness and transition of culture. The theories of hybridity and mimicry by Bhabha have strongly improved post-colonial discourse that it is used for the purpose of pointing out reference. Using the concept of hybridity by Bhabha was the most controversial and influential one since recent researches of post-colonialism (Bhabha, 2012).
Bhabha makes a backward leap to Fanon for suggesting that hybridity and liminality are crucial attributes in the condition of colonialism. This is amplified by Bhabhato to suggest that identities of colonialism are always in relation with agony and flux. This is always with respect to the location ensuring the correct articulation of colonial desire. In addition, there can be recognition of stereotypical knowledge as a source of practical control. It can also be separated out of philosophical civilized justification for the mission of colonialism (Bhabha, 2012). Each and every form of colonial identification has to be considered as source of differentiation, such as realizing cross-cutting, multiple perverse, and polymorphous. There are also determinations to demand specifically calculated effects.