A minor literature doesn't come from a minor language; it is rather that
which a minority constructs within a major language. But the first characteristic
of minor literature in any case is that in it language is affected with a high coefficient of deterritorialization.

The second characteristic of minor literatures is that everything in them is political.
In major literatures, in contrast, the individual concern (familial, marital,
and so on) joins with other no less individual concerns, the social milieu serving
as a mere environment or a background; this is so much the case that none of
these Oedipal intrigues are specifically indispensable or absolutely necessary but
all become as one in a large space. Minor literature is completely different; its
cramped space forces each individual intrigue to connect immediately to politics.
The individual concern thus becomes all the more necessary, indispensable,
magnified, because a whole other story is vibrating within it. In this way, the
family triangle connects to other triangles—commercial, economic, bureaucratic,
juridical-that determine its values.

The third characteristic of minor literature is that in it everything takes on
a collective value. Indeed, precisely because talent isn't abundant in a minor
literature, there are no possibilities for an individuated enunciation that would
belong to this or that "master" and that could be separated from a collective enunciation.
Indeed, scarcity of talent is in fact beneficial and allows the conception
of something other than a literature of masters; what each author says individually
already constitutes a common action, and what he or she says or does is
necessarily political, even if others aren't in agreement. The political domain has
contaminated every statementBut above all else, because collective
or national consciousness is "often inactive in external life and always in the process of break-down," literature finds itself positively charged with the role and
function of collective, and even revolutionary, enunciation. It is literature that
produces an active solidarity in spite of skepticism; and if the writer is in the
margins or completely outside his or her fragile community, this situation allows
the writer all the more the possibility to express another possible community and
to forge the means for another consciousness and another sensibility; just as the
dog of "Investigations" calls out in his solitude to another science.