Introduction: “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad
“The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad first appeared in 2000 in the journal Social Scientist. This essay holds significant importance in literature and literary theory due to its insightful exploration of the concept of “world literature” within the framework of Marxist thought. Ahmad challenges the Eurocentric biases prevalent in traditional notions of world literature, arguing that it often overlooks the rich literary traditions of non-Western societies. He proposes a rethinking of world literature, emphasizing the interconnectedness of literary production across different cultures and historical contexts, and the role of political and economic factors in shaping literary forms and content. Ahmad’s essay has been influential in stimulating discussions about the politics of literary representation and the need for a more inclusive and equitable understanding of global literary traditions.
Summary of “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad
- Marx’s Vision of Revolution
- The article begins by highlighting the context in which Marx wrote The Communist Manifesto, emphasizing that revolution seemed inevitable in his time. “The idea of a revolution, of one kind or another, seemed as natural as the prospect that the sun would set in the evening and rise in the morning.” Ahmad discusses how Marx, despite growing up in a revolutionary era, formulated a uniquely proletarian orientation for the coming revolution.
- Marx believed that the revolution must transcend the limitations of the bourgeoisie-led revolutions, such as the French Revolution, and strive for universal emancipation. He critiques the abstract nature of rights, noting that “the ‘Declaration’ itself guaranteed inequality when it guaranteed the right to property.”
- The Manifesto’s Transitional Nature
- Ahmad argues that The Communist Manifesto is a transitional text, reflecting Marx’s evolving thought. He notes, “For all the originality and magisterial sweep of the materialist conception of history, the essential categories of his economic analysis had not until then gone much beyond the familiar categories inherited from classical political economy.”
- The text bridges the democratic revolution of 1789 and the proletarian revolution envisioned by Marx. However, many key concepts in Marx’s later works, such as Capital, had not fully developed at the time of the Manifesto’s writing.
- Colonialism and Global Capitalism
- Ahmad addresses Marx’s limited understanding of colonialism at the time of writing the Manifesto. Initially, Marx viewed colonialism as part of capitalism’s global expansion without comprehending its devastating impact on the colonies. “Colonialism was not to be the industrializing force that so much of early Marx had anticipated,” writes Ahmad, acknowledging that Marx’s later works reflect a deeper understanding of colonial exploitation.
- The article explores how Marx’s later works recognize colonialism as “a bleeding process with a vengeance,” highlighting the uneven and exploitative nature of capitalism’s global expansion.
- World Literature and Globalization
- One of the key themes of Ahmad’s article is the relationship between the global capitalist market and the emergence of what Marx called ‘world literature.’ Ahmad explains that Marx saw capitalist globalization as creating a “cosmopolitan character to production and consumption,” leading to the rise of a global literary culture.
- However, Ahmad critiques Marx’s optimism about world literature, noting the unevenness and hierarchy inherent in global capitalism. “The same globalizing market forces which impose upon the world a historically unprecedented unity also divide and fragment the world so drastically.”
- Cultural Imperialism and National Literatures
- Ahmad explores the tension between the idea of world literature and national literatures. He notes that Marx’s critique of ‘narrow-minded’ national literatures was a reflection of his desire for an internationalist culture that transcends nationalism.
- However, Ahmad acknowledges the value of national literatures as expressions of “the democratic demand and a just cultural aspiration of a people,” especially in the context of colonial domination. The author critiques the assumption that world literature will naturally supplant national and local cultures.
- The Role of Translation and Global Literary Exchange
- The article discusses how world literature has been shaped by the global market, particularly through translation. Ahmad notes that in the current literary market, texts become part of world literature only when they are recognized and circulated within metropolitan centers, such as the United States or Western Europe. “A text thus produced becomes a text of world literature when it arrives in the metropolitan center, gets recognized as meriting inclusion in the archive of ‘world’ literature.”
- Ahmad points out that the production and circulation of world literature are driven by the economic power of the capitalist centers, which control the publishing and distribution networks.
- Contradictions in the Global Literary System
- Ahmad concludes by reflecting on the contradictions inherent in the idea of world literature under capitalism. While capitalist globalization has made world literature possible, it has also introduced hierarchies and inequalities that limit its potential. “For a ‘world literature’ to arise as a ‘true interdependence of nations,’ the logic of the ‘world market’ needs to be transcended.”
- He emphasizes that world literature, much like socialism, is a horizon, something that exists as a possibility but remains unrealized under the current global system.
References (Quotations from the article)
- “The idea of a revolution, of one kind or another, seemed as natural as the prospect that the sun would set in the evening and rise in the morning.”
- “The ‘Declaration’ itself guaranteed inequality when it guaranteed the right to property.”
- “Colonialism was not to be the industrializing force that so much of early Marx had anticipated.”
- “The same globalizing market forces which impose upon the world a historically unprecedented unity also divide and fragment the world so drastically.”
- “A text thus produced becomes a text of world literature when it arrives in the metropolitan center, gets recognized as meriting inclusion in the archive of ‘world’ literature.”
Literary Terms/Concepts in “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad
| Term/Concept | Explanation in the Excerpt |
| Historical Materialism | The theory that history is shaped by economic forces and the struggle between social classes. (Not explicitly mentioned but underlies Marx’s analysis) |
| Dialectic | A method of reasoning that involves a contradiction or opposition leading to a new synthesis. |
| Expressive Causality | A simpler cause-and-effect relationship where one event directly leads to another. |
| Teleology | The idea that everything has a purpose or end goal. |
| Nationalism | A strong sense of national identity and pride. |
| Cosmopolitanism | A world-oriented view that transcends national boundaries. |
| Globalization | The interconnectedness of the world’s economies, cultures, and people. |
| Colonialism | The control of one country over another, often involving exploitation and cultural domination. |
| Imperialism | A policy of extending a country’s power and influence through colonization. |
| Unequal Development | The idea that different parts of the world develop at different rates under capitalism. |
| Core-Periphery | A model of global capitalism where developed countries (core) exploit less developed countries (periphery). |
| Dependency Theory | A theory that argues that developing countries are dependent on developed countries and cannot achieve economic growth without breaking this dependence. |
| World-System Theory | A theory that analyzes the global capitalist system as a single interconnected unit, divided into core, periphery, and semi-periphery regions. |
Additionally, the excerpt discusses concepts related to literature:
- World Literature | Literature that transcends national boundaries and reflects a global perspective.
- National Literature | Literature that reflects the culture and values of a particular nation.
- Cultural Imperialism | The imposition of a dominant culture on other cultures.
- Hybridity | The mixing of different cultural elements.
- Translation | The process of transferring a text from one language to another.
- Cross-Fertilization | The exchange of ideas and influences between different cultures.
Contribution of “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad to Literary Theory/Theories
- Ahmad’s essay significantly contributes to Marxist literary theory by exploring the relationship between global capitalism and world literature. He contextualizes Marx’s belief that the development of a global capitalist market inevitably leads to a global culture, including a ‘world literature’. Marx viewed literature as intertwined with the capitalist system, where culture and material production are interconnected. Ahmad emphasizes, “Capitalism is seen here, already, as the first mode of production in history that has an inner logic to break the boundaries of exclusively national economies and cultures.”
- Ahmad critiques this teleological view by pointing out that global capitalism, while unifying the world economically, also perpetuates hierarchies and divisions. This analysis enriches Marxist literary theory by highlighting how cultural production is not merely a reflection of the economic base but also embedded in complex social and political inequalities.
- Postcolonial Theory
- Ahmad’s examination of colonialism and its relationship to both capitalism and world literature is a key contribution to postcolonial theory. He critiques Marx’s initial failure to grasp the full implications of colonialism, arguing that Marx’s understanding of capitalism’s global expansion was limited by Eurocentrism. Ahmad writes, “Colonialism was not to be the industrializing force that so much of early Marx had anticipated.”
- Ahmad also explores how colonialism shaped literary production, noting that the global dominance of European powers led to the subordination of colonized literatures. “Local and national literatures continue, and may even be more voluminous, but they occupy subordinate positions in the literary field as a whole.” This insight aligns with postcolonial theory’s focus on the marginalization of colonized voices and the hegemonic influence of Western powers in cultural production.
- Globalization Theory
- Ahmad’s analysis of The Communist Manifesto contributes to globalization theory, particularly in its cultural dimensions. He discusses how capitalism’s global expansion has led to the creation of a ‘world literature,’ where cultural exchange mirrors global economic exchange. He writes, “Marx insisted on the globally unifying power of capital, yet the same forces also divide and fragment the world.”
- Ahmad’s examination of the unevenness in the global literary market—where certain national literatures are privileged while others remain marginalized—provides critical insight into how globalization operates within cultural production. He argues that the “world literature” is predominantly shaped and mediated by the metropolitan centers of capitalist power, such as the U.S. and Europe. This adds depth to discussions in globalization theory about the cultural homogenization and fragmentation produced by global capitalism.
- Cultural Imperialism
- Ahmad’s work makes a significant contribution to the theory of cultural imperialism by addressing the ways in which dominant capitalist nations (primarily Western) impose their literary and cultural values on the rest of the world. He argues that the development of a ‘world literature’ under capitalism is deeply tied to the economic and cultural dominance of imperialist powers: “A text becomes a text of world literature when it arrives in the metropolitan center, gets recognized as meriting inclusion in the archive of ‘world’ literature.”
- This view reinforces the idea that cultural production is not a neutral or egalitarian process but is shaped by the same power dynamics that govern global capitalism. Ahmad’s analysis is a direct challenge to the notion of cultural universality, showing that cultural forms like literature are often vehicles for perpetuating imperialist ideologies.
- World Literature Theory
- Ahmad critiques and expands the concept of world literature, which has traditionally been seen as a body of texts that transcends national boundaries. He challenges the idea, rooted in Marx and Goethe, that world literature represents a harmonious and egalitarian exchange of cultural goods. Instead, Ahmad argues that the creation of world literature under capitalism is inherently hierarchical and exploitative: “The making of ‘world literature’ in the capitalist system reflects the same inequalities and power imbalances found in the global economy.”
- Ahmad’s critique helps to refine world literature theory by emphasizing the material conditions of literary production and the uneven distribution of cultural capital. His work suggests that world literature cannot be divorced from the economic and political structures that facilitate its creation and dissemination.
- Cultural Materialism
- Ahmad’s essay aligns with cultural materialism by emphasizing the material conditions that shape literary production and cultural exchange. He argues that literature is not an isolated or purely aesthetic phenomenon but is deeply embedded in the economic and social relations of its time. “Capitalism not only produces world literature but organizes it in the image of the world market, with all its inequalities.”
- Ahmad contributes to cultural materialism by showing how the capitalist market governs the production, circulation, and reception of literary texts. He critiques the notion that literature can be apolitical or autonomous from the material realities of the world, reinforcing the cultural materialist perspective that literature is always tied to power, class, and economic conditions.
- Translation Studies
- Ahmad’s exploration of translation as a critical process in the formation of world literature adds a valuable dimension to translation studies. He highlights how translation functions within the global literary market, often serving as a means of incorporating non-Western texts into the dominant cultural canon. “Translation has become in the second half of the 20th century as important and widespread an activity as original composition,” Ahmad notes.
- His critique extends to the fact that translation is often controlled by metropolitan centers, which select and evaluate texts based on their own cultural biases and market demands. This analysis underscores the political and economic dimensions of translation, challenging the view of translation as a neutral or purely technical process.
- Comparative Literature
- Ahmad’s work has implications for comparative literature, particularly in how it frames the relationship between different literary traditions within the global system. He challenges the traditional view of comparative literature, which often assumes an egalitarian comparison of texts from different cultures. Instead, Ahmad argues that the circulation of texts in the global literary market is governed by hierarchies of power, where certain literatures (primarily Western) are privileged over others.
- His analysis calls for a more critical approach to comparative literature, one that recognizes the material and political conditions under which literary texts are produced, circulated, and consumed. Ahmad’s essay encourages comparative literature scholars to consider the global economic and political structures that shape the field.
- Poststructuralism and Dialectics
- Ahmad employs a dialectical approach to the contradictions inherent in global capitalism and its cultural forms. He critiques the teleological reading of capitalist globalization that Marx presents in the Manifesto, where global economic integration leads to cultural homogenization. Ahmad writes, “Marx requires us to grasp this ambiguity of a contradictory historical motion…as a single process in which an infinity of good and bad effects appear as so many links in a complex chain.”
- By emphasizing the contradictions within capitalist globalization, Ahmad aligns with poststructuralist critiques of linear historical narratives and teleological thinking. He encourages readers to see world literature not as a straightforward reflection of economic processes but as a complex, dialectical phenomenon shaped by multiple and often conflicting forces.
References (Quotations from the article)
- “Capitalism is seen here, already, as the first mode of production in history that has an inner logic to break the boundaries of exclusively national economies and cultures.”
- “Colonialism was not to be the industrializing force that so much of early Marx had anticipated.”
- “The same globalizing market forces which impose upon the world a historically unprecedented unity also divide and fragment the world so drastically.”
- “A text thus produced becomes a text of world literature when it arrives in the metropolitan center, gets recognized as meriting inclusion in the archive of ‘world’ literature.”
- “Translation has become in the second half of the 20th century as important and widespread an activity as original composition.”
Examples of Critiques Through “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad
| Literary Work | Critique |
| Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness | Conrad’s novel romanticizes colonialism and presents a distorted view of Africa and its people. It reinforces the idea of the “savage” Other and ignores the historical context of colonial oppression. |
| Rudyard Kipling’s The Jungle Book | Kipling’s stories promote a nostalgic view of British imperialism and depict India as an exotic and idyllic place. They ignore the suffering and exploitation experienced by Indians under colonial rule. |
| Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart | Achebe’s novel offers a counter-narrative to colonial discourse, exposing the devastating impact of British colonialism on Igbo society. It critiques the portrayal of Africans as primitive and savage in Western literature. |
| V. S. Naipaul’s In a Free State | Naipaul’s novel explores the complexities of post-colonial Trinidad and Tobago, highlighting the legacies of British colonialism and the ongoing struggles for independence. It critiques the ways in which colonialism continues to shape the lives of people in the post-colonial world. |
Criticism Against “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad
- Eurocentrism in Framing of World Literature
- Ahmad critiques Marx for his Eurocentric focus, yet some critics argue that Ahmad himself doesn’t fully escape this bias. His analysis primarily revolves around European and North American centers of cultural and literary production, overlooking other forms of non-Western literary traditions that may operate outside of capitalist frameworks.
- Overemphasis on Economic Determinism
- Critics argue that Ahmad’s analysis leans heavily on the economic base-superstructure model, suggesting that all literary and cultural production is a direct reflection of economic conditions. This economic determinism could be seen as reductive, minimizing the agency of writers and intellectuals in shaping cultural forms independently of market forces.
- Simplification of National Literature and Globalization Dynamics
- Ahmad’s characterization of national literatures as either victims of globalization or as resistant cultural expressions is seen as overly simplistic. Critics point out that national literatures often exist in a more complex, hybrid space that can simultaneously resist and engage with global capitalist influences, making them more dynamic than Ahmad’s binary framing allows.
- Insufficient Engagement with Non-Capitalist Literary Systems
- Ahmad focuses predominantly on literature produced within or in response to capitalist markets, without deeply considering literary traditions or movements that have evolved outside these economic systems, such as indigenous or pre-modern literatures. This focus could be seen as limiting the scope of his analysis, neglecting other valuable literary traditions.
- Limited Discussion of Aesthetic Value
- Ahmad’s analysis is largely focused on the political and economic dimensions of literary production, with relatively little attention paid to the aesthetic qualities of literature. Some critics argue that his framework tends to reduce literature to its role in global capitalism, overlooking its capacity for aesthetic innovation and creative expression beyond political and economic contexts.
- Narrow Focus on the Role of Translation
- While Ahmad emphasizes the role of translation in shaping world literature, critics argue that his focus is too narrow, as he primarily addresses translation from non-Western languages into dominant European languages. The complexities of translation within non-European contexts, or between non-dominant languages, are not fully explored.
- Inadequate Engagement with Digital Media and Contemporary Literature
- Given that the article was published in 2000, some critics point out that Ahmad does not account for the significant impact of digital media and the internet on the circulation of literature globally. The rise of e-books, self-publishing, and digital platforms has changed the dynamics of literary production and dissemination in ways that challenge traditional capitalist models, which Ahmad does not consider.
- Romanticization of the Socialist Project
- Ahmad’s critique of capitalist globalization often contrasts it with an idealized vision of socialism. Critics argue that his portrayal of a future socialist world literature, free from the inequalities of capitalism, lacks practical details on how such a system would function. This romanticization of socialism may overlook the complexities and contradictions that would likely arise in any global literary system, socialist or otherwise.
- Insufficient Attention to Gender and Identity in Literature
- Ahmad’s analysis focuses primarily on class and national identity within world literature, but he provides limited engagement with how other identity markers, such as gender, race, and sexuality, intersect with the global literary market. Critics argue that this omission weakens his analysis, as these identity markers play a crucial role in shaping both the production and reception of literature globally.
Representative Quotations from “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad with Explanation
| Quotation | Explanation |
| “Capitalism is seen here, already, as the first mode of production in history that has an inner logic to break the boundaries of exclusively national economies and cultures.” | Ahmad highlights Marx’s insight that capitalism has a globalizing tendency, unifying economic and cultural spheres. However, Ahmad also critiques the oversimplified assumption that this will automatically lead to a harmonious world culture. |
| “The ‘Declaration’ itself guaranteed inequality when it guaranteed the right to property.” | Ahmad references Marx’s critique of the French Revolution’s Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, which proclaimed equality but enshrined property rights that ultimately protected the bourgeoisie. This aligns with Marx’s view that true equality cannot exist within a capitalist framework that prioritizes property. |
| “Colonialism was not to be the industrializing force that so much of early Marx had anticipated.” | Ahmad critiques Marx’s early optimism about colonialism as a progressive force. Instead, he argues that colonialism widened inequalities and hindered development in the colonized world, making it a destructive force rather than an industrializing one. |
| “The same globalizing market forces which impose upon the world a historically unprecedented unity also divide and fragment the world so drastically.” | Here, Ahmad reflects on the dual nature of global capitalism: it creates a sense of interconnectedness while simultaneously exacerbating global inequalities. This tension is central to his critique of how the global literary market is structured. |
| “A text becomes a text of world literature when it arrives in the metropolitan center, gets recognized as meriting inclusion in the archive of ‘world’ literature.” | Ahmad critiques the process by which literary texts become part of the canon of world literature, arguing that it is controlled by metropolitan centers (such as Europe and the U.S.), which determine which works gain recognition, thus reflecting global power imbalances. |
| “For a ‘world literature’ to arise as a ‘true interdependence of nations’ the logic of the ‘world market’ needs to be transcended.” | Ahmad contends that while global capitalism has created the conditions for world literature, its inherent inequalities prevent true cultural interdependence. He suggests that only by transcending capitalism can a truly equitable form of world literature emerge. |
| “National and local literatures are not inevitably expressions of ‘narrow-mindedness.'” | While Marx critiqued national literatures for being provincial, Ahmad argues that they can also be expressions of democratic and cultural resistance, particularly in contexts of colonialism and cultural imperialism, suggesting a more nuanced view of national literary traditions. |
| “Translation has become in the second half of the 20th century as important and widespread an activity as original composition.” | Ahmad highlights the critical role of translation in shaping world literature in the modern era, as it facilitates the circulation of literary works across national boundaries. However, this process is often mediated by the economic and cultural interests of dominant capitalist centers. |
| “Marx’s prescience in this regard is of historic significance.” | Ahmad acknowledges Marx’s forward-thinking vision of globalization and its cultural implications, especially the emergence of a ‘world literature’. He credits Marx with understanding that capitalism’s global spread would influence culture as much as economics, even if some of the specifics were limited by Marx’s historical context. |
| “The problem, again, is that he [Marx] does not take the next step and see more accurately that a ‘civilization’ created under such a ‘compulsion’ could hardly be described as ‘interdependence of nations’.” | Ahmad critiques Marx’s optimism regarding capitalist globalization and its role in creating a universal civilization. Ahmad points out that a world order driven by capitalist interests cannot result in equitable cultural exchanges or mutual interdependence; it would instead perpetuate domination and inequality. |
Suggested Readings: “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature'” by Aijaz Ahmad
- Ahmad, Aijaz. “The Communist Manifesto and ‘World Literature’.” Social Scientist, vol. 28, no. 7/8, 2000, pp. 3-30. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3518232.
- Ahmad, Aijaz. In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures. Verso, 1992. www.versobooks.com/books/499-in-theory.
- Moretti, Franco. Distant Reading. Verso, 2013. www.versobooks.com/books/1379-distant-reading.
- Jameson, Fredric. The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act. Cornell University Press, 1981. www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9780801492228/the-political-unconscious.
- Apter, Emily. Against World Literature: On the Politics of Untranslatability. Verso, 2013. www.versobooks.com/books/1503-against-world-literature.
- Casanova, Pascale. The World Republic of Letters. Translated by M. B. DeBevoise, Harvard University Press, 2007. www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674013452.
- Said, Edward. Culture and Imperialism. Knopf, 1993. www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/160315/culture-and-imperialism-by-edward-w-said.
- Damrosch, David. What Is World Literature? Princeton University Press, 2003. www.press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691049089/what-is-world-literature.
- Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto. Penguin Classics, 2002. www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/284409/the-communist-manifesto-by-karl-marx-and-friedrich-engels.
- Patnaik, Prabhat. “The Communist Manifesto After 150 Years.” In Karat, Prakash, editor. A World to Win: Essays on The Communist Manifesto, LeftWord, 1999, pp. 57-72. www.leftword.com/book/a-world-to-win-essays-on-the-communist-manifesto.html.