Douwe Fokkema, one of the leading scholars in comparative literary studies today, is the author of Cultureel relativisme en vergelijkende literatuurwetenschap (Amsterdam 1971), Literary History, Modernism, and Postmodernism (Amsterdam 1984), Theories of Literature in the Twentieth Century (London/New York 1995), and Literatuurwetenschap en Cultuuroverdracht (Muiderberg 1992), the last two written in collaboration with Ilrud Ibsch. Occasioned by his 65th birthday and retirement from Utrecht University, this lively collection gathers sixty-one short articles printed in the alphabetical order of their authors' names. Rather than asking the contributors to provide pieces of solid academic research, the editors chose to invite "stimulating short contributions," each dwelling on a "provocative thesis or [taking] a controversial stand on some matter central to present-day debates in literary studies, comparative literature or literary theory," such as canon formation, conventions, cultural relativism, hermeneutics versus empirical studies, and the problem of values. The volume includes neither an extended bibliography of Fokkema's works nor an index nor a more descriptive list of contributors.

Attempting to define the status of comparative literature today, a few papers that thrive on difference arguably not for the sake of its trendiness, point that the universalism of the 50s and the multiculturalism of today share the same Enlightenment ideals: freedom, equality, and brotherhood/sisterhood. While "such universalism[s are] the last thing we need," as Hans Bertens argues in his delectable "From Over-Confidence to Clear and Present Danger," both they and their critiques are conveyed in English "the superhighway of [present and] future efforts at comparativism - a superhighway fed by major interstates such as French, German, Spanish, Russian and Japanese, by country roads such as Dutch and Tamil, and by dirt tracks such as Basque, Irish, and Maori." The volume prints articles in English. Bertens points to the ideologies and institutions of "underlying sameness" that have informed so much of the public discourse and, consequently, of comparative literature since the late 40s: the creation of the UN (1945), the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man (1948), then, after the cold splits and the Trent-like retrenchment of Western oecumenism, the creation of NATO (1949), the European Economic Community and, more recently, the European Union. For Bertens, the 1950s' spirit of universal brotherhood, with their man-like Lassie and Flipper the dolphin trying constantly and effortlessly "to stimulate, help, and resemble us," is epitomized in the 503 photographs exhibited in The Family of Man show that toured the US and Europe, attracting a numbered audience of 2.7 million viewers in Moscow. At the same time "disquieting historical events" such as the Korean war, the fall of Dien Bien Phu, the Suez crisis, or the Hungarian uprising "were ultimately nothing but the result of willful blindness to that fact" (9). Contemporary multiculturalism, as implied by this position, must persevere against the ignorance of fundamental-, tribal-, global-and terror-isms - of the fatwa, of Rwanda's and Bosnia's killing fields, and of the masonry work of Wall Street.

In his intervention "Universalism and Cultural Relativism," Mihály Szegedi-Maszák contends that, although "[i]t is easier to condemn ethnocentrism and cultural nationalism than to have a more than superficial knowledge of other cultures," "it may be too early to insist on the desirability of globalization." Today's cultural diversity seems to increase not only because of Postcolonialism but also as a result of post-communism ... "more national literatures are alive in Europe than ever before" (239). Susan Rubin Suleiman (in "Diary as Narrative: Theory and Practice") contrasts the teleological concept of Weltgeschichte that may give rise to totalitarian consequences to the "interpretation of Epochenschwelle as developed by Blumenberg, Koselleck, or Jauß, which is found to be " incomparably more sophisticated" (241). However, she warns, "even this concept implies a universalism that may relegate some cultures to the periphery."

Avowedly "sitting at the wrong end of the table in the world economic order," Amiya Dev ("Globalization and Literary Value") tries to decode the newly raised globalization slogan, and its advocacy by universalism's zealots. If globalization only affects what she calls the 'Sanskritized' part of a culture (i.e., its lingua indica, its purified semiosis), its 'Prakritized' part (i.e., actual semiosis, languages spoken in different parts of Northern India) will remain unchanged. It is there then, in the 'Prakritized' part of cultures, that we may be called to address our attention as comparatists" (66). Probably this won't do; but if this won't, what will? What kind of reality will we be left with?

Invoking Aragon's "[o]nce upon a time there was reality," Lisa Block de Behar takes us on an tour of the "scarce reality of reality" (Breton) that is left after the theoretical polemics and swellings of the 1970s and 80s. In "Hermeneutics as a Quest for Literary Conjunctions and Conjectures," she notes that "[p]aradoxically, little is left of everything and within this abundant precariousness oppositions have collapsed, confronted by systems which, after receiving the greatest acclaim, seem to be more forceful than in force, more rigid than rigorous. Confrontations have been shuffled, some due to conciliation, most of them due to indolence" (20). Lubomír Dole_el's "Polyfunctional or Monofunctional Language" criticizes "poststructuralist theory of language" for its lack of desire to accept "the polyfunctionality of language" (74). Rather, "language is seen as monofunctional" and is assigned "a specific, i.e., poetic funtion." "In the final account," writes Dole_el, "this privileging of poetic language turns against poetry. If Hegel or Freud or Einstein are to be read in the same way as Mallarmé or Kafka, then literature loses its raison d'être."

Talking about canons and the guns required to impose them, one can only agree with Earl Miner's claim that "[w]e have every right to detest or sneer at foolish canons because our own are not rationally formed and might be no better if they are" ("Canons and Comparatists," 152). "Talk of 'the canon,'" he adds, "is a meaningless luxury of pampered wits. Let them on their soft pillows sound alarms about dire threats from rampant viragos or dead white males. They will assist the craft of literary study by diverting them from more important matters. Our many canons testify to those signs of life, disagreements. Real danger comes less from prescription than its twin, proscription," while during times of hardship, like the Japanese occupation of Korea, "prescription is indistinguishable from proscription... the censor's heart delights in both" (153). Miner concludes until the two non-ignorable issues in canon-discussions, "the grounds of comparison adequate for selection [and] the historical, cultural, and in fact logical relativism," are "fully discussed, canonicity seems likely to be one of the few things still assignable to free will. We need only account for the act of selection, justify it by principled comparison, and devise means at once to admit and control relativism. As these tricks show, the game of canons can be played by any number, and the only danger lies in playing the game seriously by oneself" (155). The beauty of one's weapons elusively shines forth after such battle-games, as show the pertinent analyses by Jozien Moerbeek ("Canons in Context"), and Paisley Livingston. In "Justifying the Canon," the latter invokes Fokkema's "intriguing idea that the canon is an arbitrary (i.e., 'conventional') solution to a social coordination problem where there is more than one possible equilibrium," and groups the possible theoretical takes on the canon, whose "boundaries are fuzzy and matter of degree," according to four competing theses. With respect to global critiques of canon formation, Livingston advocates a version of skepticism that, "when properly handled, it serves as a spur to further enquiry and debate; when misused, it deadens the mind and fosters intellectual and institutional carelessness and inertia" (146).

Among the more particular topics tackled in the collection, one samples Jean Bessière's discussion of the virtues of a Deleuze-inspired minimalism that could connect promisingly with Clifford Geertz's "local knowledge" (in "Literature, Cultural Relativism and the Efficacy of Cognitive Minimalism"); Roseann Runte's "Northrop Frye and the Problem of Cultural Values: The Case of Canada," where she concludes that "Frye as a reader was appropriately active in contributing to the Canadian myth of concern" (196); and Horst Steinmetz (in "Uniqueness and Contingency") celebration of Fokkema's "aversion to [labeling] events in literature and literary history... as unique phenomena. 'Emphasizing the uniqueness of an event soon brings the debate to a grinding halt. Nor can anything be learned from the unique aspect of events'," Fokkema is quoted as saying (219). The scholar honored by the contributions to the volume is seen as an advocate of "a science that allows objective control ("empirically verifiable" is Fokkema's favorite term for this) at every step... finally, a science capable of making predictions." One can only wonder if something that is empirically verifiable makes it through the verification process to remain empirical at the end (the aesthetic is hardly mentioned in the volume). In any event, the collection is a reminder that the theory of comparative literature is a site where politeness supersedes audacity. The stability and weakness of the discipline lie herein.

Contributors include Els Andringa, Hans Bertens, Jean Bessière, Lisa Block de Behar, Jan den Boeft, Jroen Bons, Frank Brandsma, Wim Bronzwaer, Tania Franco Carvalhal, Han-liang Chang, Yves Chevrel, Ampie Coetzee, Amiya Dev, Katinka Dijkstra, Lubomír Dole_el, Niels Erik Enkvist, Gerald Gillespie, Frank de Glas, Jaap Goedegebuure, Rik van Gorp, Ina Gräbe, Elrud Ibsch, Halina Janaszek-Ivani_ková, Eva Kushner, José Lambert, Margreet de Lange, Geert Lernhout, Paisley Livingston, Earl Miner, Jozien Moerbeek, Hans Mooij, Ulla Mussara-Schroeder, John Neubauer, Ziva Ben-Porat, Ann Rigney, Frans Ruiter, Roseann Runte, Siegfried Schmidt, Rien Segers, Maria Alzira Seixo, Dan Shen, Horst Steinmetz, Hans van Stralen, Leon Strydom, Susan Suleiman, Mihály Szegedi-Maszák, Joachim von Thüsen, Steven Tötösy de Zepetnek, Horst Turk, Mario Valdés, Hennie P. van Coller, Raymond Vervliet, Reinhold Viehoff, Joris Vlasselaers, Wang Ning, Jean Weisgerber, Lies Wesseling, Sytze Wiersma, Yuan Heh-Hsiang, Yue Daiyun, and Rolf Zwaan.

Calin-Andrei Mihailescu
University of Western Ontario