Editor's Note

The topic of this issue, Fiction’s Present, is the result of a wonderful conversation I had with co-editor R. M. Berry some years back concerning both the current state of literature and its criticism, and connections between contemporary philosophy and contemporary fiction. It was our hope then to encourage further discussion of the present inflection of fiction, which we viewed as Janus-faced, looking both forward to the novel’s radically changed political, economic, technological circumstances and backward to its history of achievements and problems. We asked in our call for papers whether fiction that continues in the tradition of modernist innovation has any reality for emergent political groups and cultures. We also asked whether the novel can react to the present demands of global capitalism without abandoning its formal distinctiveness.

The creative and critical responses to these questions collected in this issue are remarkable for the innovative ways in which they simultaneously engage the aesthetic, political, philosophical, and cultural dimensions of fiction at present. One recognizes in them that conversations about fiction’s present are works of creative speculation, the most exciting of which are not uncovering spaces hidden from public view, but creating vistas in which the political, aesthetic and emotional dimensions of contemporary fiction are performed. Examinations of fiction’s present are most informative not when they are defending philosophical distinctions or developing literary classifications, but when they are grappling with elusive topics such as the meaning of “the present” in fiction. This process, if pursued diligently, works to break down traditional divisions of academic and intellectual labor. It compels, for example, the creative writer to become more philosophical, and the philosopher to become more creative.

Philosophers in America often pride themselves on being ignorant of works of contemporary fiction, and fiction writers often act as though nothing could be less in tune with their work than contemporary philosophical discourse. Nevertheless, when creative writers reflect on philosophical and cultural issues, and philosophers engage products of the creative imagination, remarkable insights can occur. The essays in this issue suggest that there is much to be learned when we are encouraged to speak to topics that both engage our interests and push us just beyond disciplinary boundaries.

Currently, two issues are in preparation, both of which will critically examine key contemporary metaprofessional issues. The first issue in preparation will be entitled On Collegiality (Vol. 13, No. 1 (2005)). Welcome are contributions discussing the nature and limits of collegiality in professional life. How does collegiality effect reading, writing, and teaching practices, as well as other aspects of academic performance, such as tenure and publication? What are the social, political, economic and intellectual dimensions of collegiality in contemporary academic culture? Submission deadline: 15 January 2005.

The second issue in preparation will be entitled Discouragement (Vol. 13, No. 2 (2005)). It will address a series of questions that are very much capturing the attention of many intellectuals and academics today. In an interview held after the fatwa on his life had been finally lifted, Salman Rushdie made the surprising remark that in its own way the fatwa had been a good thing because it showed that books could still matter enough for people to get shot for writing them. His comment cuts to the heart of a problem most intellectuals face today: the discouraging feeling that no matter how important or interesting their message may be, it will not galvanize change. How do intellectuals confront the present times? How do they make themselves heard? How do they make their words matter? We are looking for papers that analyze the present situation of the intellectual, a situation that is discouraging precisely because of its want of good sense. Submission deadline: 1 July 2005. Working versions of some of the articles in this issue will be presented in a two-day seminar this coming March at the 2005 American Comparative Literature Association Conference at Penn State.

Finally, I would like to thank R. M. Berry for collaborating with me on this issue. It has been a delight to think through and work on this issue with him. Special thanks also to...