D.Tziovas is an extremely prolific scholar in the area of Modern Greek Studies, whose research interests cover almost the entire literary production of the 19^th, 20^th and 21^st centuries (to date), and whose analytical tools span a broad spectrum of theoretically informed approaches. The present sizeable volume bears witness to his wide-ranging research interests and presents a representative sample of work (some previously published) produced at different stages of his long career; it examines several major topics and literary texts mainly from a cultural perspective. These range from key ideological and socio-political issues that permeate literary movements and individual works of fiction from every stage of the history of modern Greek literature since the inception of the Greek State in the 1830s to the ethics of reception and the role of literary criticism. The volume offers new interpretations of texts and tendencies, and re-evaluates the ideological and cultural factors that contributed to the formation of the Modern Greek literary history canon. The study is divided into 8 sections and 20 chapters (including the preface) presented for the most part in chronological order, with some backward and forward movement.

The 1^st section, entitled ‘From the romanticism of the romance to the novel', discusses various theoretical issues, such as the difference between ‘traditional’ and ‘cultural’ texts, the historical development of a cultural approach to literature, and how a literary canon is constructed. In the context of defining a ‘cultural text’ as the dialectics of its various different readings and its intertextual uses diachronically, it discusses how a recent novel (Ελληνική αγρυπνία, 2016, by M. Fais) about a 19^th century short-story writer, G. Vizyinos,) has altered and enriched our approach to the work of this older writer. Going back to the very beginnings of Modern Greek fiction, this section examines the origins of the word μυθιστορία (romance) and how it differs from the word μυθιστόρημα (novel) as well as the ideology behind the use of each term. Exploring the (mainly cultural) reasons behind the renewed interest of late 20^th century critics in the fiction of the 19^th century, it emphasises the ideological role of Λέανδρος (1834) by P. Soutsos (the first genuine novel in Greek literature in Tziovas’ view) in the literature of the new Greek state – analogous to that of Αργώ (1936-39) by G. Theotokas a hundred years later, at a time of radical changes and ideological introspection for both society and literature in Greece. Finally, he discusses the (mainly social) reasons behind the absence of such a European genre as the novel from the literary production of the Ionian Islands until their annexation to the Greek State in 1864, despite their geographical proximity to Europe.

In the 2^nd section, ‘Ethography as a national narrative', Tziovas broaches the oft-debated, frequently negatively-viewed and still somewhat controversial issue of ηθογραφία from a reader-response perspective. He suggests that this literary trend in 19^th and early 20^th century Greek literature should be seen as both outcome and reflection of the transition from an agricultural to a small-scale urban space; this approach takes account of the cultural dimension (cultural geography, imagination, religion etc. of farmers/villagers), the socio-cultural dimension (relationship between nature -civilization, village – city and local- European), the socio-political (social inequalities, party politics, poverty, violence) and the national dimension (national education, memory and the construction of historical myths). In his view, ηθογραφία is a rite of passage (familial, social, individual and linguistic) and a melting pot of different discourses but not a genre in itself. He offers a reading of the novel Ο Ζητιάνος (1897) by A. Karkavitsas as an example of such an approach. In like manner, Tziovas re-reads some other 19^th century texts, termed ‘Agricultural dramas’ or ‘Agricultural idylls', which have previously been treated either as ‘idyllic lullabies’ or as social critiques, situating them instead in the intermediate space between these two poles, on the grounds that they offer a synthesis of these antitheses via rational compromise, social adjustment and convergence and, thus, social and financial progress in an urban setting.

Section 3, ‘Textual transformations', focuses on two seminal novels of 19^th and early 20^th Century fiction: Πάπισσα Ιωάννα (1866) by E. Roidis and Η Ιστορία ɛνός αιχμαλώτου (1929) by S. Doukas. Publication of former was greeted with a storm criticism of from the Greek Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church (following its French translation in 1869) on the grounds that it was blasphemous. It also proved unpopular with the Greek Modernists of the 1930s, who raised objections related to its form. Tziovas comments on the fact that today, Πάπισσα Ιωάννα/Pope Joan can only be found in the international bibliography under the names of its English and French translators, Lawrence Durrell and Alfred Jarry respectively, as the famous names of these European translator-writers overshadowed that of the author himself. Doukas’ book has traditionally been perceived as a classic example of orality; it tells the story of how two Greek soldiers survived when captured by the Turkish Army, supposedly recounted orally to the writer/narrator. Tziovas, however, suggests that we should read Doukas’ novel as a heavily mediated text, based on the self-confessed interventions of the writer-narrator, and as an example of the ideological and nationalistic manipulation by means of which it was shoe-horned into the Greek literary canon (in light of the significant differences between the first and subsequent editions).

Section 4, ‘Interpretation and Ideology', offers an alternative approach to the work of N. Kazantzakis. Tziovas argues that the defining polarities of this writer's work are ‘being’ and ‘becoming’. ‘Being’ is presented as a primordial essence, a hidden truth or divine presence to be re-discovered; ‘becoming’ is related to the struggle for freedom, going beyond limits, expectation rather than certainty, and the invention of reality. Thus, he proposes two alternative (postmodernist) readings of Kazantzakis’ work, the ethnographic and the philosophical-theological, corresponding to the above polarities. Rereading Ο Χριστός ξανασταυρώνɛται (1954) in particular, Tziovas takes issue with earlier attempts to categorize it (for example, as a social novel, political allegory or metaphysical quest), interpreting it instead as a personal (auto-biographical) drama. Tracing the history of Kazantzakis’ reception in Greece after the 1950s, he concludes that, despite the reputation he enjoyed abroad, this was rather negatively coloured by the (socialist) perspective of the film versions of Ο Χριστός ξανασταυρώνɛται and Ζορμπάς (1956 and 1964). This negativity runs counter to what one might have expected, at least from his left-wing compatriots, given Kazantzakis’ political allegiances.

In Section 5, ‘Transitions and quests', Tziovas examines Theotokas’ literary career mainly through the prism of the latter's theoretical views on novel-writing and his failure to put them to practical use; questioning other critics’ view of Theotokas as a rational Cartesian intellectual, Tziovas presents him as a romantic humanist who saw individuality as an antidote to the unstoppable forces of History and technological progress. The demonic spirit of rebellion and rupture in his youthful novels gives place to a quest for stability, harmony and Orthodox Christianity in his later career. In the same section, Tziovas attributes the enduring popularity and high sales of Karagatsis’ novels to their drawing on aspects of both high and low culture. He goes on to investigate how the experimental fiction techniques of the period 1930-1935 survived and blossomed in the 1970s and after; in his view, it is the theoretical writings on these techniques between 1935 and the 1970s (a period dominated by politics and aspiring to realism) as well the influence of the French nouveau roman, at first mainly among women writers, that paved the way to their practical re-application after 1974.

Sections 6 ('Politics, allegory, identity') and 7 ('Realism, memory and trauma') focus respectively on close readings of novels and short stories classed as ‘political fiction', fiction about personal identity and fiction that deals with the memory of trauma. Politics is a common theme in novels up until the 1980s in Greece; here, though, Tziovas focuses on 3 instances of political allegory, not a very common genre in Greece. These deal with the Greek Civil War (N. Kazantzakis’ Αδɛλφοφάδɛς, 1963) and the 1967-74 dictatorship (R. Roufos’ Γραικύλοι, 1967, and Ch. Milionis’ Τα διηγήματα της δοκιμασίας, 1973-74). V. Vassilikos's Το φύλλο (1961), an allegory about sexual identity issues, is approached through a psychoanalytic perspective. Finally, Tziovas examines two short stories by Milionis ('Το πουκάμισο του Κένταυρου', 1971, and ‘Το σχήμα του κύκλου', 1990) and a novel by V. Gouroyannis (Κόκκινο στην πράσινη γραμμή, 2009) that relate to painful memories of trauma sustained during the turbulent political period and subsequent invasion/war in Cyprus.

In the final section, ‘Metafiction and Ethics', Tziovas charts Greek fiction after 1974, focusing on themes, ideology and poetics, and detecting as he does so a clear move from a political culture (before 1974 and for some years afterwards) to a cultural politics (from approximately the mid-1980s onwards). He also traces the history of ethical issues in reading and criticism; following its apparent demise at the end of the 19^th century, reading ethics made a comeback in the early 20^th century as part of an interdisciplinary and international interest in ‘global ethics’. Thus, he concludes, literary studies have moved ‘from hermeneutics […] to a moral imperative’.

To sum up, this an intriguing, thought-provoking and extremely well-researched volume, which will prove essential reading for scholars, students and indeed anyone with an interest in Modern Greek literature.