Snezana Brajovic, University of Toronto

Dear President Naylor,

I would like to make a plea in favour of the Centre for Comparative Literature at the University of Toronto from a standpoint which sheds some light on the larger social context of comparative literary studies in general. It seems to me that today this standpoint should not be passed over in silence, because of a strong tendency towards ghettoization of cultures and, with it, an overstressing of cultural differences that leave little space for common ground dialogue and understanding.  Rather than diminishing it, the new communication tools and powerful media –such as the Internet—seem to reflect and perpetuate this exclusion game: ghettos thrive on the Net, where many “wes” (whoever the “we” are) are never understood by “them” (who ever “they” may be), and vice versa.

The Centre for Comparative Literature has not simply been a place where literature and theory are studied, it has also been a place where students with different cultural backgrounds have a chance to meet each other and find out that they can situate and discuss their differences within a common theoretical framework which promotes commonalities without denying specificities and particularities.  For me, as a newcomer to Canada, the Centre was a place I could call an intellectual home, not only because of my undergraduate and MA education in comparative literature but also because, as a comparativist, I studied Northrop Frye and read some of Linda Hutcheon’s books. The Centre was an opportunity to renew and expand my knowledge at the very source of North American comparativism, and meet people whose cultural experiences were different than mine. In other words, to merge, without giving up my intellectual identity. Precisely because of its unique approach and role, the Centre is one of competitive advantages for U of T, for it is a space where students learn to overcome limitations rooted in mono-cultural points of view.

At a time when multimedia and technology convergence are transmitting stories and poetry told not only by words but also by means of moving pictures and digitalized music, comparativism seems to have a particularly important role: if we do not compare, we will not understand either the common or the particular. Nor will we appreciate enough the uniqueness of the Canadian culture. Indeed, the Centre for Comparative Literature should expand, and not be dismantled, so that it covers new media. The Centre’s capacity to bringing together students with various cultural backgrounds, after they specialized in only one literature and only one culture, is socially beneficial.

Dear President Naylor, please reconsider the decision and let the Centre thrive. Some ideas are worth perusing, even at a (rather small) cost.

Yours sincerely,

 Dr. Snezana Brajovic