{"id":10,"date":"2014-09-02T14:38:51","date_gmt":"2014-09-02T18:38:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/conference.complit.utoronto.ca\/?page_id=10"},"modified":"2016-10-17T13:26:18","modified_gmt":"2016-10-17T17:26:18","slug":"call-for-papers","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/conference.complit.utoronto.ca\/canada\/call-for-papers\/","title":{"rendered":"Call for Papers \/ Appel de communications"},"content":{"rendered":"

From Hugh MacLennan\u2019s <\/span>Two Solitudes<\/i><\/span> (1945) to <\/span>La revue acadienne<\/i><\/span>\u2019s ironic suggestion of Chiac<\/span>1<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/sup> as a tool to \u201cprendre ces deux solitudes-l\u00e0 pis en faire une seule solitude\u201d (\u201cLe Chiac est la solution\u201d), the image of Canada as a country of two peoples or communities \u2014 English and French (or, more specifically, English and Qu\u00e9b\u00e9cois) \u2014 <\/span>has become a commonplace. Recent scholarship has questioned the applicability of this image, as \u201cthe old epics of identity\u201d (Simon 2006, 8<\/span>) are increasingly unable to represent the current multicultural and polyglot reality of Montreal and Toronto<\/span>, historically the Francophone and Anglophone literary centres of Canada. In fact, as Catherine Leclerc (2010) has argued, the two languages interact, \u201ccohabit\u201d much of contemporary Canadian literature and occasionally blend to the extent that the very notion of a \u201cprimary\u201d language for a given text begins to blur. As the model of \u201cTwo [geographically specific] Solitudes\u201d begins to crumble, an equally dreary tension emerges, this time between the image of Canada as an officially bilingual-bicultural state and the more progressive ideal of Canada as <\/span>a \u201cvaried, rich cultural mosaic\u201d (\u201cCanada\u2019s Ethnocultural Portrait: The Changing Mosaic\u201d). One could read this as a step towards greater diversity, and away from nationalism tout court, or simply as a reiteration of the Canadian national narrative, now a fortress rendered even more impenetrable by virtue of its seemingly open gates and attractive welcome mat.<\/span><\/p>\n

E. D. Blodgett\u2019s article \u201cCanadian Literature Is Comparative Literature\u201d (1988) notes that while Canada is home to a diverse range of literatures \u2014 English and French, but also other, less frequently studied settler literatures (German, Icelandic, Ukrainian, Gaelic et al.) as well as a wide range of Indigenous literatures \u2014 there are few scholars who \u201ccompare the Canadian literatures,\u201d and that most of these focus on only one point of comparison, namely \u201cthe relationship between the anglophone and francophone literatures of Canada, Comparative Canadian Literature in the official sense\u201d (905). In light of the 150th<\/sup> anniversary of Canadian Confederation, the organizing committee invites contributions exploring Canada \u2014 or Canadas<\/i> \u2014 in all the term\u2019s varied meanings.<\/span><\/p>\n

A few questions to consider:<\/span><\/p>\n