Edited By Jean Bessière and Gerald Gillespie
A Moving Target…
University of Toronto
Needless to say, the very expression World Literature is treacherous because irresistibly attractive; on the surface its two components seem self-evident until one realizes their infinite complexity and that of their alliance. As in the case of traditional literary history there was a time – and there still are circumstances – when a theoretical definition seemed or seems unnecessary. “World” designated a cultured global readership and “literature” was unambiguously identified with the formal characterization of works of excellence in recognizable genres. But again, even such words as “excellence” and “genre” have been and are disputable until it is realized that consensus on our object (rather than a certainty guaranteed in the abstract) is needed, and must be achieved, before valid discussion can occur. And this in turn calls for the acceptance of a pragmatic approach, one which raises questions and admits the variability of answers.
The work of the I.C.L.A.’s Committee on “Mapping Multiculturalism in World Literatures” tackles what is perhaps the most important issue in trying to imagine the future of a field of knowledge which calls itself “world literature.” The question of language has only gradually imposed itself, as in practice it had tended to be taken for granted that works pertaining to world literature are relevant to it in their original language, in translations, or both. Yet the “cartography” of literary phenomena must be a prerequisite if the discipline is to cover a consistent and truly...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.