02 - Literature as a World [Pascale Casanova]

Summary

The video explores the concept of world literary space, focusing on Pascale Casanova's theory of literature as a parallel, autonomous territory that mediates between the world and literary works. It delves into the relationship between literature and history, highlighting how literary theory and criticism address this connection differently. Casanova critiques the idea of 'world literature' and presents a dynamic, uneven literary space shaped by political, social, and cultural struggles. The discussion emphasizes the temporal and spatial inequalities in literature and how writers occupy both national and global positions within this space.

Takeaways

• 🌐 **World and Literature**: The terms 'world' and 'literature' are distinct, with 'world' referring to the global context and 'literature' to artistic texts.
• 🤔 **Questioning the Bond**: Literature's relationship with history and the world is a complex and ongoing question in literary studies.
• 📚 **Criticism vs. Theory**: Criticism is text-based and internal, while theory applies external knowledge to interpret literature.
• 🔄 **Mediating Space**: Casanova proposes a space between the world and literature where literary works exist relatively autonomously.
• 🎭 **Struggles and Refraction**: Various worldly struggles, including political and social, enter this mediating space but are refracted through a literary logic.
• 🏆 **World Literary Space**: Casanova rejects the concept of 'world literature' as a body of work and instead sees it as a space between the world and literature.
• 📈 **Evolution of Literary Space**: The literary space has grown from a small emergence in France and England to a global scale, becoming inconsistent and uneven.
• 📉 **Inequality and Autonomy**: Literary space is characterized by structural inequalities, with some areas having more literary autonomy than others.
• 🌀 **Greenwich Meridian of Literature**: There is an uneven scope of literary space, with a center of power and areas ahead or behind in 'literary time'.
• ⏳ **Temporalities in Literature**: Literary movements and criticism deal with temporalities, with works moving in and out of the literary canon.
• 🌍 **Global and National Positions**: Every writer occupies both a national and a global position within the literary space, indicating a complex interplay between the two.

Q & A

What is the main proposition of the script regarding the relationship between 'world' and 'literature'?

The script suggests that 'world' and 'literature' are distinct concepts that are not inherently related. It emphasizes the need to understand the relationship between literature, history, and the world, and proposes that literature can both reflect the world and create its own worlds.

What does the script say about the role of criticism and theory in studying literature?

Criticism is primarily text-based and focuses on the world within the text, while theory adopts a broader perspective by applying theories from other domains to understand literature. Both criticism and theory are in a constant negotiation to establish a bond between literature and the world.

What is the mediating space proposed by Casanova between 'world' and 'literature'?

Casanova proposes a mediating space that is relatively autonomous from the political domain and dedicated to the invention of specifically literary nature. This space allows struggles from the world to enter but they are refracted according to a literary logic.

How does Casanova define 'world literary space'?

Casanova defines 'world literary space' as a space between the world and the body of works, where literary activity occurs. It is a space with interconnected positions, and literary activity is seen as a world in its own.

What does the script suggest about the global scale of literary space?

The script suggests that literary space is global in scale but is also uneven, with different cultures and spaces having varying degrees of autonomy and influence.

How does the script explain the concept of 'literary time'?

The script explains 'literary time' as the temporal progression of aesthetic modernity within literary space, where certain spaces may be ahead or behind others in terms of literary development.

What is the significance of the Nobel Prize in the context of the script?

The Nobel Prize is cited as an indicator of the existence of a world literary space, where the artistic merit of works is debated, and winners gain global literary fame.

What does the script mean by the 'Greenwich Meridian of literature'?

The 'Greenwich Meridian of literature' refers to the center of literary power, from which literary time and influence radiate. As one moves away from this center, the influence of aesthetic modernity varies.

How does the script describe the relationship between national and international literary spaces?

The script describes the relationship as not being separate spheres but rather occupying the same domain, with national and international struggles taking place within national borders.

What are the primary characteristics of literary space according to the script?

The primary characteristics of literary space are hierarchy and inequality, with autonomy being a significant factor that influences the literary resources available within the space.

What are the three modes of domination in the lateral space mentioned in the script?

The three modes of domination in the lateral space are linguistic, literary, and political, with literary often being overshadowed by linguistic or political modes.

Outlines

00:00

📖 Understanding the Relationship Between World and Literature

This paragraph explores how the terms 'world' and 'literature' represent different concepts and are not inherently related. It introduces Casanova’s hypothesis, which questions the bond between literature, history, and the world. The discussion highlights two conflicting approaches to studying literature: criticism (which is text-focused) and theory (which uses external frameworks to analyze literature). Neither approach fully explains the relationship between literature and the world. Casanova suggests a mediating space where literature operates relatively autonomously from politics, allowing literary discussions to remain distinct.

05:03

🌍 The Concept of World Literary Space

Casanova's theory is further explained through the idea of 'world literary space,' which is not merely globalized literature, but a mediating territory between world events and the body of literary works. This space is complex and interconnected, yet autonomous. Casanova uses the metaphor of a Persian rug, where patterns are only visible from a certain perspective, to explain how literature must be understood in relation to its historical and cultural context. The paragraph gives examples of how works like those of Chetan Bhagat gain significance within India's post-globalization literary space.

10:06

🏛️ Unevenness in World Literary Space

Casanova traces the development of literary space from its origins in 16th-century Europe to its global expansion. She emphasizes that this space is uneven, with some areas reflecting more of the world's political and social struggles than others. The autonomy of literary space varies by region and culture. The paragraph explains how political struggles used to be expressed allegorically in literature, but now they are often addressed directly. Casanova's discussion of literary time and space highlights the importance of understanding literature through both temporal and spatial lenses.

15:11

🧭 The Greenwich Meridian of Literature and Power Structures

This paragraph introduces the concept of the 'Greenwich Meridian of Literature,' where aesthetic modernity emerges unevenly across global literary spaces. Casanova argues that literary spaces operate differently from political or social systems, as their elements are connected through objective, not interactive, relationships. The focus shifts to the hierarchical nature of literary space, where writers occupy both national and global positions. Autonomy and power within this space are influenced by linguistic, literary, and political domination, shaping the dynamics of rivalry and competition in the global literary field.

Keywords

💡World Literature

World Literature refers to the body of literary works that have transcended linguistic and national boundaries. In the video, it is discussed as a concept that is distinct from 'world' and 'literature' considered separately. The script emphasizes that world literature is not merely literature from around the globe but a space where literary works interact and are positioned within a global context.

💡Literary Space

Literary Space is a concept introduced by Casanova, which refers to a mediating space between the world and literature. It is described as a parallel territory that is relatively autonomous from the political domain. The script uses the metaphor of a Persian rug to illustrate how each text or author occupies a position within this larger design of volatile space.

💡Criticism

Criticism, as mentioned in the script, is one of the two modes of studying literature. It is text-based and focuses on the world within the text, thereby limiting itself to internal analysis. Criticism is contrasted with theory, which takes a broader perspective by applying theories from other domains to understand literature.

💡Theory

Theory, in the context of the video, is the other mode of studying literature alongside criticism. It involves applying theories from other domains of knowledge to interpret literature. The script uses post-colonialism as an example, where the theory influences the interpretation of literature, sometimes overshadowing the literary work itself.

💡Post-Colonialism

Post-Colonialism is cited as an example of a theory that posits a political link between literature and history. It is used in the script to illustrate how theory can dominate the interpretation of literature, highlighting the political aspects more than the literary ones.

💡Autonomy

Autonomy, in the context of literary space, refers to the degree of independence that literature has from external influences. The script suggests that where literary space has more autonomy, it has more literary resources, and vice versa. Autonomy is a key factor in determining the nature of the literary space.

💡Inequality

Inequality is a primary characteristic of the literary space as discussed in the script. It refers to the structural disparities within literature, such as the dominance of certain languages or literary traditions over others. This inequality gives rise to various forms of struggle, rivalry, and competition within the literary space.

💡Domination

Domination in the literary space is characterized by three modes: linguistic, literary, and political. The script explains that literary domination is often overshadowed by linguistic or political modes, leading to a historically structured relation that remains hidden from critical attention.

💡Global Scale

Global Scale is mentioned in the script to describe how the literary space has expanded over time, from its origins in France and England in the 16th century to a worldwide phenomenon by the 20th century. The global scale highlights the unevenness and inconsistency of the literary space.

💡Greenwich Meridian of Literature

The Greenwich Meridian of Literature is a concept used in the script to describe the center of literary power, analogous to the Greenwich Meridian of time. It signifies the presence of a center in the literary space from which literary time and power radiate outward.

💡Temporalities

Temporalities refer to the different time periods or historical contexts within the literary space. The script uses the term to discuss how literary movements and modernity are temporally situated and how they influence the perception and valuation of literary works.

Highlights

Literature is not simply a reflection of the world but has a complex relationship with it.

Literature and world are distinct concepts with literature being artistic text and world referring to the global setup.

Pablo Casanova's hypothesis questions the traditional bond between literature, history, and the world.

Criticism and theory are two modes of studying literature, often in conflict regarding the relationship between text and world.

Criticism is text-based and internal, focusing on the world within the text, whereas theory is external and broader.

Casanova proposes a mediating space between world and literature, a parallel territory with relative autonomy.

Literary space is a concept where only literary activities are possible, shaped by a logic of literature.

World literature is not a body of work but a space where literary works interact with the world.

The literary space is uneven, with different refraction of real-world struggles in different cultures.

Casanova uses the metaphor of a Persian rug to explain the interconnected positions within the literary space.

Understanding literature requires shifting focus and adjusting context, such as considering the post-globalization period in India.

The literary space has a history, starting from a small space in France and England and expanding globally.

The literary space is characterized by structural inequalities, which are visible through conflicts and struggles.

The Nobel Prize is cited as an indicator of the existence of the world literary space.

The Greenwich Meridian of literature is a concept that describes the uneven scope of the literary space.

Literary space is not a world system but a structure with objective relations that can operate outside direct interaction.

Every writer occupies two positions: national and global, indicating that national and international struggles occur within the same domain.

The literary space is characterized by hierarchy and inequality, with autonomy being a key factor in its operation.

There are three modes of domination in the literary space: linguistic, literary, and political.

The concept of world literary space opens up new ways to look at literature and literary study.

Transcripts

while literature does not mean

literature from around the world we saw

that proposition in the last

presentation now we will understand

another important framework for

literature is a simple phrase but we

have to remember that both words world

and literature signify different

concepts which are not actually related

to each other that means world is

different set up or structure and so as

literature world means the earth

together with all of its countries and

people and literature means walks or

text in any form especially which have

some artistic merits that's why it is

important to understand pablo Casanova's

hypothesis of literature has evolved she

starts with questioning the bond between

literature history and the world it is

interesting and somehow evident that

this has been one of the consistent

question in literary stories if you are

asked that what relation do they have

then some of us may be tempted to say

that world is everything so literature

must be a part of world on the other

hand literature can talk about other

worlds than our own so that can mean

world is part of literature but as we

shall see neither of the position is

complete or fruitful

criticism and theory two modes of

studying literature they are always in

this negotiation to establish bond

between literature and world but both

ends up taking opposite positioned

criticism is mainly text base it sees a

text first and then brings called in to

it so it is internal in nature it talks

about world within the text and hence d

limits itself it seems to have autonomy

regarding the working of criticism on

the other hand theory is different it

takes up a theory from other domain of

knowledge and it tries to see literature

from that Theory's perspective so a work

of literature will have less

significance than Theory through which

we look at it

Casanova cite example of post

colonialism and says that it posits a

political link between literature and

history but then runs into a kind of

external criticism in which political

gain more highlight than literally so

here working of literary theory becomes

dependent on whichever theory we have

taken up so she proposes a model she

proposes a mediating space between world

and literature and literature here is

body of works she sees it as a parallel

territory which is relatively autonomous

from political domain

and dedicated as a result two questions

debates an invention of a specifically

literary nature in this mediating space

only literary is possible in this space

all kind of struggle from the world

enters struggles which can be political

social national it can be about gender

or ethnicity they all can enter this

mediating space but they are refracted

according to a literate logic and they

have to take shape in form of a literary

firm Casanova also calls it wall

literary space she rejects all notion of

world literature by saying that it is

not a body of literature expanded to the

wall scale but as we show it it is a

space between world and that body of

works so this piece has a set of

interconnected position and she tries to

think of it as a world in its own so

these are the three primary proposition

of her theory world literary space there

is not body of literature raises space

in which there are some position which

are interconnected and we have to think

of literary

od literature literary activity as a

world she takes up example of a story by

hemorrhaging and regimes figure in the

carpet in the story

James employs metaphor of a Persian rug

if we look at it from clothes it may

seem odd combination of colors and

patterns but from little distance we can

see a set of motives in relation to one

another and this is how we can

understand worldly space each text or

author occupying a position in this

larger design of volatile space we can

grasp it by shifting our focus and

adjusting it to the context surrounding

that work or that author for example

classicist or people who are obsessed

with classic British literature they

would pronounce Chetan Bhagat or a

mystery party as not good or unworthy of

attention but when we place them in post

globalization period in India and

understand the literary market of Indian

English literature while taking account

of intended readers the new middle class

of India we may be able to appreciate

them more and understand their position

and working in India literally space and

also in world literally space hence

Casanova urges to start far from the

text and move towards it to understand

it better

Casanova traces birth of literary space

or we can say she tries to understand

how it came to be a space that is global

in the scale

she starts from 16th century when a

little space emerged in France and

England which was expanded across Europe

in 18th century and throughout the globe

in 20th century especially by

decolonization and as it grew it became

inconsistent and uneven so one of the

major thing about this literary space is

that it is uneven some where refraction

of real world struggle are more than at

other culture other spaces and because

of this difference there is also

difference in autonomy of this base for

example all the writers used to write

about political struggles in form of

allegories nowadays we can find novels

which can directly mention government or

government agencies as bad or villainous

so Casanova tells how she is not talking

about universalism

because that kind of structure would see

a standardization or normalization of

themes form languages or story types

across the world she's not talking about

how Bengali literature and Gujarati

literature are globalised how a story

from Bengal France Gujarat

are moving towards same target category

in terms of theme or story type but this

space wall literary space is about

structural inequalities within

literature and this inequalities this

conflicts within it makes it visible to

us so she cites nobel prize as an

indicator example every year what

happens surrounding Nobel Prize or essay

Oscar award each year certain works from

certain literature's are put in

competition various promotion or

demotion of credible credibility of

works are done in various ways and their

artistic merit are debated then someone

wins it and Prize winner gains a

literary Fame on global scale where

these people rejects critics choice and

proclaim them as biased it happens every

year and next time it all starts afresh

so it is not subject to any other domain

this all activity that is happens

surrounding two Nobel Prize

it is only literally and it is also

global so it indicates existence of

world Latorre space then she talks about

Greenwich meridian of literature named

after Greenwich meridian of time the

scope of this voluntary space is very

much uneven so there must be a center

where literally has more power than

political and as we move further from it

that particular line

it stretches what can be called

literary time that is when aesthetic

modernity hits certain space so the zml

Greenwich Meridian of literature will be

present but a future for spot for the

spaces and they will be behind it in

literary time we will also have to

understand what literary space in terms

of temporalities there was modernity our

aesthetic modernity is always a sight of

struggle criticism is always engaged in

classification or declassification of

works and terms like former modern or

new classic makes it evident that

criticism deals in temporalities so a

mod or a movement can be dominating only

for a time being when it enters corpus

of classic it becomes steady while

modern works come and try to accelerate

the temporality of certain space for

example how modernism starts after 1960s

in gujarati literature when it was

already modernism sorry post-modernism

in GML that is european countries so we

have to always understand literature in

terms of temporalities and only then we

can use the unevenness of the literary

space and understand certain portions of

this space Casanova

tries to call it world space only it is

not a world system because she described

how

a space or structure is different from

system system implies interactive

relations between every element and

every position they have to be in

interactive relation whereas a structure

implies objective relations which can

operate outside of any direct

interaction so that's why it is a world

space so volatile space is not a sphere

above others in which only a few great

writers can live but it is a space which

occupies every writer everywhere this

means it can occupy Shakespeare it can

occupy Chetan Bhagat and it can occupy

the writer who has started writing today

anywhere anytime this also means that

every writer occupies two positions one

national another is global maybe in

terms of Indian writers we may have a

regional position also that's why this

international struggles actually takes

place within national borders so

national and international are not

separate spheres but they occupy same

domain as opposition's so hierarchy and

inequality becomes primary

characteristics of this literary space

so whenever literary world has more

autonomy it will have more literary

resources autonomy however is not

unrelated it implies that events within

literary world are autonomous important

dates manifestos heroes capital cities

they all contribute to early history

which is different from political

wherever a little space would have less

autonomy more history from political

domain will enter into it and there are

forms of domination mainly three modes

of domination in this lateral space

linguistic literary and political in

most of cases literary is overshadowed

by linguistic or political mode

historically structured relation of

literal domination remains hidden from

critical attention so this mode of

domination combined with literary

inequality gives birth to their own

forms of struggle rivalry and

competition this idea of world literally

space opens up new question to look at

literature and literary study itself in

a new way we have taken up two important

framework to understand what literature

till now next presentation will cover a

different framework from these two thank

you