The workshop opened with a lecture in which Shapiro outlined the background of the world systems knowledge movement. He described its aim as questioning long established disciplinary categories, explaining that it seeks to move beyond “the social science categories that aided and abetted the capitalist world systems inequalities, be these exploitative, extractive, or oppressive.” He referred to Emmanuel Wallerstein’s call to overcome the division between the humanities and the sciences, which he described as a “false binary.”
The abolition of the novel as a dominant cultural form
Shapiro stated that “one of our main tasks in literary and cultural studies is to abolish the novel.” He clarified that he did not mean discontinuing the study of longform fiction, but “to invoke historical abolition and the more recent prison abolition movement” by examining the conceptual category of the novel as it developed within the context of centrist liberalism. According to him, the novel became a dominant cultural form because it aligned with liberalism’s emphasis on individualism, national frameworks, and forms of interiority. He noted that this framework contributed to the marginalisation of other longform narrative practices, which were often labelled as “genre” or treated as secondary forms.
Shapiro focused on historical, political, epistemological, and methodological reasons, why the category of the novel should no longer be served as the default for long-form fiction. Drawing on world systems theory, he explained that capitalism’s long spirals shaped dominant cultural categories, including the novel. Shapiro suggested that the second long spiral, in which the novel flourished, has ended. This, he argued, raises questions about whether inherited literary categories remain adequate. Professor remarked that current conditions are marked by a sense that technological change will “only be for the worse” and that power increasingly shifts “from liberal democracy to non-human forces, be these technological, ecological, or perhaps even extraterrestrial.” These shifts, he argued, contribute to a broader reorganisation of cultural and political frameworks.
Zemi-periphery and its potential for new cultural comparison
Shapiro proposed several directions for approaching longform fiction without relying on the category of the novel. One suggestion was to focus on the zemi-periphery as a site of cultural comparison. He argued that the zemi-periphery should be understood not only through its relation to the core but through “a horizontality and a transversality among other semi-peripheries.” This approach, he noted, avoids the emphasis on national categories and on “the traditional comparative literary studies model, which implicitly always meant to compare works to the core, or even an older post-colonial framework that saw these regions as writing against the empire, a move we feel locked works into a belated and binary response to the former colonizers, seeking recognition even in opposition to the former colonial leaders”.
This model could allow comparisons based on shared material or social conditions. He explained that this zemi-periphery could also help to avoid placing cultures into a hierarchical relationship with the core. It describes regions that are neither central nor fully peripheral, and whose cultural production can be compared horizontally (based on similar situations) with each other rather than measured against dominant Western centres (assuming they follow the same pattern of development as core countries).
A new narrative analysis for rethinking the genre
Shapiro also outlined a framework for narrative analysis based on three modes or “valences”: the thematic, the analytical, and the transformative. He described thematic works as those that register social concerns without specific direction or intent; analytical works as those that diagnose such concerns, and transformative works as those that create new forms of collective experience after they have consumed the cultural object through reading, viewing, listening, and so on. He pointed out that academic criticism tends to privilege analytical approaches, leaving fewer tools for discussing thematic or transformative modes. Shapiro emphasised that being “against the critical” does not mean rejecting analysis but recognising the need for additional categories that more accurately reflect contemporary cultural production.
Changes in knowledge production and statistical methods
Shapiro also discussed the changing relationship between knowledge production and statistical methods. He contrasted frequentist statistics, which he associated with the liberal era, with Bayesian probability, which he described as shaping contemporary digital technologies. According to him, Bayesian models rely on correlations rather than fixed rules, and this shift affects how meaning circulates in digital culture. He noted that forms such as meme culture operate through correlation rather than semiotic decoding and suggested that a “left Bayesianism” may be emerging within contemporary cultural and political movements.
Case studies of small literatures, utopia, and genre of romantasy
The workshop continued with discussion and short presentations from research teams involved in the UTOPIA and AUTOSTORY projects, addressing topics such as small literatures, utopia, European identity and the genre of romantasy.
Karolina Bagdonė examined the relevance of European identity in contemporary society through the work of Lithuanian poet and cultural figure Sigitas Geda (1943–2008). Using Geda’s example, she talked about his vision of a cultural utopia in which Europe acknowledges its mistakes, rejects evaluation based on size or influence, and where capitalist consumerism is no longer the sole measure of importance. Bagdonė argued that Geda’s understanding of Europe can be seen as a utopia of its identity that unites myth, history, and language, and makes a space for all small literatures to be seen.
Natalya Bekhta explored the concept of utopia as a genre and its relevance for understanding world literature from the perspective of the Second World. She argued that current theories of world literature lack a term for the Second World, which leads to a binary opposition between core and periphery. Bekhta suggested that utopia, with its dual nature, could offer insights into semi-peripherality, as a concept that combines features of both core and periphery. She used Amitav Ghosh’s novel “Gun Island” as an example, highlighting its blend of novel and utopian elements to address global issues.
Kristina Malmio presented a case study on the translation and reception of the Finland-Swedish novel “The American Girl” by Monika Fagerholm, which had appeared in Oprah Winfrey’s book club in 2010. She examined how this novel, representing Finland-Swedish minority literature, became part of world literature. Malmio highlighted the novel’s characteristics, its translation, and reception in the American context, noting the role of female mediators in this process. She also considered a few models of world literature, highlighting the importance of understanding minority literature’s place within global literary systems.
Tero Vanhanen & Iida Pöllänen presented AUTOSTORY project and discussed the growing interest in the distribution of popular genres such as romance through social media platforms, particularly TikTok, and how it develops and circulates across Europe. They introduced Finnish author S.K. Rostedt and her novel Kahden veren tytär, described as Finland’s first romantasy novel (2024). They discussed how Rostedt uses social media to gain visibility and mobilise readers, as well as the critiques of her debut for grammatical errors and lack of originality, which they linked to pressures created by globally popular English ‑language literature.
Text by Karolina Bagdonė
The next workshop on the theme of utopia will take place on 24 April at Tampere University. More information will be available soon.