Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T14:41:17.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What Does the Comparative Do for Theory?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

Ming Xie
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Two arguments about theory and comparative literature have been influential in recent years. on the one hand, there has been much talk of the “death of theory,” or the “end of theory,” or “post-theory” in the humanities. On the other hand, there is a “crisis” of comparative literature, perhaps a perennial condition, if it hasn't culminated in the “death of a discipline.” Under these circumstances, the question “What does the comparative do for theory?” assumes a poignant significance, which depends on what is meant by “comparative” and “theory.” To answer this question, I explore an epistemological category I call “comparativity”—that is, metacomparison or the theoretical potential of comparison—in contrast to the usual term “comparison.” If there is a crisis of comparative literature, it may be because we have moved too far from thinking comparativity as a way of knowing and engaging the world. Epistemology does not precede ontology, or ethics, or politics, but it is deeply involved in all of them. In this paper, I will argue for comparativity as at once an epistemological and metaepistemological mode of inquiry. Comparativity cannot be displaced or replaced by another disciplinary way of thinking, for comparativity is a trans- and metadisciplinary thought process, which by virtue of its self-critical reflexivity applies to all humanistic studies. My focus is therefore on the theoretical implications of comparativity.

Type
Theories and Methodologies
Information
PMLA , Volume 128 , Issue 3 , May 2013 , pp. 675 - 682
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 by The Modern Language Association of America

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

Apter, Emily. The Translation Zone: A New Comparative Literature. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2006. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Behdad, Ali, and Thomas, Dominic, eds. A Companion to Comparative Literature. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanchot, Maurice. The Work of Fire. Trans. Mandell, Charlotte. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1995. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casanova, Pascale. The World Republic of Letters. Trans. DeBevoise, M. B. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 2004. Print.Google Scholar
Cheah, Pheng, and Culler, Jonathan, eds. Grounds of Comparison: Around the Work of Benedict Anderson. New York: Routledge, 2003. Print.Google Scholar
Chow, Rey. The Age of the World Target: Self-Referentiality in War, Theory, and Comparative Work. Durham: Duke UP, 2006. Print.Google Scholar
Culler, Jonathan. The Literary in Theory. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2007. Print.Google Scholar
Cusset, François. French Theory: How Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze, and Co. Transformed the Intellectual Life of the United States. Trans. Fort, Jeff with Berganza, Josephine and Jones, Marlon. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 2008. Print.Google Scholar
Damrosch, David. How to Read World Literature. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. Print.Google Scholar
Damrosch, David. What Is World Literature? Princeton: Princeton UP, 2003. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deleuze, Gilles. Difference and Repetition. Trans. Patton, Paul. London: Athlone, 1994. Print.Google Scholar
Detienne, Marcel. Comparing the Incomparable. Trans. Lloyd, Janet. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2008. Print.Google Scholar
D'haen, Theo, Damrosch, David, and Kadir, Djelal, eds. The Routledge Companion to World Literature. London: Routledge, 2012. Print.Google Scholar
Di Leo, Jeffrey, and Mehan, Uppinder, eds. Terror, Theory, and the Humanities. Open Humanities, 2012. Web. 2 Jan. 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eoyang, Eugene Chen. The Promise and Premise of Creativity: Why Comparative Literature Matters. London: Continuum, 2012. Print.Google Scholar
Felski, Rita, and Friedman, Susan Stanford, eds. Comparison: Theories, Approaches, Uses. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 2013. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gadamer, Hans-Georg. Truth and Method. 2nd rev. ed. Trans. Joel Weinsheimer and D. G. Marshall. New York: Continuum, 2004. Print.Google Scholar
Hart, Jonathan. Literature, Theory, History. New York: Palgrave, 2011. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayot, Eric. On Literary Worlds. New York: Oxford UP, 2012. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kadir, Djelal. Memos from the Besieged City: Lifelines for Cultural Sustainability. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2011. Print.Google Scholar
Liu, Lydia H., ed. Tokens of Exchange: The Problem of Translation in Global Circulations. Durham: Duke UP, 1999. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melas, Natalie. All the Difference in the World: Postcoloniality and the Ends of Comparison. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2007. Print.Google Scholar
Prendergast, Christopher, ed. Debating World Literature. London: Verso, 2004. Print.Google Scholar
Saussy, Haun, ed. Comparative Literature in an Age of Globalization. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 2006. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saussy, Haun. Great Walls of Discourse and Other Adventures in Cultural China. Cambridge: Harvard U Asia Center, 2001. Print.Google Scholar
Spariosu, Mihai I. Remapping Knowledge: Intercultural Studies for a Global Age. Oxford: Berghahn, 2006. Print.Google Scholar
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. Death of a Discipline. New York: Columbia UP, 2003. Print.Google Scholar
Sussman, Henry, ed. Impasses of the Post-global: Theory in the Era of Climate Change. Vol. 2. Open Humanities, 2012. Web. 2 Jan. 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xie, Ming. Conditions of Comparison: Reflections on Comparative Intercultural Inquiry. London: Continuum, 2011. Print.Google Scholar
Zhang, Longxi. Unexpected Affinities: Reading across Cultures. Toronto: U of Toronto P, 2007. Print.Google Scholar