Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T19:26:15.189Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Global Literature and the Technologies of Recognition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

Shu-Mei Shih
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Recent interest in globalizing literary studies has largely involved attempts to locate conjunctures between contemporary literature and the economic formation of global capitalism and thereby to name a new literary structure of feeling—structure in terms of the organization of various literatures into a world system and feeling in terms of the literary production of new affects in new forms, styles, and genres. Its precedent is the idea of “world literature,” first articulated by Goethe in 1827 and recently recuperated. While many scholars resuscitating this concept offer a nominal apology for its Eurocentric origins, this Eurocentrism's constitutive hierarchies and asymmetries are seldom analyzed. Twenty-five years after Edward Said's Orientalism and the book's specific criticism of Goethe, it appears that the critique of Eurocentrism in general has exhausted itself, that one only needs to show awareness of it because it is predictable. Instead of working through the problem, one gives recognition to it, which serves as an expedient and efficient strategy of displacement, a tropological caveat, able to push aside obstacles on the path to globalist literary studies of global literature.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 119 , Issue 1: Special Topic: Literatures at Large , January 2004 , pp. 16 - 30
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Works Cited

Aijaz, Ahmad. “Jameson's Rhetoric of Otherness and the ‘National Allegory.‘” In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures. London: Verso, 1992. 95–122.Google Scholar
Sara, Ahmed. Strange Encounters: Embodied Others in Post-coloniality. London: Routledge, 2000.Google Scholar
Alain, Badiou. Ethics: An Essay on the Understanding of Evil. Trans. Peter Hallward. London: Verso, 2002.Google Scholar
Ian, Baucom. “Globalit, Inc.; or, The Cultural Logic of Global Literary Studies.” Gunn 158–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judith, Butler. “Merely Cultural.” New Left Review os 227 (1998): 33–44.Google Scholar
Rey, Chow. “How (the) Inscrutable Chinese Led to Globalized Theory.” Gunn 69–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Lauretis, Teresa. Technologies of Gender. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimock, Wai Chee. “Literature for the Planet.” Gunn 173–88.Google Scholar
Arif, Dirlik. “Literature/Identity: Transnationalism, Narrative and Representation.” Review of Education / Pedagogy / Cultural Studies 24 (2002): 209–34.Google Scholar
Madhu, Dubey. “Postmodernism and Racial Difference.” U of California Multicampus Research Group on Transnational and Transcolonial Studies. U of California, Los Angeles. 20 Nov. 2002.Google Scholar
Nancy, Fraser. “Rethinking Recognition.” New Left Review ns 3 (2000): 107–20.Google Scholar
Xingjian, Gao. “The Case for Literature.” Nobel Lecture. 2000. The Nobel Prize in Literature 2000. 21 Aug. 2003. Nobel Foundation. 13 Sept. 2003 <http://www.nobel.se/literature/laureates/2000/gao-lecture-e.html>..>Google Scholar
Xingjian, Gao. Lingshan [Soul Mountain]. Taipei: Lianjing, 1990.Google Scholar
Xingjian, Gao. Yige ren de shengjing [One's Man's Bible]. Taipei: Lianjing, 1999.Google Scholar
Gunn, Giles, coordinator. Globalizing Literary Studies. PMLA 116 (2001): 1–272.Google Scholar
Peter, Hallward. Introduction. Badiou vii-xlvii.Google Scholar
Nancy, Hartsock. “Rethinking Modernism: Minority vs. Majority Theories.” The Nature and Context of Minority Discourse. Ed. JanMohamed, Abdul R. and Lloyd, David. New York: Oxford UP, 1990. 17–36.Google Scholar
Chin-shu, Huang. Ma hua wenxue yu Zhongguo xing [Malaysian Sinophone Literature and Chineseness]. Taipei: Yuanzun wenhua, 1998.Google Scholar
Fredric, Jameson. “A Brief Response.” Social Text 17 (1987): 26–27.Google Scholar
Fredric, Jameson. “Third-World Literature in the Era of Multinational Capitalism.” Social Text 15 (1986): 65–88.Google Scholar
Efrain, Kristal. “Considering Coldly….” New Left Review ns 15 (2002): 61–74.Google Scholar
Emmanuel, Levinas. Otherwise Than Being; or, Beyond Essence. Trans. Alphonso Lingis. Pittsburgh: Duquesne UP, 2000.Google Scholar
Lionnet, Françoise, and Shih, Shu-mei, eds. Minor Transnationalism. Durham: Duke UP, forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lionnet, Françoise. “Thinking through the Minor, Transnationally: An Introduction.” Lionnet and Shih, Minor Transnationalism.Google Scholar
Lisa, Lowe. Immigrant Acts: On Asian American Cultural Politics. Durham: Duke UP, 1996.Google Scholar
Malmqvist, Göran. “Presentation Speech.” 2000. The Nobel Prize in Literature 2000. 19 Dec. 2000. Nobel Foundation. 13 Sept. 2003 <http://www.nobel.se/literature/2000/presentation-speech.html>..>Google Scholar
Franco, Moretti. “Conjectures on World Literature.” New Left Review ns 1 (2000): 54–68.Google Scholar
Franco, Moretti. “The Slaughterhouse of Literature.” Modern Language Quarterly 61 (2000): 207–27.Google Scholar
Kelly, Oliver. Witnessing: Beyond Recognition. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 2001.Google Scholar
Palumbo-Liu, David. “Rational and Irrational Choices: Form, Affect, Ethics.” Lionnet and Shih, Minor Transnationalism.Google Scholar
John, Pizer. “Goethe's ‘World Literature’ Paradigm and Contemporary Cultural Globalization.” Comparative Literature 52 (2000): 213–27.Google Scholar
R., Radhakrishnan Diasporic Mediations: Between Home and Location. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1996.Google Scholar
Edward, Said. Orientalism. New York: Vintage, 1979.Google Scholar
Edward, Said. “AWindow on the World.” Guardian 2 Aug. 2003. 14 Oct. 2003 <http://www.guardian.co.uk/>.Google Scholar
San Juan, E. Jr. After Postcolonialism: Remapping Philippines–United States Confrontation. Boulder: Rowman, 2000.Google Scholar
San Juan, E. Jr. Beyond Postcolonial Theory. New York: St. Martin's, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shih, Shu-mei. “Globalization and Minoritization: Ang Lee and the Politics of Flexibility.” New Formations: A Journal of Culture/Theory/Politics 40 (2000): 86–101.Google Scholar
Gayatri, Spivak. “Can the Subaltern Speak?” Marxism and the Interpretation of Cultures. Ed. Nelson, Cary and Grossberg, Laurence. Urbana: U of Illinois P, 1988. 271–313.Google Scholar
Tam, Kwok-kan. “Gao Xingjian, the Nobel Prize, and the Politics of Recognition.” Introduction. Soul of Chaos: Critical Perspectives on Gao Xingjian. Ed. Tam. Hong Kong: Chinese UP, 2001. 1–20.Google Scholar
Immanuel, Wallerstein. “World-Systems Analysis.” The Essential Wallerstein. New York: New, 2000. 129–48.Google Scholar
Huadong, Xie. He Nuobei'er wenxuejiang jiaojin [Flexing Muscles with the Nobel Prize in Literature]. Shanghai: Xuelin, 2002.Google Scholar
Žižek, Slavoj. “Multiculturalism; or, The Cultural Logic of Multinational Capitalism.” New Left Review os 225 (1997): 28–51.Google Scholar