In "Formations of World Literature and Shaw's The Man of Destiny in Chinese and Japanese Translation" Shunqing Cao and Xin Chen expand Franco Moretti's dictum that "world literature is not an object, it's a problem" to elaborate that the concept of world literature is in some sense a problematic one, which is itself under a process of problematization. Cao and Chen discuss how variation and heterogeneity contribute to a more in-depth understanding of formations of world literature. Taking the Bernar Shaw's (...) The Man of Destiny they discuss the writer's presence in world literature from a bi-lateral perspective: Shaw's work in the English-speaking West and Shaw in Asia. For the former, Shaw stands in a specific place in recent postcolonial Irish Studies and thus raise problems for their research paradigm. For the latter, Cao and Chen present an analytical comparison between a Chinese and a Japanese translation of The Man of Destiny. Cao and Chen argue that by such a bilateral approach we may recognize the importance of heterogeneity so as to obtain further reflections on present discussions of world literature. (shrink)

If we inspect closely the works that ascend to world literature from the peripheral, David Damrosch’s well-recognized argument that “world literature is writing that gains in translation” may need some revision, because apparently translation is not the sole factor that decides the formation of world literature. Translated works do not necessarily represent the best part in one national literature. Damrosch’s overemphasis on translation differences and untranslatability in world literature tends to overlook the syncretism of heterogeneous literatures: The influence of Roman (...) Empire on Indian Buddhism, the influx of elements from Indian, Arabic, and Persian stories into European writers’ creation, the genres of China’s ancient literature influenced by Buddhism, etc. Furthermore, a great deal of Chinese idioms and allusions appearing in Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese literatures provide us a general view of how world literature forms through exchange and syncretism. On this account, Damrosh’s argument may be reformulated as “world literature is writing that gains in variation.” Variation reflects the ability to absorb otherness and then to create something new. Meanwhile, the perspective of literary syncretism will help us reasonably distinguish world literature and national canons. (shrink)

In "The Variation of Chinese Literature and the Formation of World Literature" Shunqing Cao and Lu Zhai discuss how Chinese works of literature entered other countries' literary circles through variation, and became an essential part of world literature. Both ancient Chinese literature and contemporary Chinese literature have undergone textual circulation, language translation and cultural filtering before becoming part of world literature, all of which are the reasons why literary variation occurs. According to Cao and Zhai, the occurrence of variation is (...) a key factor for Chinese literature to become world literature, and an important foundation for the formation of world literature. A country's literature absorbs the characteristics of other countries' literature through variation, thus adapting to the cultural background and reading habits of other countries' readers in terms of language and style, in order to enter the world literature market. Variation may lead to a certain loss of nationality in literary works, and result in significant differences from the original texts. However, the formation of world literature does not come at the cost of eliminating nationality; variation facilitates the formation of world literature. (shrink)