In 2010, Susan Rubin Suleiman and Christie McDonald co-edited impressive collection of essays entitled Global: A New Approach to Literary History. In their book, Suleiman and McDonald envisioned an approach to literary history, as defined by multiple implications and resonances of 'global' (ix.). Within this global worldview close attention is paid to transactions between and among cultures and peoples, both outside and inside France's national boundaries which are every period of French (x). The transaction between and among cultures is particularly relevant, as it is necessary component of study of from former colonies-the broad category offrancophone literature. In particular, Global raises questions about relation of (territorial) center to its extraterritorial peripheries, as analysis of this network of relations has become crucial to discussions of Francophonie (xi). It is focus on continuing tension between relation of center (I. 'Hexagone) to colonies Global that has brought Rene Maran's Batouala back to global literary stage.The inclusion of essay on Maran's 1921 novel Batouala within this collection is remarkable, as it is not particularly well-known novel outside of francophone specialists. What is proposed within Global is reconsideration of this novel, and others, within dynamic and more inclusive model, both spatial and temporal that emphasizes points of contact (xix). This global view allows us to re-read novels such as Batouala through lens other than classic binary paradigm of colonizer/colonized or master/ slave. Accordingly, Suleiman and McDonald propose analysis that echoes work of David Damrosch What is World Literature? Damrosch proposes more dynamic model of literary analysis: a more elliptical approach, to use image of geometric figure that is generated from two foci at (133). Undoubtedly, re-examination of Maran's Batouala would certainly benefit from such different approach. That said, though we should certainly favor dynamic model of literary analysis, as engaged readers we must remain conscious of following:We never truly cease to be ourselves as we read, and our present concerns and modes of reading will always provide one focus of our understanding, but of other and eras presents us with another focus as well, and we read field of force generated between these two foci, (ibid.)This dynamic approach is remarkable that, although it permits new scholarly analysis of somewhat forgotten text, it helps one avoid trap of presentism and dealing only with contemporary (Suleiman and McDonald xvii). Thus, challenge is to re-read work such as Maran's Batouala in relation to globe: as world, as sphere, as space of encounter with others and with very idea of otherness {ibid.).However, we might ask question: Why Batouala and why now? In introduction to A History of Literature Caribbean, J. Michael Dash suggests that literary history, much like contemporary history, is inevitably conditioned by present, by preoccupations, intellectual fashions and crises of our own times (309). Dash further elaborates on variability of literary history by stating:If this proposition is valid general terms, it is even more true francophone Caribbean. Part of problem stems from fact that we are dealing with less than two centuries of writing [... ] It is consequently, difficult to have clear sense of what are moments of this [... ] These questions are even further complicated by fact that we are not dealing with homogeneous corpus of literary works, {ibid.)If it is, as Dash suggests, quite difficult to pinpoint great moments of literature within francophonie and its varied corpus, then one might be led to once again ask why seemingly obscure author like Maran was included modern analysis of and Francophone within what Suleiman and McDonald describe as the multiple implications and resonances of 'global' (ix. …