Consequently, the term 'creolization' is covered by Édouard Glissant's concept of a process whereby different cultures are linked to one another but wherein no single culture is dominant (Le Traité du Tout-Monde, 1997; Le discours antillais, 1981; Poétique de la relation, 1990). When defined based on strictly economic issues, it also refers to how the Creole elite was limited (Allen, 1982). Creolization is seen as an alternative to colonial hegemony: 'The world of ethnicity and that of creolity will be viewed as two particular ways of denying the importance of economic differences and métissage in the transformation of Mauritian society' (ChazanGillig, 2003, p. 64). In a narrower, more literal sense, creolity, creolization and Créolie are related when considered in the Indian Ocean context of emancipation since 1978. In the case of Reunion Island, Créolie came to define a new form of writing (Samlong, 1989, p. 179). In the Mauritian experience, Créolie came to embody a specific culture, one that celebrated equality and fraternity and that was loaded with a poetic energy connecting the islands: 'Where, outside our Indian Ocean region, could a creative thought without exclusivity of language be found?' (Prosper, 2001, p. 110). Since the 1890s, 'the proliferation of the press, the increase in literary and philosophical circles, the rise in readership and its extension to the mixed-race population, through their constant interaction, are the very foundation for the Mauritian Creole literary project' (Furlong and Ramharai, 2005, p. 39). From this literary breeding ground, a minority of writers, visual artists and journalists campaign for the recognition of a global Creole identity that applies not only to the descendants of Africans, but also to Europeans and Indians. By opposing the idea that only the descendants of slaves can be custodians of creolity, Firoz Ghanty denounces a version that is 'a historical [and] which would negate the miscegenation', thus reinstating the idea of 'roots' to cement Mauritianness: