Comparative literary studies
From a broad point of view the terms ‘comparative literary studies’
and ‘cross cultural communication studies’ look similar in their
respective embrace of content and form. But on a closer examination and
interpretation there seems to emerge several visible traits of
difference. In the first instance it was the translation and the
adaptation process of literary works from one language to another that
created the climate of studies for the two subject areas. It is observed
that these translations of literary views and creative works like
poetry, drama and narratives enacted like a catalytic process in the
creative process of writers.
In the orient as well as the Occident this could be visualised as the
seminal creative influence the creators had from one language and
culture to another language and culture. One good example from our own
context is seen as the influence of both Pali and Sanskrit works on the
development of Sinhala literary works.
While Jatakas, Panchatantra and Hitopadesa had a creative impact on
Sinhala literary works, several Sanskrit works like Megha Dhuta and
Sakuntala had an impact on the poetic creative works like Kavsilumina
and later Guttila. Most local scholars from the very beginning had
knowledge in at least three to four languages. It was believed that a
wider knowledge in the awareness of literary works depended upon the
knowledge acquired via the study of several other languages and
rhetoric. This former background set the creative scene also as a
cultural acquisition via literary and creative works.
|
|
Marshall
McLuhan |
James
Joyce |
An overview of the studies in comparative literature shows that it is
initially a study of linguistics or seeking knowledge in a language and
from there transcending the mere narrow barriers of the use of language,
as suited to a particular social context. One good example may be drawn
from the study of oriental narrative forms and its influence drawn from
the other oriental works written in other languages. This gradually
evolved to the point where more and more works came to be translated and
/ or adapted for the local reader.
The result was the advent and the gradual emergence of both the
content and the form. The content and form could be envisaged from
several literary and cultural standpoints. As the pioneer narrative
writer Piyadasa Sirisena points out in most of his Sinhala novels, he
was influenced by two literary channels. The context was a visible
cultural and historic standpoint. The treatment of the content according
to this view had been largely due to the occidental influence of the
narrative works known by the term ‘novels’ which he brands as story
telling process.
The art of story-telling had been known by most creators from their
birth, yet the fact remains that the process could have had varying
degrees of influences. The content could be as usually perceived as what
one wants to express. But how does one say it?
It is widely known as the ‘form’, a term applicable to many artistic
creations, inclusive of art, architecture and music. Sirisena is seen as
a genuine creator of his time. His content falls with his form, where
dialogues, monologues, fantasies, poems and other forms emerge through
his characters and their situations. Perhaps this example could be
extended to seek many more examples drawn from other countries.
I am reminded of a more modern example from America. When the black
writer Ralph Ellison wrote his well known chronicle-like novel titled
Invisible Man the literary critics of the time never denounced some of
the merits it possessed, drawn from Negro culture in transition. One
critic Ellison Horowitz introduced the work of Ellison as the rebirth of
the artiste and enveloped a passage drawn from James Joyce’s novel A
Portrait of the Artiste as a Young Man in the following words:
“Welcome o life! I go to encounter for the millionth time the reality
of experience and to forge in the smithy of my soul the uncreated
conscience of my race.”
The literary critic Horowitz heightens the fact that it is the
extension of the thought stream of one cultural milieu to another that
has resulted. Similarly when most writers from the orient are influenced
by the experiences of the Occident, the creative patterns physically
change. The most visible pattern was the use of the form and literary
techniques. Perhaps the process may have emerged as a creative flux. In
this manner the need arises, whether one wants to know how the process
works. This then is the essence of the study of comparative literature.
With the advent of the wide use of mass media channels, the term may
have broadened the meanings.
The broadening of the media channels resulted in bringing the
cultures closer to one another. Marshall McLuhan termed it as ‘global
village’ and our own Arthur C Clarke termed it as ‘global family’.
Comparison may not seem easy as it implies a series of layers such as
religious, cultural, racial, political and other nuances. But the fact
remains that it happens that comparison becomes an ongoing process. But
when the essentials are understood, the unity of attitudes and
judgements underlying the variety of works become startlingly explicit.
[email protected]
|