I hope you had a lovely three-day weekend. It's nice to have a little extra time to recharge your intellectual batteries, right? I know I feel that way, especially after the first week or so of school.
Remember, you have until FRIDAY AT 8AM to submit your scintillating and 3E response to this prompt. Remember that you should 1.) compose/save your responses in Word and then cut and paste them into the comment box here, 2.) avoid the "preview" button like the plague, 3.) not freak out if I don't approve your response immediately because I wait until after the due time to approve them, and 4.) email me your response if you're worried it didn't go through.
The title of this blog post is "Why Study Literature?" And that, essentially, is the question I'm asking you to ponder in your response. Note that EVERY WORD in the question, however, is packed with meaning. I have not asked "Why do we read novels?" or "Why study English?" As you will learn, in this class EVERY WORD MATTERS. Appreciating and analyzing diction, whether in a poem, prose excerpt, or a prompt, is of paramount importance. So make sure you're focusing your written efforts on the question you've been asked.
Of course, this wouldn't be an Advanced Placement course if I weren't making this a bit more of a challenge, so here's where things get a little more involved. You're going to read and synthesize four documents before composing your response. And you will incorporate said documents in your argument as evidence to support your claim(s). I also welcome you to use your own experiences with studying literature as a way to inject personal voice into your written response; you do not need to be entirely objective in your prose style, at least for the purposes of this blog entry (when it comes to writing AP essays, that's a different story for a different day).
So, without further ado, here are the sources you need to read and cite (appropriately--include the author's name in parentheses after quotations/references!) in your carefully crafted response:
Source A (Gopnik): http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/why-teach-english
Source B (Chiaet): http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/novel-finding-reading-literary-fiction-improves-empathy/
Source C (Harvard): “A study at Harvard Medical School has shown that students are successful in their medical studies regardless of undergraduate concentration, providing that they have had adequate science preparation. Students are urged to strive for a balanced and liberal education rather than specialized training. No preference is given to applicants who have majored in the sciences over those who have majored in the humanities.” – Harvard Medical School Admissions website
Source D (Brooks): http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/21/opinion/brooks-the-humanist-vocation.html?_r=0
P.S. For those of you who didn't have me as your English 2 Honors teacher, I thought I'd include a link to the quizlet set of the words I teach my sophomores (Dibble Diction), so here it is. Take a gander and see how many you know--they are WONDERFUL words! And those of you who are returners might want to test yourself on how many you remember. Hopefully plenty! :)
https://quizlet.com/16536961/dibble-diction-e2hehap-vocab-2017-18-flash-cards/
(part 1)
ReplyDeleteReal literature, for all intents and purposes, isn’t something tangible. Books can be held, novels written, but literature is what it is because we made it that way. It only exists as “literature” through the appreciation shown by readers and by the efforts we put into to understand it. So why study literature? Plenty of reasons exist for it- from simple appreciation as humans (Gopnik) to improving ourselves through it (Chiaet) to rediscovering our inner minds and spirit (Brooks). In an era where math and sciences are societally valued higher than the humanities, literature (and the study of it) offers us a reprieve to embrace our humanity and inner selves.
We study literature to learn from the stories of others and to apply what we learn to everyday life. While these characters may be fictional, we actively seek them out to understand all aspects of human nature. Be it the innocence of Huck Finn, the ambition of Dr. Frankenstein, or the loneliness of Holden Caulfield, we, as fellow humans, try to connect with these characters emotionally. We learn to empathize with characters through their misery, apathy, joy and in turn we become better at empathizing with others as well (Chiaet). While this may not be our end goal, studying literature is about learning and applying what we read in fiction. We grow with characters’ mistakes and adopt their positive traits as our own. Our emotional empathy then grows with this to allow us to better communicate with others. But even more than this, studying literature opens a pathway for us to learn about ourselves in a way we’ve never experienced before.
Introspection is key for an individual to develop and grow. However, many are either unwilling or afraid to look inwards to uncover their inner thoughts. The study of literature helps ease students (or even adults) into the path of personal discovery. As Brooks puts it literature helps discover “the most inward and elemental part of a person.” (Brooks). Because we can connect with various characters, we also unlock a part in ourselves as we empathize with them. We study literature, not only to understand the history behind the text, but also because the lessons found in them can still be used today. Even more so, these lessons can be applied directly to a particular reader, possibly sparking a revelation within them.
(part 2)
ReplyDeleteStudying literature gives a new perspective on outlooks on life. In today’s day and age, where math and sciences are, unfortunately, held at a higher regard than the humanities, the importance of studying literature shines through. Studying literature requires deep analysis skills and an extremely open mind to different interpretations of the same work, skills that are much less frequently used in the sciences. Harvard Medical School Admissions, for example, recommends students to “strive for a balanced and liberal education rather than specialized training” before applying for their medical program (Harvard Medical School Admissions). Not that our entire purpose of studying literature is to get into medical school, but here we see an example of real life applications of studying literature. We learn from literature to get new outlooks on different aspects of life, one of which could be the biological sciences. In essence, it helps us expand our views on the world around us so that we can be more aware and impactful with our choices.
But the reason we study literature might simply be because we like it. We enjoy reading- enjoy the mental stimulation, the puzzles, the suspenseful buildup to that perfect (or sometimes not) ending. As Gopnik succinctly puts it: “…we’re human. That’s enough” (Gopnik). We study literature not because we have to but because we want to. People who enjoy reading will always enjoy reading, no matter the societal opinions about it. So why not let everyone enjoy literature? While we do study literature to further our understanding of the world and to express ourselves as better humans, the most fundamental reason for us to study literature could just be out of pure enjoyment and appreciation.
History, introspection, empathy. Those are all things we strive to learn through studying literature. I could have a reason to study it while someone else may have a completely opposite reason. Either way, we all study literature for a purpose in life. For everyone that’s something different- and that’s wonderful. It all boils down to this: we study literature to gain something out of it- be it something physical or spiritual. And by studying literature, we all hope to find answers to some of the unknown questions we have in life.
(1/2) (Disclaimer: I do not intend to offend any Latin students here at Peninsula. I’m sure you have your reasons.) Why take Latin? I can’t see the point of learning a “dead language,” an archaic tongue that not even the Greeks maintain. Even Slavic would be more useful in today’s political climate (does it seem cold in here?). But when it comes to English, a language most Americans regularly converse in, I’d never thought of it as slowly withering away, at least in profession. I myself know numerous current English and humanities majors, many who just started college this fall. Yet, David Brooks, an Op-Ed columnist for the New York Times believes interest in humanities is dying faster than the fall of Constantinople. In fact, in his article “The Humanist Vocation,” he highlights a substantial decrease in college degrees for people who majored in humanities- from 14 to 7 percent in just half a century.
ReplyDeleteNow, I didn’t immediately see the cause for alarm. Brooks continues that, yes, it is true that vocational stability and economic success aren’t included in the humanities packages, and, thus, jobs in more technological fields have been favored. Especially with the booming and continually expanding opportunities for computer scientists or engineers in Silicon Valley and around the world, it’s no surprise students would chase economic interest over personal interest. So why does this all matter? If the natural course of progression eliminates English as a legitimate occupation, would it really affect anything? Isn’t English a subject that we can do independently, in our homes, away from institutions fill with stuffy old professors who argue about the true intentions of Marlow? And as for literature, why spend resources to examine it?
(2/2) In his New Yorker article “Why Teach English,” Adam Gopnik argues that even if the English major were abolished, people will still study literature “because many people like books.” Out of pure necessity to read, humans will naturally gravitate towards literature, as it not only provides entertainment but also is essential to our very human existence. Literature is truly a “natural or inevitable consequence of literacy,” the fabric of our very civilization that embodies that sentiments of our authors, from Hawthorne to Steinbeck, all woven into a tapestry of our cultural identity (Gopnik). I most certainly agree. Literature acts as a vessel, a time machine of sorts, where we share our satisfactions and regrets, a storyline immune to the clutches of time, from the Shadow of the Wind, when someone simply reads.
ReplyDeleteNow, mere cultural importance might not be enough to sway the mast majority of our increasingly unread nation or the 93 percent of students of non-humanity majors to drop everything and read. As Gopnik so lucidly states, “if we closed down every English department in the country, loud, good, expert, or at least hyper-enthusiastic readers would still emerge.” So we don’t need to save the books. However, the negligence to continually examine literature might have negative consequences on emotional and interpersonal grounds. In a study conducted researchers at The New School in New York City in October, 2013, they have found that literary fiction actually improved the reader’s capacity for empathy. When one is forced into another’s position, to invest themselves into the character and their struggles, one’s emotional intelligence is strengthened. In more empirical fields, such as medicine, such traits are actually greatly valued. Harvard’s admissions process for medical school takes such studies into account and admits students “regardless of undergraduate concentration” (Harvard). Literature not only constitutes what we call civilization but also expands our capacities for empathy. And, although reading will never be a panacea for all global conflicts or personal qualms, we improve our lives by examining the stories of someone different than us; we live vicariously- we see the way they live, we feel the way they feel. And, through it all, we come out the other side with a better understanding of ourselves.
(1/2)
ReplyDeleteScience, Math, Engineering, and Technology (STEM) majors hold much more societal importance than the humanities. This statement of one of the greatest fallacies that has sewn itself into the fabric of modern American education. Although STEM majors potentially give society a more efficient future through innovation and inventions, the humanities, particularly literature, grant people from any academic level the ability to gain a greater understanding of themselves. Much like the sciences, literary analysis is hereditary through timeless scholars that have been immortalized by their works. People study literature to comprehend the seemingly incomprehensible enigma that is the human condition. As society continues to devalue the worth of literature, humanity must realize that literature is not meant to make us more human, but it gives people the opportunity to discover the ideas and philosophies that have shaped their lives in a more meaningful and enlightening mode.
Even though the popularity of humanities has declined within the college circuit, this does not entail the demise of literature; This entails the exact opposite: literature is more important than ever. In David Brooks’ The New York Times article “The Humanist Vocation”, Brooks rightly attributes the plummeting popularity of the humanities to the humanities themselves. Brooks correctly states that the humanities have lost their purpose over time, and their true purpose has always been to cultivate society’s understanding of “the person’s care, wisdom, truthfulness and courage” and “the million little moral judgments” that comprise the world. Although “political and social categories like race, class and gender” have essentially poisoned the inner workings of humanities, it does not mean that the purpose of the humanities and literature has changed. When readers are aware of the purpose literature is meant to exact, they can understand the ideas conveyed through literary works to the fullest. If readers were to look at Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky through the modern political and social lens, one could see the tale of Rodion Raskolnikov as how hierarchical social classes can cause people to commit acts out of desperation for something. However, if readers were to view this work through a literary analysis lens, one could possibly gleam the notion that although people may think that their inner darkness has tormented them beyond being human anymore, people’s primal emotions can ignite their own inner humanity they may have thought as long gone. As readers, people must realize that they read literature not to understand the PRESENT situation of things, but to understand the UNIVERSAL situations that have pervaded human history and will continue to permeate the future.
(2/2)
ReplyDeleteOther than our understanding of ideas and philosophies through literature, reading literature also “improves a reader’s capacity to understand what others are thinking and feeling”, according to Julianne Chiaet’s Scientific American article “Novel Finding: Reading Literary Fiction Improves Empathy”. Just as the sciences gives readers an understanding of the workings of the world, literary fiction and literature in general gives readers an understanding of the workings of people. Chiaet states that there is “empirical evidence linking literary and psychological theories of fiction.” Unique to literary fiction, fiction pointedly targets the mindset and psyche of individual characters found in imaginary, sometimes outrageous, situations. Whether it be Huckleberry Finn on the Mississippi River or Hamlet speaking to the ghost of his slain father or Percy Jackson dueling the Greek Titan of Time, Kronos, on a floating mountain above the Empire State Building, the use of these situations, no matter how fictitious, grants readers the ability to learn how to empathize with anyone or anything regardless of race, class, gender, or even planet. If readers can learn how to empathize with the most outlandish fictive characters manifested from text on a page through literature, literature can help readers understand the emotions of the characters in their own lives whether that be friends, family, or peers.
Ultimately, literature’s importance is greater than any institution that humanity itself can create, and its importance lies within people’s individual interest in their favorite works. Academic scholars and the “ordinary Joe” alike can safely assume that Shakespeare’s works are possibly the most influential work of literature second to the Bible. However, most people do not actually consider how the tales of Romeo, Hamlet, and Macbeth survived through 400 years and has also bested other great literary works that were born during this time. Shakespeare’s influence on the literary world was not established by an institution like a college or a library system, but by society’s value of said works. The very fact that people can relate to characters conceived 400 years ago proves that literature like Shakespeare’s is truly important. In Adam Gopnik’s The New Yorker article “Why Teach English?”, Gopnik notes that even if people “abolished English majors tomorrow, Stephen Greenblatt and Stanley Fish and Helen Vendler would not suddenly be freed… They would all migrate someplace where they could still talk Shakespeare and Proust and the rest.” Gopnik’s analysis supports the fact that society found literature important not because a certain institution deemed literature a vital part of society, but because of the philosophies and ideologies readers could glean without assistance. Great literature is not the hardest to read, but great literature is the literature that presents us ideas that are sometimes the hardest to accept or the hardest to find on our own without such literature. As readers, people read to find something or learn something about themselves that they either never knew or simply needed confirmation about an inkling or “whatever” as Gopnik so eloquently states.
Understandably, English majors are becoming rare with time. The cause of the declination of humanities majors may be a result of a world becoming more focused on the material and physical nature of the world instead of the internal emotions of human beings. There exist many reasons for this phenomenon; however, the consequential implications of the loss of literature are just as important to recognize. The consequences of losing the humanities departments seem to include the decline of productivity and social interactions. In regard to the decline of productivity, "the truth is that for every broadly humane, technological-minded guy who contributed one new gadget to our prosperity there are six narrow, on-the-spectrum techno-obsessives who contributed twenty" (Gopnik). This scenario shows that any non-humanities major can benefit from literature in terms of productive results. The individual that has deeply involved him or herself with literature has the capability of applying intellect that encourages productivity. Gopnik also made the point that Victorian factory owners who read Dickens didn't necessarily make their factories better through Dickens; however, they were individuals who read Dickens that made the factories nicer. The seemingly small but greatly impactful influence of literature seems to increase productivity regardless of whatever field any individual may pursue. In regard to the decline of social interactions, studies show that the reading of literary fiction enhances our social skills as it teaches us to relate and connect emotionally to others' perspectives. Clearly, the significant decline of English majors would result in some statistical reduction of socially apt individuals in the professional world. The particular benefits of literary fiction over other forms of literature is that "they support and teach us values about social behavior, such as the importance of understanding those who are different from ourselves" (Chiaet). Chiaet also argues that we as human beings love to discuss the works of literary art with others as it leaves the most impacts in comparison to other forms of literature such as popular fiction, nonfiction, and others.
ReplyDeleteNow, let us discuss the reasons for why English majors, or humanities in general, are declining so rapidly. One interesting reason seems to be the increasing tendency of professors to incorporate political moralities into the humanities rather than the romantic moralities. In essence, they begin to deviate from individualism to identity politics. Instead of "old notions of truth, beauty and goodness" it seems that literature has become "more about political and social categories like race, class and gender" (Brooks). Brooks argues that the reason why the humanities is declining is because the humanists themselves are deviating from the humanities! What more could be devastating to the liberal arts departments? The idea that the humanities are "becoming more boring" may be the result of moving away from truly liberal ideals that literature offers and moving towards the more political stances that many detest.
Studying the humanities have benefits that many students are not taking advantage of. The Harvard Medical School Admissions website implies that those that study the humanities during undergraduate studies do just as well as those who studied the medical field during that period. The simple fact that humanities can offer the same edge to students who weren't 100% devoted to the medical field during their undergraduate education shows that humanities is a very powerful tool and can broaden the intellect of many students. This shows that humanities is a universal subject that can be utilized in any field and provides those who studied it a cutting edge in life.
Recognizing that English literature is declining, we have a duty to continue studying literature to impede its progress. The question of why we study literature needs to be very clear and universal to everybody if the decline of English majors can be prevented at all. Gopnik makes it very clear that we are human, and that reading literature is a unique characteristic that distinguishes us from other known species. The reason why we study the humanities has no better reason than the fact that we are human. We can say that the reason for reading literature is to help us improve productivity and social activities, which are inarguably valid claims, however, the most notable motivation for studying literature is that we are human, and it is a part of us that is inseparable from the human experience.
ReplyDeletepart 1
ReplyDeleteAs someone who constantly gets in trouble for reading, it’s always nice to read scholarly articles that scientifically affirm the validity of my favorite pastime. I appreciate the researchers at The New School in New York City studying the tangible, outward effects of reading fiction novels in school children, stating that those who read literary fiction exemplify a great capacity for empathy and exhibit more tolerant social behavior (Chiaet). I agree with their conclusions, external to the methodology of their study, by corroborating evidence from my own life. The study introduces a caveat that concludes that literary fiction “focuses more on the psychology of the character and their relationships” compared with popular fiction (Chiaet). I will be the first to admit that I read entirely too much popular fiction and thoroughly enjoy it too. However, I’ve found that even while main characters of popular fiction novels are placed in supposedly real-world settings, using social media and making timely references, I connect more as a reader and a person to 19th century Pip crouching in the churchyard marshes than any teen protagonist from the current YA genre. I tend to find more of myself as a human being in books of literary merit. Whether that’s because the dissimilitude between Victorian literature and my own world leads to a heightened sense of abandonment, or rather Dickens is just a better author at exploring the human consciousness than Sarah Dessen will ever be, I’m not sure. Probably the combination of them both contributes to me connecting with characters in fiction, even when the protagonists don’t look, sound, or experience things the way I do. That’s one thing I really love about literature. No matter the author, genre, or cultural differences, quality literature transcends geographical locations and time periods to unite us in our need to express ourselves and be understood. And in that way, we become more empathetic people and better humans.
However, while nobody would stipulate that being increasingly empathetic is an inherently negative thing, I argue that we should never relegate the merits of literature to its ability to tangibly affect the real world. In fact, this type of study proving that literature helps kids in the real world is in direct conflict with the essence of why University of Chicago professor Karl Weintraub studies literature. He writes in a letter, “Why cannot you see that this matter is a real, real matter, often a matter of the very being, for the person, for the historical men and women you are looking at!” (Brooks). Literature isn’t for us; it’s a real thing that is happening to characters that we have the privilege of watching. This New York Times article enclosing this letter argues that the recent unpopularity of studying the humanities at the university-level can be attributed to the shift in humanities turning “from an inward to an outward focus” (Brooks).
part 2
ReplyDeleteWhen we start to try to justify the essence of literature and the humanities by looking for external markers, like a scientifically-trackable increase in empathy, we start to lose the spirit of what it means to be a human. The article by The New Yorker heartily agrees, including a quote from a “wise post-structuralist critic” answering the question of why he was professor of literature by stating “Because I have an obsessive relationship with texts” (Gopnik). The article spends most of its time giving credibility to opponent’s arguments including critic Lee Siegel’s question of “why don’t we just take books out of the academy, where they don’t belong, and put them back in the living room?” (Brooks). The answer: while it may be true that institutions have no reason to teach literature, they don’t need one since few institutions have a reason for existing in the first place (Gopnik). Gopnik’s argument for literature isn’t an argument at all, its merely an observation of the past and present. He argues, and I agree, that literature doesn’t need goal, reason, or justification to exist. It always has, and will continue to with, or without, our help. And that’s what makes it great. The Harvard Medical School Website agrees that to be a doctor, you don’t need to study a certain subject over another; the diligent study of anything is sufficient (Harvard). Harvard makes the assertion that it’s not so much of what you study, as how you study it. And I think that’s the point. We don’t study literature because we have to, or because we are weighing the external benefits the humanities will afford us. We study literature because we want to. Ultimately, literature is unique: it has a funny way of connecting us all on our basic, and maybe only, commonality as humans. And so even though we don’t need a reason to study it, we will continue to read and analyze literature just because we can.
Why study literature? Maybe this sounds like a question for Siri. In this twenty-first century era with state-of-the-art technology and more options for entertainment than ever, more and more people question the utility of literature. People are less willing than ever to engage with text on a page; in fact, the thought of slowing down our fast-paced lives to curl up with a book seems quite absurd. After all, the same book could be presented in a cinematic medium, with a large soda and popcorn, and one could cut down on their reading time to a brief two hours. This age of “snackable content” and instant gratification has not only reduced our attention spans to that of a goldfish but also made us forget how to interact with others. Literature is often dismissed as unnecessary, and true bibliophiles are often grouped in with “starving artists”. However, what we do not realize is that literature is essential to us as humans. While we can pose questions to Alexa and Google, some questions can only be answered by exploring our deepest innermost thoughts and having moments of introspection. While we may think text on pages is meaningless, we forget about the many human civilizations built on ancient scrolls and sacred texts. And while we can technically stay alive without literature, simply eating, sleeping, and breathing, literature is what enhances a life into a life well-lived; it challenges us intellectually and morally, causes us to learn more about ourselves and understand others better, and makes us human.
ReplyDeleteLiterature, first and foremost, is a form of entertainment. In the New Yorker article “Why Teach English”, Adam Gopnik succinctly describes reading as “the one kind of time travel that works”. Literature has an amazing quality of timelessness and possesses the ability to seemingly transport one, no matter the space-time continuum, to any place in time or history. It stimulates the mind and forces us to exercise our imagination, much like a calisthenics workout for intellectuals. Through our own skills of synthesis and analysis, we “connect dots” in an adult workbook, whether it be a novel or epic. Rather by coloring by number, we paint images in our minds with each character of text printed on the page. However, beyond entertainment, we unwittingly gain an even more valuable experience from reading literature; we can actually increase our capacity to relate to others and empathize with them, simply by reading --- literary fiction, that is. In “Novel Finding: Reading Literary Fiction Improves Empathy”, Julianne Chiaet describes scientific studies which have shown that people of all ages are better able to relate to others’ feelings after reading fiction. Because readers are often forced to fill in gaps in characters’ thoughts and motivations, they become more aware of others’ feelings who are different than themselves (Chiaet). Psychologist Emanuele Castano even suggests that autistic people can benefit from reading literary fiction, as a means of building social skills without the side-effects of pharmaceuticals. In building a better understanding of others’ thinking processes and personalities, literature could be conducive to better social awareness and sense of empathy.
And while literature-lovers have become synonymous to “the unemployed”, pursuing humanities majors or focuses could actually still lead to gainful employment. A Harvard Medical School study states that “students are successful in their medical studies regardless of undergraduate concentration”, and “no preference is given to applicants who have majored in the sciences over those who have majored in the humanities”. Literature can strengthen not only one’s intellectual repository for knowledge but also their communications skills, as well as their analytical and argumentative abilities. Reading is known to build vocabulary, but it can also be beneficial in building critical thinking skills necessary for many careers today. Further, beyond creative thinking and good writing, studying literature can lead to internal transformations, both in spiritual depth and personal integrity (Brooks). Literature challenges our preconceived notions. It makes us weigh right and wrong. It makes us ask the existential questions of life: our purpose, the meaning of our lives, what it truly means to be alive.
ReplyDeleteIt is easy to ask questions like “why study literature”, but it is exceedingly more difficult to provide answers. In the same way, literature challenges us to provide answers to ourselves. There is not necessarily ever a wrong answer, much creativity is allowed, and the responses will vary from person to person. However, it is through these challenges that we grow as people. It is up to us to place the “human” in “humanities”. Literature may not rouse a response in every person; many will interact with it as they do with other people --- dismiss it, and then proceed to stare at their phone screen. Nonetheless, literature will have its impact on those who chose to engage with it; like another person, it can provoke deep conversations, incite new interests and passions, or provide the support we need, letting us know that we are not the only ones to experience the many trials of life. And while you may learn a bit more about the author and the historical context of their life, you can also learn a bit more about yourself and the context of our own lives. It seems quite peculiar to ponder our lives in this fashion, but someday the years we were born will become a new section in a history textbook (though if this is a tangible book or something in the cloud, it is unclear). Literature may change in the format in which it is presented; perhaps hard-bound books are going out of style. However, no matter the binding or lack thereof, the ideas and connections we make can never be taken away. Literature is and always will be a staple of humanity and something that should be studied, and when it ceases to exist, I believe we will as well.
The question of “why study literature” is one that I believe that most of us in this class would know very well, as it is something many of our counselors asked us when we said we wanted to choose lit over lang. To them, studying literature was “impractical”, a course that would have no benefit unless you were to become an English major. But as Christina Paxson, the president of Brown University, states, “We do not always know the future benefits of what we study and therefore should not rush to reject some forms of research as less deserving than others.” Literature as an entity is something of immense depth and breath at the same time: breath, in the sense that it can span from many genres, styles, decades, etc, and depth, in the sense that it is purely focused on fiction. Having literature be fiction is one of the key selling points to why we should study it. It has been found that studying literary fiction has a significant impact on a reader’s ability to empathize with others (Chiaet). This is because of the difference in intent of literary fiction writing, compared to any other type of writing. Literature forces us as readers to take into account each character’s internal dialogue, thus increasing our understanding of how each person we encounter in real life has their own thing happening in their head that we might not know about (Chiaet). By doing this, literature enforces the idea of connecting to those who are different from us in ideas and personalities and in turn, makes us better people.
ReplyDeleteThis idea of literature using introspective thinking to help shape our view on the world is echoed by many past ideas on the humanities in general. The humanities, such as literature, have a duty to help cultivate the human core, the place in which outsiders learn about one’s beliefs, personality, intellectual intricacies, etc (Brooks). By studying literature, a person is able to get in touch with their human core and focus less on “outward” ideas such as social hierarchies and focus more on “inward” ideas such as honesty. I believe that this shift in perspective is another reason why we study literature. Especially in our current society, most conversations and personal identities are made up by outward focuses: gender, politics, races, etc (Brooks).
Pt. 2
ReplyDeleteJudgments are made based on these categories before people can even get to know one another. But, to make true judgments, analysis must be made on those inward focuses. Otherwise, we are only getting half of the picture. Literature helps enforce the notion of not judging a book by its cover. It asks for us to dig deep and try to find paths that could show us some sort of light within each character or person. The ability to do this digging is what helps build our abilities to relate to each other or find the smallest connections. These skills are needed in every job force, not just ones that center on English. Knowing this, it is clear to see why even applicants to medical school are expected to have some sort of study in the humanities (Harvard). Future medical professionals need the skills found in literature to be able to communicate with patients and develop good care conduct. As such, the ability to apply skills across two very different areas such as literature and medicine is proof that literature it not just for the study of English.
Literature, if nothing else, is a study of life itself. It is a study of other worlds, of futures, of pasts, of ourselves. We study literature because it broadens our minds and makes us think critically to find the symbolic purpose of each item (Gopnik). Literature is what shapes our ability to explain things, to tell people why something matters, and to create orderly discourse. We study literature not because it will make us seem smarter or more posh but because it will simply help us enjoy life more and endure it better (Gopnik). So, to say that we study literature for anything other than to increase our ability as people to be people would be false because, while we do learn new cool literary terms and analyze poems, literature, uninterrupted, is made only for that sole purpose.
(Part 1)
ReplyDeleteFor every one person that’s shocked about my four years of Latin study, there’s another person who’s even more shocked when I shrug off comments about how useless my four-year endeavor was. I freely admit I won’t be reading Latin newspapers over coffee every morning, that’s not my primary concern.
Often grouped with “useless” subjects like Latin is literature. One’s a dead language, and the other is seemingly dead in the heart of the masses. At the point where Harvard Medical School writes on their own admissions website that students are “successful (…) regardless of their undergraduate concentration,” why bother a flight of fancy like literature, when you could study biomedical engineering, organic chemistry, or physio-anatomy and get a leg up in your studies? Or maybe a leg up in the workforce later? To understand why we study “fruitless” subjects in general, we need to understand why we study literature first—and then everything else will fall into place.
In response to critics hurling insults like “worthless” and “impractical” towards studying literature, literature champions often come rushing to the scene armed with scientific studies and ardent pleas of its worth. For example, to defend reading literature, journalist Julianne Chiaet reports for the Scientific American that after participants read literary fiction, their capacity for empathy for reading improved “markedly” compared to genre-fiction readers and nonfiction readers. Op-ed columnist David Brooks appeals to skeptics by declaring that studying humanities—including subjects like literature—is necessary to “cultivate the human core.” The New Yorker staff writer Adam Gopnik plainly puts it that “we need the humanities (…) because we’re human.” While these are all well-intentioned, good defenses of studying literature, I maintain it doesn’t matter whether or not studying literature is useless or not. We should still do it regardless.
(Part 2)
ReplyDeleteThe reality is that arguments defending literature studies through the lens of utility disintegrate quickly. Chiaet’s report for the Scientific American doesn’t say people garner additional empathy points by studying literature, but just by reading it. Based on that study, for example, STEM majors don’t need to study literature in order to reap those empathy benefits. Brooks’ argument falls flat when one considers the fact that anyone passionate about a field will claim that it “cultivate[s] the human core.” Gopnik’s argument, however, is closer to the mark—and doesn’t collapse easily like the others’ arguments. Even if studying literature has no utilitarian value whatsoever, we should still study it—or at least have the option to study it—because it adds meaning to our lives and makes humanity “human.” If we lived our lives solely based off of utilitarianism, there’d no be need for parks, museums, festivals…. Hospitals, schools, and office buildings would just span for miles. And that’d be a bland existence for all of us. Studying literature doesn’t save as many lives as studying heart surgery, but discounting it solely because of a utilitarian paradigm is a mistake.
Then, what reasons left are there to study literature? To quote The Balloonist, “What good is it? Can you eat it? Will it carry you from Gothenburg to Malmö like a railway?” Defenses for studying literature don’t have to answer any of those questions. Studying literature is worthwhile purely because it’s enjoyable. Gopnik himself admits the best argument for studying literature he heard was from a literature professor who justified his study by saying he had an “obsessive relationship with texts.” It’s the same reason why some people play basketball and I don’t. They love the thrill of making a jump shot, while I’m less enthused by the thought of my glasses getting smashed in the process. Activities don’t have to be 100% practical to be gratifying. Like playing basketball, studying literature doesn’t directly produce mass-manufactured goods, nor does it contribute to a large portion of our nation’s GDP. But that doesn’t matter. It’s just fun. And that’s a good enough reason to keep studying it.
Sure, studying literature isn’t everyone’s calling. The themes in Jane Eyre that thrill me probably bore someone else to tears. But for those who love it, studying literature makes life worth living—and that’s true for art, Latin, and all the other “impractical” subjects out there. The answer to “why bother” with any these subjects isn’t really that profound. It’s just a pleasure for those who enjoy these subjects, and it would be a shame for them not to. I have fun picking apart Latin texts. I have even more fun dissecting authors’ hidden meanings in AP Literature. I don’t have to do these “useless” activities, but, man, are they delightful—and make my life one that I look forward to living.
Not only do the humanities “produce creative thinking, good writing, spiritual depth, [and] personal integrity”, but they also “cultivate the human core, the part of a person we might call the spirit” (Brooks). The study of humanities contributes to who we grow into, and is the extent of our socialization skills. The more we’re exposed to the humanities- and even more specifically, literature- the more we can understand what’s taking place in the chaotic world we live in. By using literature as a tool, we can craft our own perception of the feelings we- and the people around us- experience.
ReplyDeleteSimply reading literary fiction “improves a reader’s capacity to understand what others are thinking and feeling” (Chiaet). When reading literature, we’re also adding social skill bricks to our wall of personal actions and emotions. This certain genre of work “focuses more on the psychology of characters and their relationships” (Chiaet). Apart from subconsciously giving our brains a social sciences lecture, literature also gives us a break from our hardships.
On a broader level, humanities is one of the few subjects that can be broached with an exploratory and unhindered mind. It allows us to “enjoy life and endure it better,” without the burden of judgment or one taking offense to an observation (Gopnik). Reading and writing have remained some of the oldest forms of idea spreading, whether it be considered propaganda or a work worth of literary merit. The same is true today.
Present-day literature has expanded into something much larger than one’s own opinion. Certain people naturally get along with other like-minded people, and works of literature may either affirm their beliefs and speculations about our world, or they may change them. At the very least, we’ve determined “some idea of symbolic purpose, of pleasure is essential to human existence,” and literature provides both purpose and pleasure to insatiably curious minds (Gopnik).
We study literature to encourage independent thinking, and to be exposed to a very “valuable socializing influence” (Chiaet). Even Harvard agrees literature is so potent, it aids students when it comes to “a balanced and liberal education rather than specialized training” in a subject other than the humanities (Harvard). The very essence of literature’s purpose is to “[educate] emotions with art in order to refine it”; it allows us to become free thinkers and transcend the triteness of our everyday lives (Brooks). Literature is the key to social interaction and bettering our independent minds. Without the opportunity to study it, we’d be confined to spoonfed ideas, and so absorbed in our own lives we wouldn’t think about others or how to communicate with them. So it goes.
Literature has always been and will always be a staple in our culture and in our society. Through this medium, an infinite number of ideas and philosophies have been dissected and preserved for future generations to explore. Through this medium, we get to explore the minds of depraved outcasts and angelic Samaritans alike. Through this medium, we as humans get to contemplate the nature and reality of our existence. Literature educates mankind and facilitates civilization. Without it, humanity simply would not be what it is.
ReplyDeleteIn his article for The New Yorker, Adam Wipnok asks the reader, “Whence, where, and why the English major?” One easy answer would be the love of literature. Those who love a classic tale about the American dream or a winding journey into the heart of Africa would certainly have a future in the humanities aspect of higher education. Those who are willing to dive headfirst deep into a story are people who will put their all into soaking in and digesting whatever they find. As a result, they will find themselves feeling more enriched emotionally, intellectually, and philosophically. They might not understand Newton’s third law of thermodynamics, but they will possess a more thorough understanding of “‘the dark vast forest’” (Brooks). If the job of those in the sciences is to push the boundaries of innovation, then the job of those in the humanities is to push further into this ‘deep, vast, forest’ and cultivate it so that the rest of mankind may lead more enriching and fruitful lives. Unlike many areas of study, literature does not take you on a journey outward, but on a journey inward. Such ventures have grown less popular through the years. As Brooks states, because “many in the humanities have lost faith in this uplifting mission, the humanities turned from an inward to an outward focus.” Literature has never been and will never be a journey outward, which sets it apart even more from the rest and does not help its case in the public eye.
Despite public perception, Harvard Medical School only requires that students have had “adequate science preparation” before applying because “a study has shown that students are successful in the medical field regardless of undergraduate concentration” (Harvard). In other words, it does not matter whether a student majored in the sciences or the humanities. Those who major in the sciences may have more technical knowledge than those who majored in the humanities, but those who major in the humanities possess a more expansive understanding of the essence of a human being. An undervalued but critical skill that those in the medical field must possess is empathy. A successful doctor must be able to empathize and interact smoothly with every single one of his or her clients. A study conducted by social psychologist Emanuele Castano and PhD candidate David Kidd showed that kids who read literary fiction got better results on “a test that measured their ability to infer and understand other people’s thoughts and emotions” (Chiaet). In other words, those who read literary fiction became more empathetic. Those who read other genres did not improve their emotional quotients. These results align with the original purpose of the study of literature: to find truths deep within the human mind and soul.
In conclusion, exposure to literature can only benefit the human mind. Literature gives one a better understanding of the world and of the self. Put shortly, the study of literature should not be a choice. Like it or not, we all have to do it, because literature makes us who we are
(Part 1)
ReplyDeleteI think we have all reached a point when we stop to ask, “Why and what am I doing?” It is not a moment of reaching peak confusion, but rather at the tip of clarity. Questioning why we have faith is an opportunity to investigate on a deeper level our motivation and potential gains. And as I devote a minimum of one hour a day in my schedule to study literature, it is important to question, “why?” I believe that literature is important because it challenges readers to be better human beings, it is not less valuable than other studies, and literature is a fulfilling way to spend our time.
First, literature can be used as a device to practice empathy. Of course, reading literary fiction does not make you automatically a good person (Gopnik), there are sadly plenty of well-read but nasty and mean people out there. Literature may educate people about the struggles of war, but taking a step to protest war is another matter. Yet, educating why it is important to protest war is can be done through literature. And evidence shows that specifically literature can help children become more empathetic because, “This genre [literary fiction] prompts the reader to imagine the characters’ introspective dialogues.” Source B (Chiaet). Literature challenges readers to consider another viewpoint, to consider the pains and triumphs of another person’s life. This person may be fictional, but that is not important. Like scientists experimenting with models of real scenarios, literature is a model for real life. And as Phil from Breaking Down the Walls and Link Crew says, “It is hard to hate someone whose story you know”. This is how people become more empathetic to literature. Common experiences expressed in literature are intense loneliness, or struggles with self-identity, and confusion with love. Literature tries to unpack these questions that keep you up at night and makes us better humans in that way. Studying literature is important because it practices being a better communicator and listener. Good listening includes absorbing the meaning of what is being said. Literature teaches important lessons, such as “. They support and teach us values about social behavior, such as the importance of understanding those who are different from ourselves.” This practices empathy, which makes us better human beings. Empathy is the string tying people together. Empathy is a mirror to understand our own pain.
Studying literature is important not just because of the lessons that can be absorbed through great works, such as To Kill a Mockingbird or The Catcher in the Rye, but the act of thinking critically is significant as well. This is a skill that can be applied in any field of life. Studying literature admittedly will not lead to stable jobs like accounting (Brooks). And the study of literature is suffering internally because people are embarrassed to be a lit major for the sake of being a lit major. Often, literature is injected with political dogma in an attempt to make it seem more relevant. But this attempt to justify literature fails to accept the simple truth that literature is enjoyable. Instead, it tries to impress people looking in and judging the importance of literature. And studying literature is not less valuable, as even Harvard Medical School shows, “students are successful in their medical studies regardless of undergraduate concentration, providing that they have had adequate science preparation” Source C (Harvard).
(Part 2)
ReplyDeleteTherefore, the study of literature still holds value. Indeed, this sounds foreign in a society and a culture that places so much emphasis on STEM subjects. Not to discredit STEM subjects, who themselves had to undergo a repackaging of sorts in recent years to attract more people. And support for innovation in STEM is incredibly important in modern life. But to idealize STEM as the only successful path is damaging to society. The world needs a diversity of people. Literature is a path to achieve success, even Harvard Medical School will not, “No preference is given to applicants who have majored in the sciences over those who have majored in the humanities” (Harvard).
Lastly, studying literature is important because it is simply an enjoyable way to spend the time. Literature is the result of human consciousness. Even though the numbers of graduates of humanities have been declining, I doubt the number of avid readers is also declining. This is because studying literature will continue exist, as long as books also continue to exist. As Gopnik puts it, “One might call this a natural or inevitable consequence of literacy” (Gopnik). The “inward” function of studying humanities has not received as much attention in recent years but are still important in why we study literature (Brooks). Not only is literature just fun to read and enjoy, it investigates readers’ inner workings. Studying literature also connects humans to generations of knowledge. Being well read is still valued in society because having knowledge of books of literary merit opens up opportunities for discussions. These discussions can be forums to exchange reading experiences, and to provide unique perspectives. For example, studying Pride and Prejudice disproved my falsely held notion that all women in the past were demure. In the beginning, I thought it was another dense Victorian/Regency novel about women being pushed aside for a man’s marriage. Until, I reached the part where Elizabeth Bennet rejects Mr. Darcy’s proposal. The character of Elizabeth Bennet is complex and self-reliant, and a reflection that strong women did exist in that time. Austen is proof, and I saw that proof through Pride and Prejudice.
Literature expands minds and worlds, and it is valuable to devote time and effort into this study. Of course, not everyone should or can be an English major; like how not everyone can be a professional baseball player or painter. But the world would be a less vibrant place without them.
When watching a movie that was originally a novel, I have constantly been disappointed. I would imagine more glorious deaths in battles, cuter boys than Josh Hutcherson, more chemistry between characters, etc. But with the reasoning behind the disappointment of movies comes the reasoning behind beauty of reading: our imagination. The director of the movie, the author of the novel, and each individual in the fan base will all have differing opinions about the movie in relation to the novel because everyone interrupts the book differently. Some might love how the movie depicted the deaths in battle since it was everything they wanted and more; some might love that they used Josh Hutcherson since that is what they pictured as the main character when reading; and some might think the chemistry was PERFECT because that is exactly how they imagined it to be. In novels, because characters’ are often given seldom details of their life and the interconnections and opinions of anything and everything in the world, “We’re forced to fill in the gaps to understand their intentions and motivations, Kidd says.” Scientific American(Julianne Chiet). We assume their likes and dislikes, sometimes even relating to the characters themselves or their situations, which allows us to have a deeper connection with the novel, to learn lessons which applies to our everyday life, or even to learn more about ourselves. Reading and studying literature “prompts the reader to imagine the characters’ introspective dialogues,” Scientific American(Julianne Chiet), and “the characters disrupt reader expectations, undermining prejudices and stereotypes” which allows us to “support and [learn] values about social behavior, such as the importance of understanding those who are different from ourselves.”-Scientific American(Julianne Chiet). Reading allows us to become more empathetic and permits us to answer the “why” questions we ask daily. We can view life from a myriad of perspectives, social class, race, gender, etc of any era., while seeing the growth and inner turmoil of different characters. Hence, it provides us a glimpse of the world that transcends space and time because it allows the author to communicate with many generations of readers.
ReplyDelete