Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
abstract: The trend toward world literature and globalization in literary studies motivated Gayatri Spivak to make the ominous claim that Comparative Literature is dead. Her solution was to suggest that Comparative Literature join forces with Area Studies, and combine its techniques of "close reading" with a more focused and in-depth analysis of national literatures that only Area Studies can provide. Although this appears a welcome suggestion to give "new life" to Comparative Literature, there are obstacles in the way of this ideal. This essay discusses Spivak's idea with reference to Chinese aesthetics, namely, Haun Saussy and Stephen Owen, and an analysis of the late poems of Du Fu. The essay argues that the emphasis Chinese studies places on "distinctness," which is true of all Area Studies, hinders the possibility of a comparative reading. An analysis of Du Fu's late poems shows that there is a discrepancy in approaches between a Chinese and a Comparative approach that is irreconcilable. If Comparative Literature is to stay alive, it has to retain its theoretical freedom to "close reading" and forego the temptation to combine forces with Area Studies.
Comparative Literature Studies – Penn State University Press
Published: Apr 3, 2017
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.