The French School of Comparative Literature

Introduction:

The French School of Comparative Literature was a dominant school of thought in the early 20^th century until World War II. It was characterized by a positivist and empiricist approach where scholars would analyse works to find evidence of influences and origin between works from different countries.

In the French School of Comparative literature, it is a statement of the French literary history and the moral responsibility of every French comparatist to trace and relate the world literary experience to the French literary response, because according to the French comparatist, the French literature is the backbone of the universal literary system. In the French school ‘comparative literature’ becomes an ancillary discipline in the field of literary history. Jean Marie, Rene Etiemble, Paul Van Tieghem, Balden-Sperger are some of the famous French comparatists.

Key Aspects of French School:

1.     Narrow Approach: The French school took a narrow approach focusing on direct influence between two works.

2.  Emphasis on geographical and linguistic boundaries: The French school emphasized geographical and linguistic boundaries and insisted that comparison be made between two different languages.

3.     Nation-State Approach: The French school practises the nation-state approach of the discipline and aims to prove that French national literature is the superior to other European and non-European literatures.

Lack of Method: The French school lacks in determination of method because the French theorists are not being able to reach an idealist methodology of comparative literature. It is Tieghem who makes a rigid sharp distinction between general literature and comparative literature. In an attempt to have this concept of general literature circulated in Europe came to a knot, when  H. Remak makes the already indistinct definition of comparative literature which was much more blurred. Remak maintains that ‘general literature’ and ‘comparative literature’ are inseparable for they rely on one method. Remak argues that the notable founder of French school, Guyard comes to agree with American critic. Remak agrees that Tieghem’s view on “general’ and ‘comparative’ literature fall into the same category of meaning. Tieghem’s concept gives wider hopes to general literature than national literature and comparative literature.

The Concept of Influence: There is a general agreement that the influence study is basic for French school of comparative literature. It is a very knotty question for it takes various forms which comparatist sometimes misuses due to a failure to distinguish between one form and another. Influence can be defined as a conscious or unconscious movement of an idea, theme, an image, a literary tradition and even a particular cultural concept in literary texts.

1.     Literary and Non-literary Texts: The concept of literary ‘influence’ seems to trace the hidden mutual relation between two or more than two literary texts. It can be regarded as the ‘touchstone’ of literary studies. G.B. Shaw’s “Pgymalion” and Tawfiq’s “Al-Hakeem” are perfect examples of literary influence. However, French culture is based on the principle of ‘non-literary’ influence.

2.     Direct and Indirect Influence: A direct influence is marked when there is an actual contact between writers beyond culture, language and space. For example, Shakespeare’s plays are largely based on history and folktales. In many cases influence can exist between two different writers even without any direct relation between them. If there is any influence of this sort, the French comparatists take it to be ‘indirect’.

3.     Translation can also be regarded as a part of ‘influence’ study. Due to a strong impulse, the writer translates the original text beyond the limit of culture, language and space.

The Concept of Reception:

There is a sharp line of demarcation between the process of ‘influence’ and ‘reception’ though the two are not unrelated, because no influence can take place between foreign writers without the reception of a literary work outside its national boundaries. So reception can be taken as a step on the road to influence.

Five Thrust Areas:

The fields of study of comparative literature according to the French school are 1. Literary Schools and Genres, 2. Ideological Echoes, 3. Image Echoes, 4. Verbal Echoes, and 5. Human Models and Heroes.

Conclusion:

Thus, in the French school of comparative literature ‘influence’ and ‘reception’ study. Today the French school practises the nation-state approach even though it promotes the approach of European comparative literature.