Saturday, November 21, 2020
Last Video: Reading the "World"
NOTE: This is your final video for the class, so don't forget to leave a response below (a lot of people are forgetting to do this, so be careful!). However, this video and the response are geared to prepare you for your final paper, the so-called Proper Paper #2. I'll post that early next week so you can start thinking about it, though it won't be due until the last day of finals. Don't forget the final set of questions for The Lover below this post as well.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"World Literature" carries the connotation of something that is simultaneously "foreign" and "relative". Because we are all citizens of the world, this literature can be relatable. However, we are not all familiar with the many different cultures that inhabit the world, so this type of literature can be difficult to immediately understand. When reading "World Lit", I try and refrain from making cultural assumptions because I'm reading about cultures I'm not apart of. Additionally, I believe it is wise to research these books to gain a better experience of the characters, settings, and plot. For instance, when reading Miguel Street, it's helpful to understand the switches between languages. If I'm reading something that is under the blanket term of "American Literature", I may not research the book as much because I am familiar with American culture. I do not believe that there is negative connotation with the "otherness" of being considered "World Literature". I believe that acknowledging the difference or complexity of these works from others impresses the importance of learning about things we are not already familiar with. It's vital to learn about things we don't understand, even if we will never fully comprehend cultures that we are not apart of.
ReplyDeleteI agree, it's a useful distinction since it not only sets them apart from the traditional surveys (or suggests they are merely part of a more mainstream tradition) but it also prompts us to look for differences as well. After all, we don't expect everything in a British lit class to be the same, as the works are varied by time period, author, movement, and style...and so, too, with World Literature, only to a much greater degree. But I think this term also serves as a starting point to determine where to place many of these works that don't fit comfortably in the clumsy distinctions we offer for literature (just as some works like LOTR are offered in fantasy, fiction, and even children's lit!).
DeleteYHelm:
ReplyDeleteI think labeling these novels as World Literature is accurate for our purposes. They reveal a worldview that is unfamiliar to us, (Americans), and open our eyes to cultures we would not otherwise be exposed to. Even viewing a culture through foreign(British) eyes, such as Bronte's description of the Creole wife in "Jane Eyre", provides a glimpse of a different culture and a differing viewpoint. . Your question made me wonder how American works are labeled in other parts of the world. Would American authors be labeled "American" or placed under "World" literature?
Yes, that's a great point: most American lit is considered "American Lit' elsewhere, and there are even American lit programs in most foreign universities. However, some schools have "English literature" courses that define 'English' as language, not country. So American, British, Canadian, Australian, etc., could all be in the same class as the same literature--which, in a sense, it is. So where does Naipaul most belong, since he's a Trinidadian writer who writes in English but lived in England? He didn't feel he was part of Carribean literature, identifying much more with British literature proper--though he was also critical of much of this tradition. So maybe "World Literature" allows us to ask these questions, while also making sure we're not limited by them.
DeleteI believe an interesting perspective to take on this question is that regardless if a text was written to be "world literature", you can view an author's work through a "world literature" lens; to elaborate, not all literature is world literature of course, and not each work is attempting to make a statement about a culture that is relevant across the world, but you can ask yourself how a culture or statement within your text compares to your previous understanding of the text's material. Questions like "Does the text go against what I currently think" or "How can I use the text to enhance my understanding of not only the culture within the text, but the world in general?
ReplyDeleteIn this way, world literature is indeed a philosophy in which you can grab onto to analyze text; thus, almost any work could educate you on world literature if you put in the effort to look at the text that way. Novels like "Manon Lescaut" or plays like "The Seagull" may not appear to be written with a world literature philosophy in mind at first glance, but a world literature stance can indeed be taken.
Conversely, novels like "Miguel Street" and "Lover" make numerous statements about race, class, and ethnicity, topics that appear regularly in world literature. Each of these works says something about one or more cultures, which prompts you to reflect on your own beliefs and culture. The author is very clearly asking their readers to ask themselves these questions and look at their story as if their story was a world literature novel, more so than a British or American novel.
Intentions aside, novels such as those could be looked at from a different perspective as well and not strictly as world literature, which is the great thing about literature in general - there is no clear answer as to what you should take away from a text; thus, I do believe world literature is a mindset that can be used and applied to text, as there are consistent themes and ideas that can be taken away from them that relate to world literature, even if isn't exactly the author's goal. While a novel isn't "world literature" by default, a question you pose in the video, any novel can be looked at under a world literature lens to deduce if there are themes relevant to world literature.
^ This is Paul Harris, by the way.
DeleteGreat response! I like your idea that "which is the great thing about literature in general - there is no clear answer as to what you should take away from a text." This is all the more true with a title like "World Literature," which gives you nothing to hang your hat on--not a country, or a culture, or even a language. It leaves everything open for you to establish your own readings and connections. The only thing it vaguely implies is that the authors live "out there," away from our country and traditions. So the question is, what are there traditions, and languages, and cultures? And what does this literature communicate that might in response to--and at odds with--the more canonical works of American and English lit?
DeleteCarla Torres:
ReplyDeleteI think World Literature can be very broad if defined like British, American, and French Literature because there is range behind it. While reading certain books in different genres of literature, I view readings with a different lens/identity because it allows me to get a better sense of how to read the book. While reading these last three books in class, I have had an open mind of what the authors background was because it had an effect on their books. I think each book despite the literature it is classified in, has an affect on it due to the background of the author. I think it is useful to know how to sort out different areas of reading because it will enable you as a reader to get a better understand of the authors book.
Yes, the term does allow you to have more of an open mind, since it doesn't tell you what you're going to find, or even what to look for. Maybe there's a better term to use, though "World" suggests "of the world," which can be anything--simply other things "out there." I don't think this necessarily means "non-American or non-English," but maybe rather, our own words are outside the mainstream. After all, there are more works in the world than in American or English lit! So maybe we're the outsiders?
DeleteI think world lit can be considered and inclusive term because this style of literature seems to refer to a different style of hardship that is present in American, French, or British literature. For me reading literature through the lens of world lit helps me understand that the conflict at hand may not be as simple as the protagonist falling love with someone else why she is still married. Usually the conflict is much greater like a young girl giving herself up in order to support her family. For me personally, reading these last three works under the umbrella of world literature has made me really focus on the message the author is trying to convey; furthermore, typically these lessons are a lot more profound and I like to try and learn life lessons from the characters.
ReplyDeleteGreat response...I think it might be dangerous to assume that other cultures are "more profound" or even more interesting than our own simply because they're exotic or strange to us. However, it does show us that there are other ways to live other "normal" ways to write and places to live that might sharply contrast with our own. If nothing else, we realize that there are numerous ways to live and be successful, and even more obstacles than we dared to imagine. I think that's one of the main things we learn from reading outside our culture.
DeleteI think that "World Literature" can be considered an inclusive term. And I think that rather than dismissing those that fall within this category as other than British or American, it merely provides a lens with which one can view a work. It acknowledges the fact that the work is not British or American and that because of that, we can't read it with assumptions and biases that are derived from our own culture. If we did that, then we would never gain a full understanding of those works. I also think that it's a useful way for people of other cultures to look at American Literature or any kind of literature that is not from their culture. You have to acknowledge the difference and then use it as a tool to attempt to understand that which is not from your own culture. And I think that this is why it was so useful to study these last three works under the umbrella of a World Literature course. This umbrella enabled us to shield ourselves from our own culture's assumptions, biases, etc. that surround us in our everyday lives. Thus, it led to us being able to understand the said works more than if we had not acknowledged the differences between our culture and theirs.
ReplyDeleteYes, I like this idea: "You have to acknowledge the difference and then use it as a tool to attempt to understand that which is not from your own culture." So World Literature first of all makes you confront the difference between your culture, your literature, and your language. Then you have to make your own sense of it, since nothing is really provided by the title, since "World" isn't a culture or a single country. It makes it at once easier and harder to establish what you're reading and what it's true message is.
DeleteCallie Farley: I do agree with some of the previous posts and I do think that (at least for us at ECU) the blanket term of "World Literature" is good because there would just be too many classes otherwise. I think that if you're using a world literature class the way that it probably should be used, like not just focusing on European cultures, but using the class to explore all different types of cultures from around the world, than it's fine. If we never explored other cultures than we could never learn what it's like to walk in their shoes, if only for a couple of chapters. I agree with what you said in the video-- about how we can't just read these though and think that we know exactly what it's like, but it does create empathy and a little bit of understanding. It's so important for us to learn from other cultures, to take in our differences, but to also see our similarities. These last three works were really interesting to read because the whole time I was thinking about other coming-of-age books that I love (Aristotle & Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe, The Perks of Being a Wallflower..etc.) and see the similarities between our desires and the differences in our circumstances. I think that whenever we acknowledge these things it helps us build empathy for others and see the world through a bit of a wider lens.
ReplyDelete(Also, I just had to tell you that Illicit Affairs by Taylor Swift is a perfect song for The Lover!!)
Yes, great point--it's fascinating to see the narrative of "growing up" from other cultures, since not everyone tells the same story about success or even adulthood. The bildungsroman isn't written the same the world around, and just because it's different (i.e. Botchan) doesn't mean it's flawed or even a failure. In fact, these authors know the 'real' story that English literature is supposed to tell, and that's why they're writing around and against it. So it's less confusing to read them together, since you see that this is an almost unified approach of expression and critique. And not surprisingly, many of these cultures are skeptical of the English 'happy ending,' since it was never provided to them--only to the native born (or the upper classes).
DeleteAnd yes, I do know that song now (thanks to my wife), so I'll have to keep it in mind next time I teach The Lover!
Good points--the "Word Literature" title initially hides the culture/country of the author, so we can focus more on what is being said, rather than our preconceptions of it. It also suggests that all these works have something in common, such as a 'postcolonial' link, or a literature-in-translation connection. It helps us look for similarities and differences, but doesn't give us any pre-packaged formulas, as 'American' or 'British' or even 'African' literature might.
ReplyDeleteI don't have a problem with the use of the term "world literature," necessarily. I feel similarly to the rest of the class, who might argue that, without blanket terms like "world literature" and "British literature," we'd have no way to classify what we're reading (and also too many classes, LOL). But there's a limitation to this kind of classification. For instance, it would be great if we all agreed that "world literature" meant "postcolonial non-European literature," but we don't, and there are probably a lot of people out there that are still teaching, I don't know, a bunch of German and French texts and calling it world lit. So I'd be inclined to say that we'd still probably benefit from narrowing the classifications down some more. It would be awesome to take a "post-colonial world literature" class (of course, we basically just did :D), and a "colonial literature" class, and a "post-colonial French literature" class, and so on. And that's probably the direction we're moving in higher ed, anyway, just slowly. Either way, I really appreciate classes like this one, which feel like the logical application of the theory we learn about in intro to literary studies and critical theory.
ReplyDeleteWhen I think of the term "World Literature" I think of every culture in this world. Every culture has a story and we get to read about their stories/culture by not just reading novels but by reading poems and short stories as well. "World Literature" is such a broad term and I think British lit, French, lit etc.. all fall in the "World Literature" category. For learning purposes, I do like how ECU splits British Lit., American Lit., and all of the other lit courses from "colonial" to "post-colonial." It makes learning easier because you know what time period your focusing on and what is going on during that time period. Splitting up the courses also feels like you are not in a rush to learn about all of these "World Literature" novels, which makes learning less intimidating. What I like most about "World Literature" novels is that most of the time the novels are not as "popular." By the term "popular" I mean that we have not heard about them in America. With British Lit., everyone has heard of Frankenstein, Jane Eyre, and Pride and Prejudice. World Literature is so broad and therefore the novels in this category are endless.
ReplyDeleteI find there to be a bit of both negative and positive connotation when using the term "World Literature" for literature outside American, British, and French. On the negative side, it can sometimes come across as a way to lump together cultures and literature that do not "belong" or do not stand up on their own. Luckily, I have never had firsthand experience with someone who views it this way but generalization is far to common and in this case, generalizing cultures diminishes who they are and the importance of what they offer the world. However, on the other hand and what I believe to be more prominent, World Literature is a blanket title that can be relatable to any literature scholar because, as Gloria stated in her response, it gives the impression of something that is both foreign and relative. World Lit is an inclusive category that offers room for cultures that may not be as prominent or may not produce as much literature to find a place where the masses can have an easier chance of discovering them. This allows a World Lit course or category to be incredibly inclusive. There is only the risk of generalizing too much and risk losing the uniqueness of cultures behind blanket terms.
ReplyDeleteI believe that "World Literature" means that it is a broad term for books everywhere. This is not as focus as American or British literature but that does not mean that it could not hold some of the same themes. Botchan, Miguel Street and the Lover fall under this term due to the fact that they are all from different places in the world. I believe that generalizing these texts into one term does not really make them any "less" than books that fall in any other inclusive literature class. However, it makes it harder to focus these books under a specific lens due to the fact that they are from different places in the world and different cultures.
ReplyDeleteKurstyn Young:
ReplyDeleteI do think that "world literature" can be considered and inclusive term. Throughout this class and many other books that I have read, world literature continues to teach me new things. I think all cultures hold just as much value as my own. I love reading and learning about other cultures and their writing, and once you get down to it, all humans are live and breathe the same air. Themes and values are always important in any writing, which is why world literature should hold the same value as American or British Literature. These Woldl Lit books might not be talked much in school because most places prefer to focus on literature that founded America. You read history so we don't repeat it, but more people should read World Literature books because we can learn about their history and learn from other places, too.
I think what coins these works and many others as world literature is what is portrayed throughout each of them. I feel that if the work gives the reader a glimpse at social views or constructs from a specific place within the world during a specific era it would be considered world literature. I also think that world literature should portray the specific culture in which it comes from within the work. We all know that literature in general tells a story or gives a message. I think that in order for it to be considered world literature it should represent the elements that make its place or origin unique and I feel this is through their own culture, social views, and how their society or lack there for operate. I feel the stories that we have read in this class have done a great job of portraying love and social constructs from other places within the world.
Delete