|
|
Post by Marina on Jun 7, 2011 21:06:04 GMT -5
I'll bring this up again.
What about works that become the definition of their genre? Or the canon?
i.e. Sherlock Holmes as the father of mystery/detective genre.
I understand it might have not been the first, but it's what people might think of when thinking of detective novels.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eternal Lobster on Jun 7, 2011 21:06:55 GMT -5
So you would say that that novel has absolutely no literary value?! : P I'm going to quote Dodger because I think trashy novels are "something read for consumption (by horny women) rather than knowledge or thought. It's something you read in order to read, rather than something thought-provoking or without deeper meaning. It's shallow." I am going to counter this with: www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/ |
|
|
|
Post by Dodger Thirteen on Jun 7, 2011 21:09:23 GMT -5
Your original definition of literature must be revised to be "written word which provokes thought." Agreed, though it should be "meaningful thought" or something similar. |
|
|
|
Post by Marina on Jun 7, 2011 21:14:13 GMT -5
Their first post is about Richard Armitage being on a cover of a trashy romance novel. Quick I need $5.99! |
|
|
|
Post by Dodger Thirteen on Jun 7, 2011 21:15:04 GMT -5
Their first post is about Richard Armitage being on a cover of a trashy romance novel. Quick I need $5.99! Hynegh, Richard Armitage.... <3 |
|
|
|
Post by Marina on Jun 7, 2011 21:17:51 GMT -5
Eternal Lobster used Richard Armitage. It's Super Effective!
|
|
|
|
Post by Dodger Thirteen on Jun 7, 2011 21:20:37 GMT -5
Back on topic....
Okay, so the proposed definition is: "Literature is the written word that provokes (meaningful) thought."
Accepted? Nay-sayers? Indifferents?
|
|
rayyychul
Armadillo
On ne voit bien qu'avec le c?ur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux.
Posts: 159
|
Post by rayyychul on Jun 7, 2011 21:21:50 GMT -5
I think that a piece of work becomes literature as soon as the aesthetic of the text elicits emotions from the reader. Does the beauty of the phone book turn you on? Then by all means, let it be literature! But what if I get angry reading a sign that says "DONT TRED ON THE GRASS"? Is that literature? It's elicited emotion, but... Is it literature? I'm inclined to a big, fat no. I'd be inclined to agree with you if a sign offered its reader any aesthetic. Aesthetic (as I intended it to be) is a philosophy that deals with the nature of beauty and art (among other several things). Is the sign art? I'm sure you could find a way to argue that it is, but I would disagree. The sign's purpose is not to inspire, nor does it hold any cultural significance. Its purpose is to keep people off some old codger's grass. Therefore, I would argue that literature is art. Prose, drama, poetry, etc. are the reflected results of an author who wishes to convey a message or issue through his writing. They inspire and they hold cultural significance. The "art" is the writer's choice of words and images (the aesthetic; the beauty or the ugliness that he chooses to depict). When the aesthetic of the art evokes emotion from the reader (which it almost always will), then it can be defined as "literature." |
|
|
|
Post by Eternal Lobster on Jun 7, 2011 21:21:55 GMT -5
Eternal Lobster used Richard Armitage. It's Super Effective! I smell a new Armadillo. "Dispute meaning of literature with fellow majors. Use Richard Armitage to resolve argument" |
|
|
|
Post by Dodger Thirteen on Jun 7, 2011 21:22:58 GMT -5
Eternal Lobster used Richard Armitage. It's Super Effective! I smell a new Armadillo. "Dispute meaning of literature with fellow majors. Use Richard Armitage to resolve argument" SUBMIT IT! |
|
|
|
Post by Fuck Yeah Dion on Jun 7, 2011 21:23:34 GMT -5
Broad, yes, but inclusive. As I said, it is difficult to determine an all-inclusive definition, sadly. I really do think this would be a fascinating discussion topic for Sigma Tau next year. I am curious as to how you would describe the other side of literature's coin. Because I think (?) that we are all agree that there is an opposite to literature, or else how can you define it? I think that the definition of the word can be very gray but there is still something that defines it differently from everything else. Am I making sense? I don't think there is an opposite to literature. |
|
|
|
Post by Marina on Jun 7, 2011 21:23:39 GMT -5
But what about "literature" books that don't? For example I may be completely indifferent to Dickens. Again, we're back to the reader's opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dodger Thirteen on Jun 7, 2011 21:24:41 GMT -5
I am curious as to how you would describe the other side of literature's coin. Because I think (?) that we are all agree that there is an opposite to literature, or else how can you define it? I think that the definition of the word can be very gray but there is still something that defines it differently from everything else. Am I making sense? I don't think there is an opposite to literature. I feel inclined to state that is because you don't believe there is such a thing as literature, based on your use of an italicized "if" in a previous statement. |
|
|
|
Post by Fuck Yeah Dion on Jun 7, 2011 21:24:56 GMT -5
I'll bring this up again. What about works that become the definition of their genre? Or the canon? i.e. Sherlock Holmes as the father of mystery/detective genre. I understand it might have not been the first, but it's what people might think of when thinking of detective novels. I think the canon is a really dangerous thing to include in the definition of literature, since it's overwhelmingly western white dudes teaching the works of other western white dudes (although thats been changing a bit in the last thirty or forty years). |
|
|
|
Post by Fuck Yeah Dion on Jun 7, 2011 21:27:05 GMT -5
I don't think there is an opposite to literature. I feel inclined to state that is because you don't believe there is such a thing as literature, based on your use of an italicized "if" in a previous statement. True, but if literature does exist, then I wouldn't give it an opposite. Like, I would never say something like "erotica isn't literature" or "Twilight isn't literature." I feel like those arguments are just pretentious and judgmental. |
|
