Thursday, February 2, 2012

Johnson's Novel

Both Johnson and Lamb comment extensively on the role of books and literature. Johnson suggest that books are pivotal to the growth of a person. He claims that a proper, well educated person has expertise in three main fields- reading, writing, and conversing. A balance between these three areas becomes critical in ensuring that an individual is adequately able to create their own thoughts while communicating it effectively with others. On the other hand, in his first article, Johnson exalts literature's ability to frame human minds, but warns against its dangers. Literature, he suggests, should have characters that are the epitome of Virtue, one's that embody all aspects of goodness while neglecting the negative aspects of humanity. Lamb, on the other hand, comments on the pleasure that reading provides. The personal connection that one feels when being immersed in a novel, and the fulfillment acquired after finishing it. 
I agree with both these authors for the most part; my contention, however, lies with Johnson's claims on the responsibility of the novel and of authors. I've never quite viewed the priority of books to be to create illusions for people to live by. As cliche and cheesy as it is, for me, literature has always been about exploring human nature at its finest. The role of literature has never been one of falsification, rather, it is one that is in pursuit of the truth. Are humans the epitome of virtue? I think it's hard to argue so, but despite our flaws and imperfections, literature has a way of showing how marvelous the world is despite our seemingly insignificant existence. Literature, more than anything, is what has brought people together, it has crossed religious, political, temporal, and spatial, boundaries. The classics have been read throughout time, just as modern thought and philosophy is rooted in writings centuries old. As such, I challenge Johnson's statement with this: the role of literature is not to falsify human nature, but reveal it for what it is, its flaws, imperfections, marvel, and beauty. A understanding of that, and an observance of how people truly are, will, I think impact people even more so than creating a false delusion.

1 comment:

  1. Hi Karthik--

    Interesting! Most of us now would agree with you, of course. But those of the eighteenth century were particularly vexed by the danger that novel readers might mirror what they read, an argument that parallels that of those who argue re: violence in video games today.

    Right or wrong, what impact does understanding the presence of this alternate historical view of the novel and reading have on your readings/interpretations of it? Perhaps more interestingly, how might you/we discuss the different kinds of impact a unrealistic but didactic novel (all Virtue) and a more psychologically realistic work (open-ended) might have on readers? What of children's literature?

    best,
    NP

    p.s. You might take a look at "...I'm not good at titles" who's discussing some similar issues.

    ReplyDelete