"He knew everything about literature except how to enjoy it."
--Joseph Heller
Some opening notes:
First off, I keep three blogs (albeit irregular, despite all attempts to change that), so I clearly love writing, and have no doubts that learning to write is a valuable skill learned in English.
(oh-- last week, I decided to take a small hiatus due to the fact that I was incredibly busy moving into the dorms and downloading LOTRO, but I'm back up again for now)
Secondly, I have about a billion million books that take up ridiculous amounts of space all over the room, so I clearly love reading, and while I get jealous of those people in my classes who always seem to be one step ahead of me in book-reading, I love to discuss books with them that we both have read even more.
And finally, I am an English major, so anybody whining about having to take English classes should know that I have very little sympathy for them.
However, since the uses of English/Literature classes aren't always obvious to those non-humanities people (as opposed to the uses of math and science classes, which are pretty obvious to most people, major or no), I thought I would write a blog explaining my personal point of view on the subject. Anybody is welcome to correct me, add on, or explain their own opinion on the subject.
When I was a senior in high school, I took a course called "Gods and Monsters" that looked at books concerning human nature, and what it means to be human. The course itself was fascinating, and I loved the required texts, which varied from Shakespeare's Macbeth to No Country for Old Men to the Bacchae of Euripedes to The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, and more. The varied lit assignments allowed me to see a running theme throughout all of them, of the Apollonian/Dionysian conflicting natures that seem as critical to writers from ancient Greece as they are to authors today, and of the good/evil barrier that doesn't seem to really exist as much in a single person as it does somewhere in the outside world, and of the question of insanity, and the line between that and genius.
I loved it.
Of course, there was that one day where some kid raised his hand in a class discussion and said, "What is the point of English?" in a tone indicating he clearly thought himself to be quite a witty and discerning student. I had seen this kind of thing before, in which case the teacher tended to brush it off with something in the manner of, "Of course you can't live without English, silly! We all speak English, and these books are classics! And you have to learn to write someday, when you are writing big business deals!" However, the mistake with that answer is that this is simply bait for the student: "How come these books are classics? They are so boring! I can't even understand what Shakespeare is saying...and I thought Mr. Hyde was going to kill people. And you don't have to write like this to get by."
I will never forget how my teacher answered. Well, okay, I did forget. I mean, I forgot the words he said, but I remember the marrow of his answer, which I will try and explain.
When you read a book, you're not just reading into the plot, but into the writing itself, and into the author's life, and the lives that the author saw and wrote in his/her text. When books last hundreds of years, they do so because there is something timeless about the writing, whether it's the plot, the content, the characters, or some intangible idea that resonates for some unknowable reason-- they don't last because they sold well at the time. I think it is rare that a book lasts because every aspect of it is timeless. I can't think of a single example off the top of my head. Maybe it is impossible.
But, should a good book fall into thousands of years of unheard-of writing just because some small aspect of seemed to grow dated?
If you say no, then stop reading and go finish up whatever book you are currently reading.
If you say, but the book wasn't that good to begin with, then we're beginning to talk about opinion on what kinds of books we like. I like a lot of classic literature, but I can't stand Jane Austen. That doesn't mean I think her books have no value-- it's just of a type that isn't for me.
A good book (there are a million billion ways to finish this sentence-- here's my take:) should explain an aspect of nature in a way that is beautiful, thought-provoking, and subtle. You should know when you've read a good piece of literature because it gives you more questions to turn over in your head than answers. Literature doesn't have all the answers, but the questions (for answers, go to the reference section, or the internet if you're feeling particularly brave).
If you're reading for historical reasons, then you want to learn something about the time period. If you're reading because your friend read something and loved it, then you're finding out what (s)he is interested in reading. You can also read to escape life, to pass the time, to think, to or to be up to date with some current subject-- and don't get me wrong, these are all perfectly great reasons for reading, and the majority of reasons, too. But if you are reading literature for the sake of finding out what it has to offer (which can overlap with a number of those previous reasons), than keep this question in mind: What does the author think about humanity as a whole? Once you have that, then you're on the right reading track. Hold onto that thought. Because, ultimately, people are self-centered, and the most you will get out of a book in your entire life-- the book that impacts you more than any other book-- will not tell you about humanity, or nature, or God, or life.
It will tell you something about yourself.
This is what my teacher said: "I hope that in some small way, by the time you finish my course, you will have learned something about who you are as a person."
Here, the books have no answers, because only we have the answers. The books, instead, help us to ask ourselves the right questions, and then once we are able to find them, we feel more comfortable with what we believe, and what we decide to stand for.
Of course, in doing this, you (as the reader) can also see the rest of the world in a light that makes a little more sense, because in the end, English isn't about who has read the most books or who knows the most about the "real" classic authors, but instead about what literature has done for you in terms of understanding yourself, and the world around you.
If you read, then at some point, a single author, book, or even sentence will suddenly strike a chord with you and you will immediately realize how the words simply make perfect sense, illuminating life, the world around you, and therefore yourself. You will feel as if you can see the entire world and the way it works and turns as a whole, and how you simultaneously fit into the world and stand beautifully on your own. While this may last a single second, a day, or maybe the rest of your life, that moment is absolutely worth reading literature for, and what I would think of if I ever needed a reason.
