Teaching world literature

For most of the twentieth century, teaching literature in American secondary schools meant teaching British and American literature.  During the last third of the century, the term “multicultural literature” began to appear, accompanied by critiques of the literary canon—critiques of the process by which the canon was formed and of the outcomes of that process.  For the most part, however, multicultural literature meant literature by members of marginalized groups within the United States, not by writers in other parts of the world. 

“World literature” has been a feature of the curriculum in some states, districts, and individual schools for many years, but in most cases it has not played a prominent role in the theory and practice of English teaching.  For example, in Applebee’s (1993) study of the literature curriculum, only about 25 percent of high schools included a course focused on world literature.  Of the authors of required book-length works, 58.3 percent were from North America, 33 percent from the United Kingdom, 7.6 percent from Europe, and 1.1 percent from Other.  Now, however, there are some signs that world literature may become a more important part of literature instruction.  These include the following:

            Globalization.  The media, business, science, the arts, and educational institutions are all becoming less bounded by national borders and identities.  Friedman’s “flat world” thesis may lack a certain sophistication, but at bottom, it’s accurate. 

            The presence of growing numbers of immigrants from other countries in American schools.

            Electronic media, particularly the internet, but also including satellite TV and radio that make few distinctions about international boundaries.  A Google search can turn up results from anywhere on the globe.

            Pressures to make the study of literature relevant.  In our post-9/11 world, student awareness of and interest in international events, culture, and history are growing. 

For English educators, preparing prospective teachers to teach world literature can seem daunting, especially given factors such as the following: 

1. Content preparation at most institutions continues to include little or no study of world literature.  Prospective teachers come to English methods classes well-versed in 19^th century American literature and the Romantic poets, but unable to name more than one or two authors or works from Africa or Asia.  Furthermore, most have not studied the role of translation in literature.  Some of our interpretive traditions (such as close reading) are problematic when the work under study is a translation.
2. Even less available to prospective teachers is exposure to works of literature from Africa, Asia, and Central and South America appropriate for young readers.  American publishing companies are notoriously remiss in publishing works in translation, but the problem is even more pronounced in the area of young adult literature.
3. Prospective teachers may lack cultural, geographic, and historical knowledge about the regions authors have written about.

However, it is also true that prospective teachers come to the teaching of world literature without some of the deeply embedded conventions of practice that can interfere with thoughtful instruction.  This means student-centered, interactive, inquiry-based approaches to teaching literature become more immediately possible for prospective teachers to explore.  Consider the following:

    1. A course or unit focusing on world literature tends not to carry with it the expectation that works must be taught chronologically. 

    2. There is no high school canon of world literature so teachers have a good deal of freedom to select works that will interest their students and meet their instructional goals.

    3. Prospective teachers do not find themselves wed to particular interpretations of works (what their own high school and college teachers told them about Gatsby, for instance), so they can approach the act of interpretation in the collaborative, open manner reader-response theorists advocate. 

    4. Studying translation can be a powerful way explore difficult-to-put-your-finger-on aspects of literature such as style.  Placing two translations of the same poem side-by-side exposes word-level qualities of literature in ways few other activities can.  (This is close reading gotten at from a different angle.) 

    5. Supporting ELL students becomes less difficult if the literature being taught requires all students to stretch their cultural and linguistic imaginations instead of casting some students as always in-the-know and others as perpetual outsiders.