I am very impressed and also... jealous...

Recently read an article written by this 20 or 21 year Singaporean guy. He wrote this article pertaining to the teaching of Singaporean literature in schools as opposed to Anglo-American Literature. I have to agree with him that defenders of Singaporean Literature should not say that students must learn Singaporean literature just because we speak the same slang, have the same skin, etc. Students must be exposed to more foreign literature so as to have ideas cross-fertilize and Singaporean students are badly in need of that, we are already being labelled as 'uncreative' and 'rote-learning'. Damn impressed by this guy writing and jealous too. Then, his writing bears the mark of a Singaporean academic elite. Still...
Meanwhile, I'm working on my writing to write the first Singaporean literary masterpiece. :bow:

No affirmative action for local literature

Yes, he writes very well. Studying "foreign" literature has not hurt his clarity or style.

I remember having an argument with an English teacher about the inclusion of "Blood Wedding" by Fredrico Garcia Lorca, not because I did not think the students should be studying a Spanish work, but because I thought he should be more accurate and remove the "English" from the title and just call his lesson Literature. The fact they were studying it in translation did not make it anything other than Spanish literature. (Mind you, I also think Lorca, like Thomas Hardy, is one of those authors who is so miserable and pessimsitic that we ought to be protecting young minds from them)

I don't think that studying foreign works necessarily undermines local culture either. For example, Shakespeare's popularity varies from country to country; the strength of his appeal must reflect the local culture.