1.After I read Jonathan Culler’s chapter on “What is literature and does it matter?,” the author gives a definition of literature,”Literature, is a speech act or textual event that elicits certain kinds of attention.” However, the definition is not very clear. In this chapter Culler refers to the difference between literature and non-literature, but there is no practical difference between the two to distinguish literature from non-literature. Because literature is defined subjectively, it depends on whether it is endowed with emotions and thoughts that transcend words and connect the author with the reader. I think defining literature is not necessary but it’s a positive thing.Because the distinction between literature is a subjective concept, masterpieces such as “Hamlet” “The Old Man and the Sea” must be called literature, but there are many more books or articles that fall somewhere between literature and non-literature.This can be controversial because everyone’s subjective impressions are different. So I don’t think it’s necessary to define literature. But when you want to read a good book, a literary book. We can look for it on a label. And when reading this book, as a reader, you can have a connection with an author you’ve never met before (who may have been far away from your country or left the world hundreds of years ago), so I think it’s a positive thing and a positive thing.
2.The question that stays with me as I read this chapter was,Is it true that when an article or a poem is defined as literature, its value is higher than that of non-literature? Is the “value” of literature imagined? Because the word does not change before and after it is defined as literature, but its value is changed.
This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.
Hello Jinde!
I thought the same thing. It’s hard to distinguish what is literature or not. Like most works of art, i.e music, comedy, paintings, poems, our thoughts on what’s considered “legitimate” or not can be largely subjective. Works can resonate with individuals and thus can be defined as “literature” but the opposite is true as well. I enjoyed reading this 🙂
I think when a poem or an article is defined as literature, it has a special structure, so we can distinguish and categorize it. I don’t think that the “value” of being defined as literature itself is going to be higher. Books are for the reader as long as the reader can understand and learn that means the book is valuable to the reader. I think any Works can resonate with individuals and thus can be defined as “literature value”
I found your question interesting that if the article or poem is a work of literature does its value get higher? I think that a work of literature may attract a few readers but it doesn’t make the value higher.
Yes what are the standards to define what is literature and what is not !