Reviewed by: The Right to Difference: Interculturality and Human Rights in Contemporary German Literature by Nicole Coleman Miriam Schwarz Nicole Coleman. The Right to Difference: Interculturality and Human Rights in Contemporary German Literature. U of Michigan P, 2021. 258 pp. Cloth, $80.00. Drawing on antiracist scholarship, especially that of Fatima El-Tayeb, Nicole Coleman emphasizes in her introduction to The Right to Difference that the German national identity continues to be imagined as mono-ethnic and white.1 She sees this reflected in literary categories of German literature and criticizes that what started as a homogenizing endeavor in the nineteenth century is still apparent when scholars work with a binary that differentiates between white German literature and migrant or intercultural literature. Coleman argues that literature studies must aim to represent the reality of German diversity and suggests a reconceptualization of the term "intercultural literature" that forgoes "categorization based on background" (19). Here, precisely, is a disconnect between Coleman's premise and the theoretical solution she proposes: despite criticizing that Germanness is strongly associated with whiteness, she aims to detach intercultural literature from biographical rather than racist categories. This is reflected in Coleman's theory of interculturality. Her definition [End Page 112] of culture is separated from hierarchizing identity markers such as racialization or nationality and "assumes that there is a network of culture which overlaps [ … ] and that all humans affiliate with multiple cultures at the same time" (21); culture is "any kind of social group that provides us with meaning" (27). Her theory of difference works accordingly. Based on Derrida and Levinas, Coleman conceptualizes difference as networked and inherently interlinked with sameness. Since difference can therefore be understood as a commonality that all humans share, Coleman argues for a "right to difference" (33). While Coleman incorporates Leslie Adelson's criticism of the term interculturality concerning its implications of essentialized and discrete cultural entities, she does not address the term's implications that epistemic systems exist on an eye-to-eye level regardless of political and discursive hierarchies. Coleman admits that before an intercultural attitude that understands difference as a shared commonality is achieved, there is work to be done. Thus, she develops a new model of intercultural competence that she proposes as an "intercultural lens" (59). She proposes it as a tool for analyzing what she terms "human rights literature" (50), aiming to create an understanding of the right to difference. Based on models of intercultural competence and communication that argue for cultural relativism, namely, those by Milton J. Bennett and Darla K. Deardorff, Coleman's model consists of five categories that describe "attitudes towards cultural difference" (40). "Cultural ignorance" and "cultural exclusionism" describe a denial of cultural differences and a negative view of cultural differences, respectively. "Universalism" tries to understand and eventually reduce cultural differences from one's own cultural perspective, often by focusing on sameness rather than difference. "Autocultural reflexivity," the awareness of one's own cultural socialization, is the threshold to "interculturality" which is where "autocultural reflexivity and engagement with others come together" (41–42). Coleman argues that reading human rights literature does not automatically lead to empathy for those who are perceived as different. Rather, her analysis of eight contemporary German novels suggests ways of "reading interculturally" in order for "classrooms [to] become places for social knowledge about exclusionary practices and [ … ] racism, and also spaces for strategy testing and potential scenarios for intercultural societies" (57). Each of her four chapters of literary analysis contrasts two novels by different German authors who write about a similar topic, loosely describable as trials of genocide perpetrators, political incarceration, [End Page 113] German-Polish postwar identities, and refugees in contemporary Germany. Coleman examines the texts and protagonists by asking which of the attitudes toward cultural difference they represent. The context she provides for each chapter and the detailed teaching suggestions are highly resourceful, especially for teaching white students. The results of her analysis suggest that there is indeed a link between the authors' epistemic position, the topic they write about, and which overall attitude toward difference Coleman identifies in the texts. Given that scholars like José Medina have shown that marginalization leads to epistemic advantages, one might argue...
Search from 250 M+ research papersSearch from 250 M+ research papers
Open Access
Aug 23, 2024
David A Winter 
