Is there such a thing as "good literature"? I'm currently studying to become a professor who will teach young students Spanish grammar and literature. The big majority of my classmates are really int

Lis Duclos

Is there such a thing as "good literature"? I'm currently studying to become a professor who will teach young students Spanish grammar and literature. The big majority of my classmates are really into literature, and they all have strong positions on how and what one should teach to the students. I had an argument the other day because of this. I told a classmate that I didn't think literature could be studied. Looking at a book through the eyes of a scientist just kills the reason the book was made for. She replied that she thought that was the best part of reading a book, trying to figure out what the author tried to say. I said it was meaningless. A book reflects the reader, not the author. One should figure out the meaning of a book for oneself, in a way that serves the understanding of oneself and nothing else. I'm against placing a book into structures and schools that obviously can't explain the book as a whole. I have two categories when it comes to books: I liked it / I didn't like it. That is all. I just can't say if it was good or bad. My classmate didn't agree with this either. She said that, for example, Harry Potter or the likes of it don't teach you anything, so they can't be considered "good literature" and shouldn't be taught at school. What is "good literature"? What do you mean with "it doesn't teach you anything"? Does any book do that? We need to make something clear: literature, like every artistic practice, IS COMPLETELY USELESS. I can perfectly make it through life without ever reading Shakespeare, and even without knowing who he was. Reading Shakespeare or reading J.K. Rowling will give me the same completely useless wisdom. So, just let the kids read what they like and what is significant to them, and let them decide which books are essential, or else they might end saying Shakespeare is "good literature" just because a professor told them so, and not because they truly believe it. The real job of a literature professor is not creating a fake literature sensitivity in kids, but making sure the kid won't think "literature is not for me". There are all kinds of books, and you don't have to like the one your professor told you to. There's one book waiting for you, go and find it! Your professor should give you plenty of options. What do you guys think?

Sep 2, 2014 9:04 PM

Corrections · 4

"yes, there is indeed such a thing as "good" literature, and the fact that you have a developed a category for yourself such as "liked" and "disliked" means that you've understood this" No, that just means that her/our body respond positevely to a piece of work not because it's inherently good but because of a reason we can't understand. Maybe that book reminds you of a past personal experience or it shares with you some personal concept, much probably because we are able to symphathize with the characters, and for an evolutionary mechanism that brings pleasurably towards people, but to say that you like something because it's objectively good it's really illogical. If that was the case then why don't you like what others like? Because everyone has a different taste for what it's good, but this would only be a subjective judgment not an objective one. There's no way to say that a book from Dante is better than a Marcel Proust's book. "reserve the right the call someone who falls into that category, an idiot... " Someone else will call this way of reasoning Stupid, with the capital S but I won't. You're just saying that what your emotions tell you to like is good while what others like, if you consider it bad, can't be good. No way to prove that what you like is good.

September 3, 2014

To answer your question though: yes, there is indeed such a thing as "good" literature, and the fact that you have a developed a category for yourself such as "liked" and "disliked" means that you've understood this. The problem however, is that the standard of literature these days has dropped to such a deplorable standard that few can discern between what is actually "good", or worth reading. I am astonished at what manages to get published actually, so much contemporary literature seems to the same... Parodies, each of each other. Everything which is written, seems to be written, with the expressed purpose of the work being developed into a movie, or TV series, or some other puerile derivative. Apart from this, it is just POORLY written. You must admit, if only for the fact that that a novel might be poorly written, this would tend to weaken the "art" aspect of novel... Making it less likely to be "good." And this is the state of much contemporary literature: bad. I've not even broached the aspect of a piece of literature being beneficial or not... But of course if something is poorly offers no insight, and leaves you with very little real world value, then of course that novel would be deemed insignificant. And would be more deserving of the title "bad". Now, of course someone can like something thats "bad," and they might dislike something which is "good." This is human nature... Illogical. But I do however, reserve the right the call someone who falls into that category, an idiot... You don't eat junk food 24/7 and expect to avoid obesity. Adios.

September 2, 2014

One of the most ill-considered posts I've ever had the displeasure of coming across. So here we are? Your argument is that literature reflects the reader, not the author, and as such, it can mean anything? Such reasoning is fallacious. You imply that a reader may derive anything from a source of literature, even that which the writer had not, or could not, have intended. It is true that a piece of literature may "inspire" something (anything in fact), within a particular reader, but I assure you that a writer writes with a specific purpose and a refined intention, thus what the writer intends to inspire is calculated, and critical analyses of the work is encouraged.

September 2, 2014

"I have two categories when it comes to books: I liked it / I didn't like it. That is all. I just can't say if it was good or bad." I finally found someone like me who has understand the truth regarding the absence of objective qualities such as good/bad, ugly/beautiful. It's the same thing with music, there's no good music or bad music. The only undisputable thing is that you can like a song or not but you can't say that it's a good or a bad one because no one has an objective tool to judge it objectively.

September 2, 2014

Want to progress faster?

Join this learning community and try out free exercises!