In an interview with UnterEins, Gerrit Wustmann talks about why "world literature" often only means "Western literature", who is to blame and what can be done about it. An interview worth reading that makes you think:
Here is a small excerpt from the interview:
Your book says: If it says "world literature" somewhere, for example in university lectures or on lists of the best, it's mostly about Western literature: European and Anglo-Saxon books. Perhaps some of you are also wondering: Is it enough? Why do we absolutely have to read Arabic literature, for example? What do you say?
It's a sad fact. When I was researching the book, I looked at hundreds of lists and always got the same result. Regarding your other question: Of course nobody has to read Arabic literature, for example. But you should. Otherwise we miss a lot and we remain in a Eurocentric perspective. We deprive ourselves of formative reading experiences. This distorts your view of the world. By the way, there is nothing wrong with teaching Western literature or making hit lists of Western literature. We should just call it that and stay away from the term 'world literature'.
You can find the complete article here.
You can order the book here: Gerrit Wustmann: World Literature
