Kafka: Toward Guattari's notion of a "minor literature.

" Let me quickly reassure

those unfamiliar with the concept that, contrary to appearances, the adjective "minor" is
meant in an entirely positive sense here. It is something "a minority constructs within a
major language" and therefore represents a kind of subversive or revolutionary tendency
within the body of a major literary tradition. "We might as well say that minor no longer
designates specific literatures but the revolutionary conditions for every literature within
the heart of what is called great (or established) literature." The authors' interest in
Kafka therefore derives perhaps more from his sociopolitical position (as a Czech Jew)
than from his newly won status as a modern classic. They see in this social-political fact
a fundamental force shaping everything that is genuinely important about Kafka's
writing. That writing, in turn, has its importance (in this book, at least) mainly as a
paradigm for the general case of minor literature, which in its turn is significant in that it
is "the revolutionary force for all literature" and therefore the impulse that keeps
literature lively. "There is nothing that is major . . . except the minor." a Minor

Literature (review)
Clayton Koelb
From: MFS Modern Fiction Studies
Volume 33, Number 2, Summer 1987
pp. 376-378 | 10.1353/mfs.0.1120

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

This brilliant, tho Guattari's notion of a "minor literature." Let me quickly reassure those
unfamiliar with the concept that, contrary to appearances, the adjective "minor" is meant
in an entirely positive sense here. It is something "a minority constructs within a major
language" and therefore represents a kind of subversive or revolutionary tendency
within the body of a major literary tradition. "We might as well say that minor no longer
designates specific literatures but the revolutionary conditions for every literature within
the heart of what is called great (or established) literature." The authors' interest in
Kafka therefore derives perhaps more from his sociopolitical position (as a Czech Jew)
than from his newly won status as a modern classic. They see in this social-political fact
a fundamental force shaping everything that is genuinely important about Kafka's
writing. That writing, in turn, has its importance (in this book, at least) mainly as a
paradigm for the general case of minor literature, which in its turn is significant in that it
is "the revolutionary force for all literature" and therefore the impulse that keeps
literature lively. "There is nothing that is major . . . except the minor."ugh also
frustrating and at times misleading, study of Kafka as an exemplar of "minor literature"
has been available in French for over a decade. The book deserves a wide readership,
and the editors of the series "Theory and History of Literature" at Minnesota have done
a service by offering an English translation. Like the original text, however, the
translation requires a patient and at times forgiving reader.
In an important way, the volume is not so much about Kafka as it is about Deleuze and
Guattari's notion of a "minor literature." Let me quickly reassure those unfamiliar with
the concept that, contrary to appearances, the adjective "minor" is meant in an entirely
positive sense here. It is something "a minority constructs within a major language" and
therefore represents a kind of subversive or revolutionary tendency within the body of a
major literary tradition. "We might as well say that minor no longer designates specific
literatures but the revolutionary conditions for every literature within the heart of what
is called great (or established) literature." The authors' interest in Kafka therefore
derives perhaps more from his sociopolitical position (as a Czech Jew) than from his

newly won status as a modern classic. They see in this social-political fact a
fundamental force shaping everything that is genuinely important about Kafka's writing.
That writing, in turn, has its importance (in this book, at least) mainly as a paradigm for
the general case of minor literature, which in its turn is significant in that it is "the
revolutionary force for all literature" and therefore the impulse that keeps literature
lively. "There is nothing that is major . . . except the minor."
The idea is a potent and timely one for current literary theory, which has become deeply
concerned with political and social issues and particularly with the problem of
marginality. Because the notion is so fertile, it does little harm to point out that Kafka is
probably not a particularly apt example. Deleuze and Guattari have what seems to me
an exaggerated notion of Kafka's cultural "minority." They see him as a speaker of a
minority dialect, a "Prague German" full of "qualities of underdevelopment that it has
tried to hide." But it is clear that whether at home, at school, or at the office, Kafka
swam in a sea of standard "high" German that diverged only slightly from the
"Bhnensprache" to which the cultured aspired. Kafka wrote in his mother tongue. It is
perhaps curious, given his ethnic background, that his mother tongue should have been
standard German, but it was. Other misperceptions about Kafka and his work play an
important role in the argument, as when the authors repeatedly cite the "becominganimal" leading to "a way out" as a standard pattern in Kafka's stories. This is, at best, a
hasty generalization. The very basis of "Report to an Academy" is that becoming
human, not the opposite process, provides the protagonist with a "way out."
At the same time, there are numerous brilliant observations about Kafka's mode of
writing that quite ove Guattari's notion of a "minor literature." Let me quickly reassure
those unfamiliar with the concept that, contrary to appearances, the adjective "minor" is
meant in an entirely positive sense here. It is something "a minority constructs within a
major language" and therefore represents a kind of subversive or revolutionary tendency
within the body of a major literary tradition. "We might as well say that minor no longer
designates specific literatures but the revolutionary conditions for every literature within
the heart of what is called great (or established) literature." The authors' interest in
Kafka therefore derives perhaps more from his sociopolitical position (as a Czech Jew)
than from his newly won status as a modern classic. They see in this social-political fact
a fundamental force shaping everything that is genuinely important about Kafka's
writing. That writing, in turn, has its importance (in this book, at least) mainly as a
paradigm for the general case of minor literature, which in its turn is significant in that it
is "the revolutionary force for all literature" and therefore the impulse that keeps
literature lively. "There is nothing that is major . . . except the minor."rshadow the
occasional lapses. The discussion of Kafka's letter-writing is both provocative and right
on target. The critical vocabulary, borrowed from linguistics, that allows them to
separate "the subject of enunciation" from the "subject of the statement" leads to
important perceptions about the doubling of the self in Kafka's letters. The writer is split
into two functions, one of which can remain at home while the epistolary "subject of the
statement" flits about Europe in "an apparent movement, an unreal movement" brought
about by the postman. Only space limitations prevent me from citing additional flashes
of critical insight.
I am obliged to comment on one aspect of this translation, which in general seems
reasonably adequate, that I find inexcusable. The translator, acting as if the works of
Kafka were not already well known in English, translates the titles of Kafka's works in

several variants. We have sometimes "Investigations of a Dog," for example, but other
times "Investigation of a Hound." The case of "Das Urteil" becomes ridiculous: not only
do we have it referred to here as "The Judgment" and...