World Literature

World Literature sure sounds like a nice idea.

Each day I post a new Online MCAT CARS Passage. This is for anyone who wants to practice for the Critical Analysis and Reasoning Section.

Every article is selected to meet the AAMC MCAT criteria for MCAT CARS.

Subscribe by email to receive a new free practice passage each morning.

June 3, 2017 – Online MCAT CARS Practice

Question: What is your summary of the author’s main ideas. Post your own answer in the comments before reading those made by others.

World Literature sure sounds like a nice idea. A literature truly global in scope ought to enlarge readers’ sympathies and explode local prejudices, releasing us from the clammy cells of provincialism to roam, in imagination, with people in faraway places and times. The aim is unimpeachable. Accordingly, nobody says a word against it at the humanities department conclaves, international book festivals, or lit-mag panel discussions where World Literature is invoked. People writing and reading in different languages (even if one language, English, predominates) about different histories and cultures and ideas: who could be against that?

Still, in a sick, sad world, it’s hard not to be suspicious of anything as wholesome as World Literature. The word literature itself has come to sound fake. Is there something the addition of world is making up for, a blemish it’s trying to conceal?

This much is clear: by the late ’90s, a new literary globalism had begun to flourish. In 1997, Arundhati Roy’s God of Small Things won the Booker Prize, soon selling 6 million copies; in 2001, Oprah had her book club read Rohinton Mistry’s A Fine Balance, an excellent 19th-century novel, published in 1995, about Indira Gandhi’s Emergency; in 2003, reading the bestselling Kite Runner, by the Afghan-born Khaled Hosseini, made some Americans feel better, and others worse, about our war over there. Literary scholars have focused on World Literature especially since 1999, when the French literary critic Pascale Casanova published her pathbreaking World Republic of Letters. In the ’00s, Franco Moretti, from Italy but resident (with Google) in Silicon Valley, instigated data-based debates about the world-system of literature in the New Left Review.

The geographic broadening of literary sensibility has taken place alongside the beginnings of a remarkable economic catch-up of poorer with richer countries. In 2013, for the first time since the Industrial Revolution, more economic growth will take place in “developing” than in developed countries. The Indian market for anglophone literature will soon be bigger than the British one. Chinese writers have won two of the last thirteen Nobel Prizes. A South American is now pope, for the first time since Columbus brought Christianity to the New World.

What has all this meant? In literature, no more folkloric long poems, like Okot p’Bitek’s Song of Lawino (1966), let alone those dreary tales of hardscrabble villages with nonpotable water, which everyone in grad school pretended to like. In the new millennium, literature has taken a Jason Bourne–like tour through the emerging financial capitals of what used to be the third world: big books about Mumbai and Beijing, Nairobi and São Paulo, have joined books about London and New York in a glittering constellation rotating across the night sky. In the new economic era of northern slowdown and southern catch-up, the exemplary novelists have seemed to be those, like Orhan Pamuk, Ma Jian, and Haruki Murakami, who successfully transcend their homelands and emerge into a planetary system where their work can acquire a universal relevance.

The progress of World Literature since the ’90s has accompanied that of global capitalism. In the past, the spread of money — what Marx called the “universal equivalent,” for its ability to serve as an empty vessel of exchange value — strengthened rather than weakened national boundaries and languages. It wasn’t so much “world literature” as vernacular literature — composed in Florentine Italian, say, rather than universal Latin — that developed alongside international finance in northern Italy in the late 15th century. Later, the headquarters of capitalism shifted to Holland, then England, then the US, countries mainly inhabited by Protestants who distinguished themselves from Catholics (the word catholic meaning simply “universal”) largely by listening to, but especially by reading, the Bible in the same Dutch or English they spoke over dinner. Not coincidentally, these countries attained mass literacy sooner than Catholic ones. In these countries, and others gathered into the capitalist world-system, questions about how money was to be distributed, for example, were discussed in publications produced in the local and/or national language and thus legible to far more people than any “universal” language had ever been. The overall nationalization of literature, throughout modernity, didn’t mean there could never be an internationalist literature, of the kind once imagined by 19th-century radicals. But an internationalist literature would be different from World Literature as we know it.

Adapted from nplusonemag.


Leave a comment below with what you understood to be the author’s main ideas. Ask about this daily passage in office hours/workshops for help.

Subscribe to my Daily CARS mailing list by entering your email.

The full list of daily articles is available here.

This was an article on Literature.

Have a great day.
Jack Westin
MCAT CARS Instructor.
Contact Information



  1. Globalization of literature


  2. World literature has changed since the 19th century in a way where people are influenced by it in a different aspect (more industrial) – developing countries economically growing more than developed countries.
    Author points out examples of the change from reading literature as a history/culture lesson, to more of a universal style that relates more towards economy


  3. World Literature increasing, developing countries economies increasing


  4. Literature has become globalized in the last 20 years, with the emergence of 3rd world country cities as financial centers; literary globalization w/ capitalistic spread (spread of $$$)


  5. The author talks about the ways literature has evolved over the years. It has diversified and become more globalized.


  6. literature globalization = parallel to global capitalism


  7. Theme: World literature refers to literary works of other countries been translated and read in other languages by people from other countries. Such works are meant to broaden our horizons and introduce us to cultures, histories and ideas that are foreign to us. However, world literature as we know today has not accomplished these ideals.

    Tone: cynical (sick sad world), skeptical (hard not to suspicious of anything as wholesome as World literature….a blemish it’s trying to conceal?) Author is not convinced that there’s such a thing as world literature. Dismissive of the current state of world literature and how it has evolved. Doesn’t give ideas on how it should have evolved but gave reasons for its evolution (globalization). He harbors hope that one day internationalist literature will take shape and be different from today’s world literature (doesn’t pander to the western world).

    Author provides examples of such literature and alludes to the fact that in the literary world, literal works by writers in developing countries and their intellectual feats and accomplishments are gradually getting more recognized (remarkable economic catch-up…economic growth will take place….Chinese writers have won two …..South American is now pope)

    Author feels that the literary landscape has changed (literature has taken a Jason Bourne-like tour…..what used to be the third world) and it focuses on developing countries that have become more modern and globalized. He was hoping that literature from these countries would focus on the unique cultural differences and experiences and not so much on how similar they have become compared to the western developed countries.

    Literature from non-English speaking developed countries are getting more recognized (their work can acquire a universal relevance) due to global capitalism (spread of money…..strengthened rather than weakened national boundaries and languages) and increasing literacy in these countries.


  8. MI: The rise in popularity of third world narratives coincides with the rise of globalization

    Tone: cautious


  9. MIP: World lit = good idea + lit. broadened w/ economic improvement; tone = +


  10. World literature growth parallels growth of global capitalism


  11. Literature has deviated from its Eurocentric roots because of global capitalism


  12. WL = important and increasing as capitalism increasing


  13. World Literature = growing + parallel with global capitalism.


  14. Third world countries catch up with richer countries –> globalism in literature
    World Literature redefined by globalism


  15. World literature is continously evolving since 1900’s.


  16. MP: there will be a change in literature as a medium for the change in what is occurring in the world


  17. World literature has helped facilitate universal relevance.


Leave a Reply