Carlos G. Tee (鄭永康)摘要

Some Reactions to

“The Crisis of Comparative Literature” by René Wellek

Published in 1959, this article by René Wellek, written in strong, forceful words, criticizes the French school of comparative literature for its confined system and obsolete methodology.

To illustrate the state of the discipline at that time, Wellek called the situation a crisis. In this article, although he criticized the French branch of comparative literature for its many deficiencies, the general tone readable between the lines was that he considered the French school a part of the global community of comparative literature as a whole. Wellek's allusion to a crisis was not meant to refer to the discipline as practiced in the United States but he was in fact pointing an accusing finger at the “rotten” French part of the metaphorical apple. Although he had migrated to the US by the time he wrote this piece, as a European by birth, Wellek did not show a parochial attitude by just limiting his views on comparative literature as practiced in his newly adopted country.

In addition to pinpointing the many maladies of French comparative literature, Wellek spent many paragraphs criticizing Paul van Tieghem by reciting a litany of errors in the French camp. The reason for singling out Van Tieghem was obvious: the clout enjoyed by the Frenchman in his native country and Europe at that time. He was said to have had many followers in his adamant adoption of positivistic factualism and other such approaches.

One of the striking points in the article was when Wellek reminded us of the origins of comparative literature; that it arose as a reaction to narrow-minded nationalism prevalent in 19^th Century France. How ironical it is that only half a century later (at the time of Wellek's writing), French comparative literature was being criticized for putting lopsided emphasis on influence studies and what Wellek labeled as “cultural book-keeping” as the French had a way of drawing attention to high levels of achievements in their literature of the preceding centuries.

Towards the last third of the paper, Wellek's defense of the open, multidisciplinary approach of the American school and its emphasis on criticism sounds so prognostic, that is, as we now look back at how comparative literature in America has developed in later decades. Several years after the publication of this paper, Wellek's views are echoed in the ACLA (American Comparative Literature Association) Levin Report of 1960 by its call for greater emphasis on critical methodology and internationalism (Levin 25), among others.

Quite apparently, Wellek's words found eager ears in the American comparative literature community that the directions he pointed out and the warning signs he posted were well heeded. In an increasing trend, his positions on how the discipline should move forward were adopted in the ACLA Greene and Bernheimer Reports, issued in 1975 and 1993 respectively. The American school of comparative literature has since then developed towards a more pluralistic and multidisciplinary direction.

A crisis is not always to be viewed in a negative way. In any organization, setting, country, or even, individual, a crisis is an opportunity to reflect, and for reform and repositioning of one's priorities. Only the illogically stubborn and the misfits end up being sure losers in a crisis.

Works Cited

Wellek, René. “The Crisis of Comparative Literature.” Comparative Literature: Proceedings of the Second Congress of the ICLA. Ed. W. P. Friederich. 2 vols. Chapel Hill: U of Carolina P, 2:149-59.

Levin, Harry et al. “The Levin Report, 1965: Report on Professional Standards.” Comparative Literature in the Age of Multiculturalism. Ed. Charles Bernheimer. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1994, 21-7.