Unit 2 trans. studies

Hello readers ! This blog is a part of my academic journey. The blog is about Translation studies.

'What is comparative Literature Today ?' Comparative Literature : A Critical Introduction by Susan Bassnett. 

Abstract

Sooner or later, anyone who claims to be working in comparative literature has to try and answer the inevitable question : What is it ? The simplest answer is that comparative literature involves the study of texts across cultures, that it is interdisciplinary and that it is concerned with patterns of connection in literature across  both time and space. Susan Bassnett gives a critical understanding of Comparative literature. She says that there is no particular object for studying comparative literature. Another thing is, we cannot give a definite term for comparative literature. Different authors of literature give various perspectives about comparative literature. The popular understanding of comparative literature means different cultures across the world, expressed in the history of literature.

Key Arguments 

Critics at the end of the twentieth century,in the age of postmodernism,still wrestle with the same questions that were posed more than a century ago: “What is the object of the study in comparative literature? How can comparison be the objective of anything? If individual literatures have canon,what might a comparative canon be? How can be comparatist select what to compare ?Is comparative literature a discipline? Or is it simply a field of study ?” Susan Bassnett argues that there are different terms used by different scholars for comparative literature studies. Therefore, we cannot put it in a single compartment for comparative literature. The second thing she argues is that the west students of 1960 claimed that comparative literature could be put in single boundaries for comparative literature study, but she says that there is no particular method used for claiming. 

“Everywhere there is connection, everywhere there is illustration. No single event,no single literature is adequately comprehend except  in relation to other events,to other literature.”

The near writing has been created through the advancement of the world and through different societies of various mainlands. An alternate societies of the mainlands play had a crucial impact in near writing studies, be it European, African, American and Eastern so on. Matthew Arnold in his Inaugural talk at Oxford in 1857 when he said :

Goethe is named Weltliteratur. Goethe noticed that he got a kick out of the chance to "keep informed about unfamiliar creations' and exhorted any other person to do the same.It is turning out to be increasingly more clear to me,"he commented, "that verse is the normal property of all humanity."

Benedetto Croce contended that near writing was a non-subject, derisively excusing the idea that it very well may be viewed as a different discipline. Wellek and Warren in their Theory of Literature, a book that was gigantically huge in similar writing when it initially showed up in 1949,suggest that :

“Comparative Literature …will make high demands on the linguistic proficiencies of our scholars.It asks for a widening of perspectives, a suppression of local and provincial sentiments, not easy to achieve.”

Conclusion 

Near writing couldn't be brought under one umbrella except if it turns into a specific part of the discipline of writing. A ton of endeavors are being taken to concentrate on similar writing through a typical language that is done in interpretation, which is perceived by all individuals. Near Literature has customarily guaranteed interpretation as a sub-category,but this supposition that is currently being questioned.The work of researchers, for example, Toury,Lefevere,Hermans,Lembert and numerous others has shown that interpretation is particularly at snapshots of incredible social changes. Evan Zohar contended that broad interpretation action happens when a culture is in a time of interpretation :when it is expanding,when it needs renewal,when it isin a pre-progressive phase,then interpretation has a fundamental impact.

Todd Presner, ‘Comparative Literature in the Age of Digital Humanities: On Possible Futures for a Discipline’ in Ali Behdad and Thomas eds. A Companion to Comparative Literature’ 

Abstract 

After five hundred years of print and the massive

transformations in society and culture that it unleashed, we are in the midst of another watershed moment in human history that is on par with the invention of the printing press or perhaps the discovery of the New World. This article focuses on the questions like it is essential that humanists assert and insert themselves into the twenty - first century cultural wars, which are largely being defined, fought, and won by corporate interests. 

Why, for instance, were humanists, establishments, and colleges prominently - even outrageously - quiet when Google won its book search claim and, really, won the option to move copyright of stranded books to itself? For what reason would they say they were quiet when any semblance of Sony and Disney basically designed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, drastically confining protected innovation, copyright, and sharing? The Manifesto is a call to Humanists for a lot further commitment with advanced culture creation, distributing, access, and possession. On the off chance that new advancements are ruled and constrained by corporate and diversion interests, how might our social inheritance be delivered in new media designs? By whom and for whom?

Key Arguments 

  Nicholas Negroponte once asserted in his wildly optimistic book Being Digital (Negroponte, 1995 ), for they always have an underbelly: mobile phones, social networking technologies, and perhaps even the hundred - dollar computer, will not only be used to enhance education, spread democracy, and enable global communication but will likely be used to perpetrate violence and even orchestrate genocide in much the same way that the radio and the railway did in the last century. Paul Gilroy analyzed in his study of “ the fatal junction of the concept of nationality with the concept of culture ” along the “ Black Atlantic, ” voyages of discovery, enlightenment, and progress also meant, at every moment, voyages of conquest, enslavement, and destruction. Indeed, this is why any discussion of technology cannot be separated from a discussion about formations of power and instrumentalized authority. N. Katherine Hayles, I find myself wondering – as we ponder various possible futures for Comparative Literature in the second decade of the twenty - first century – how to rouse ourselves from the “ somnolence [of] five hundred years of print ” (Hayles, 2002 : p. 29). Of course, there is nothing neutral, objective, or necessary about the medium of print; rather it is a medium that has a long and complex history connected to the formation of academic disciplines, institutions, epistemologies, and ideologies, not to mention conceptions of authorship and scholarly research. Darnton’s assessment seriously that we are now in the fifth decade of the fourth information age in the history of humankind, it seems to me that we ought to try to understand not only the contours of the discipline of Comparative Literature – and for that matter, the Humanities as a whole – from the perspective of an information - and media - specific analysis, but that we also ought to come to terms with the epistemic disjunction between our digital age and everything that came before it.

Analysis 

For Nelson, a hypertext is a Body of composed or pictorial material interconnected in such an intricate manner that it couldn't advantageously be introduced or addressed on paper [ … ] Such a framework could develop endlessly, step by step including increasingly more of the world's composed information. The field of "social examination" has arisen throughout recent years to bring the instruments of high - end computational investigation and information representation to take apart huge - scale social datasets. There are numerous corporate elements anxious to direct the public space and control the "lodge of the brain." 10 For Boyle, the genuine peril isn't unapproved record sharing yet "bombed sharing" because of walled in areas and injuries put upon the universe of the innovative hall.

Conclusion 

This article primarily centers around the twenty-first century in quite a while of advanced humanities and how we are doing similar investigations. In the wake of talking about different contentions, we come to know that to date, it has multiple million substance pages, multiple hundred million alters, more than ten million enrolled clients, and articles in forty - seven dialects (Wikipedia Statistics). This is a gigantic accomplishment for a very long time of work. Wikipedia addresses a dynamic, adaptable, and open - finished network for information creation and conveyance that highlights cycle, coordinated effort, access, intuitiveness, and inventiveness, with an altering model and forming framework that records each contingent choice made by each contributing creator. As of now in its short life, Wikipedia is as of now the most far reaching, agent, and inescapable participatory stage for information creation at any point made by mankind. As I would see it, that merits a few respite and reflection, maybe even by researchers in a future disciplinary manifestation of Comparative Literature.