"But on the bridges of Paris I, too, learned that I was afraid of freedom." (Clamence, in Albert Camus' The Fall). Oppression, censorship, adversity, and bad luck, when experienced by talented writers, often lead to the production of excellent literature. Many world masterpieces were written-and continue to be produced -in part as a response to authors' dire personal or political afflictions. But good literature is more complex than just a response to grave adversity, be it personal or political; good fiction is produced also by people who have no catastrophes, wars, disasters, or serious personal grievances to write about. What is the critical difference between these two contexts: writing with no fear of censorship, nor in response to an identified grievance, versus writing in fear or in response to misfortune? Are the demons fought by a visibly oppressed or unhappy writer necessarily more frightening than the demons fought by an author who, to all appearances, is not oppressed, nor overwhelmingly distressed? How does one even begin to identify, evaluate, compare, and critique fiction in these slippery but significant areas? We will read works by Cervantes, Camus, Havel, Akhmatova, Paul Auster, Coetzee, other writers from Canada, Iran, China, Latin America (texts can be added or substituted based on student interest) in an effort to answer not only some of the questions above, but also other valuable ones that will surely arise along the way. Pertinent theoretical readings will be included. Requirements: meaningful class participation, class presentations, and a research paper.