Mapping World Literature: International Canonization and Transnational Literatures (review)

Thomsen’s book methodically reviews the lineage of World Literature as both a concept and label and succeeds in being detailed without becoming hindered by the myriad dichotomies which typify the term. The scope of this undertaking is ambitious and the result is an opportunity for scholars of comparative literature to consider new types of literary and cultural constellations encompassing national, translational and global movements. Thomsen’s agenda is very much to expose an approach to mapping World Literature rather than advocating a strict theoretical mandate for critical reading. In the pursuit of this goal Thomsen deftly contextualises the current status and origins of World Literature. It is Goethe who is credited for originating the concept of a World literature, which, in its locus, held an optimism for a “symbiotic” (12) relation between national and international literatures. As Thomsen concedes, the concept and practice of world literature has far exceeded the innocence of Goethe’s original statements and this stands as a sound basis for the proceeding chapters. The book discusses the arguments that have informed and mired the development of ‘World Literature’, providing valuable contextualisation for contributions from Moretti, Spivak, and Damrosch. Thomsen’s assertion that “world literature does not act in apposition to comparative literature, but is instead a correction of the way it is going,” (23) sets a lofty goal for any conception of World Literature.

Thomsen’s admission that the concept of World Literature is easily blurred provides a stark notice for the reader at the outset (5). This admission becomes pertinent as Thomsen navigates numerous paradigms and contradictions and a seemingly insurmountable tension between an idealism of a World Literature and its reality. For scholars of Comparative Literature with a predilection towards a western canon, Thomsen provides a critical and engaging debate on the formation and use of the canon. As the sub heading, International Canonization and Transnational Literatures suggests, central to the concerns of Thomsen’s contention is the nature, function and use of canonization. Instead of a closed western-centric hierarchical canon the potential for a more dynamic ordering is made possible when membership is no longer predicated on writing in English or western culture (7).

This leads to the more dynamic aspect of the book; in employing Moretti’s consideration of a spatial geography of minor and major centres of world literature, relative movements from center to periphery become visible and the temporal nature of canonization takes on new meaning (34). The complexity of these movements from center to periphery and back again do not weigh down the appeal of an approach that advances an adaptive and evolving consideration of world literature as opposed to a rigid doctrine of reading. The position of the canon in this perspective becomes an evolving schema that can be used actively in studies of literature rather than as an intransient system of classification. The risk of homogenisation and reiterating older models of dominance via the effacement of difference through a new guise is one that Thomsen acknowledges and in doing so displays a depth of self-reflexivity.

Travel writing, migrant writing, translation, the modernist epoch and the cosmopolitan are all given valid weight in influencing the emergence of World Literature in a new era of globalization. In a positivist modality, the international canon is seen as an evolving tool, open to change and, more importantly, as sustaining national canonization through a wider proliferation of diverse authors and literatures (43). Though the vocabulary of the history of World Literature appears oppositional in nature, minor and major, national and international, Thomsen avoids an anachronistic repeat of binary propositions and focuses on the reciprocal nature of literary and cultural interactions.

In providing an example of one such constellation, Thomsen identifies literature representing trauma as an instance of synergy in World Literature. Thomsen observes that, “a number of works that, through a certain theme, also display related ways of addressing it, a constellation based on international canonization emerges, and reveals several related properties” (138). However, how...