摘要：When examining a sub-category of literature such as protest literature, it is easy to forget the fact that such categorisation often tends to overstress the distinctions that supposedly obtain between it and other sub-categories. As Irving Howe rightly observes, ‘we are hardly speaking of genres at all when we employ such loose terms as the political or psychological novel, since these do not mark any fundamental distinctions of literary form’.1 In order to properly situate categorisations like these, it must first be realised that the differences which establish them are actually more subtle than they first appear to be. In his foreword to American Protest Literature, John Stauffer states: I define protest literature broadly to mean the uses of language to transform the self and change society. By language I refer not only to words, but to visual art, music, and film. Protest literature functions as a catalyst, guide or mirror of social change. It not only critiques some aspect of society, but also suggests, either implicitly or explicitly, a solution to society’s ills.2
