It always amazes me when I hear about the dwindling literary readership. The subject comes up in meetings for The Missouri Review from time to time, noted with apathy or lament or sometimes just this simple observation: people care less about literature now than fifty or a hundred years ago. Matt Pearce compared the modern literary scene to tundra in his last blog entry on this site, and that’s not far off.
But this reality astonishes me. The average person’s potential to achieve and learn has increased exponentially in the last hundred years, and even more dramatically in the last ten years, in the last five, even. In America and elsewhere, modern access to knowledge presents a potent vehicle for education. Sure, college costs soar and the professional educational system can, in many cases, be in shambles, but I’m talking about something a little deeper and more important than that.
Let me explain.
A scene from the movie Good Will Hunting always stands out in my mind. The genius protagonist, Will, is looking to impress a woman in a bar and gets into a confrontation with a young Harvard know-it-all. Will shows up the Harvard guy by quoting from textbooks to tear the other man’s arguments to shreds. Finally he takes a jab at the expensive college education itself: “Fifty years from now you’re gonna do some thinking on your own and realize,” Will says, “that you wasted $150,000 on an education that you could’ve gotten for $1.50 in late charges at the public library.”
This statement really hit home with my young mind in the late ’90s. A person with a will to read and learn can walk into any library and open almost any book from the evolving canon of world literature.
The last decade has offered even more opportunities with the onset of the digital age. Not only do books exist for free at the local library, but older books are found in their entirety online. Websites like Bartleby and Project Gutenberg present countless works of prose and poetry that are no longer copyrighted. I interned for a political campaign in 2006 for a few weeks and read about half of This Side of Paradise online on my down hours.
Now, more than ever in history, any person on the streets can choose to learn anything they want from a library or a website. One might imagine this would produce the most enlightened generation ever, a world of streetside Shakespeares and coffeeshop Newtons. Yet it’s not the case, and to all of you reading this, I’m essentially asking you why.
Sure, I’ve got some of my own ideas. Just look back through the TMR Blog for some good starting points. My last entry mentioned a British publisher cutting classics down in size for more convenient reads. Alex Streiff talked about the lack of letter writing and the breakdown of eloquent communication. Patrick referenced financial blows to the independent publishing industry. Increasingly a gap separates the literary audience and the broader population, which seems a bit bizarre. The world’s poised for a new and wider-ranging renaissance, given our new options and access to knowledge–people would just have to want it first.
What’s happening to the literary readership? Is it still out there, perhaps transforming with the new trends in media and communication? Maybe a person who in decades past would have been a famed poet now seizes the opportunities and creative outlets of YouTube. Perhaps those who would have relished the restless prose of Marcel Proust a half century ago now find more satisfaction in a good HBO series they rented on DVD. I don’t know. I’m curious about your thoughts.
An Acquired Taste. That’s what one needs to read and enjoy literary fiction. A commitment to hard work and letting go of quick fix mentality also help. Same thing goes for good music. Good art. Good food. Robert Henri (The Art Spirit) said, “Art when really understood is the province of every human being. It is simply a question of doing things, anything, well.” I’m from Mississippi, and I think one reason we’ve got so many good authors down here is because we haven’t quite caught up with the pace of the rest of the country. [Some of us] still prefer to sit on the front porch or walk on the beach and look at the beauty all around us and talk with each other, rather than numbing our senses with a steady flow of electronic vibrations. Our only real distraction down here lately has been the mosquitoes. And you know, if you’re reading a really good book, you don’t notice them so much. Enjoyed the chat, John. Please visit my blog at http://wwwpenandpalette-susancushman.blogspot.com/.
I’d like very much to believe that I am somehow better for having read piles of books, that my mode of existence has been and is superior and more refined than those folks who choose to spend their time otherwise. However, I can’t really manage to believe that. Readers are chronic escapist. We are the people who knew long ago that there were better places to be than our own living rooms. We can’t condemn the people who choose to do what we do, only choose a more immediate and concise medium for doing it.
As for the death of literature, I’m more inclined to see it as on the brink of a major evolutionary leap. The Internet (intentionally capitalized to indicate its almost godlike potential) is reinventing all forms of media. Musicians are making it to the top of the charts without ever drawing the attention of the recording studios. Blogs are followed more religiously than newspapers – newspapers which have gained the reputation of being tainted by corporate patronage. Videos on YouTube have more viewers than some of the top rated television programs. All these things being true, I can’t help but wonder if the reason [i]literature[/i] (italicized for it’s godlike self-image) isn’t doing itself a grave disservice by standing aloof and suggesting that only words printed on paper are significant, as if a tree must be laid on a sacrificial alter in order to appease the gods (who are not the book publishers or the literary magazine editors but rather the folks who will not defile their passion with the tools of popular culture).
Ally
I tuned into your blog, afraid a bit of writing procrastination on my part, and found you were talking about something that’s been bugging me too. I added a bit about this into a non-fiction piece I recently finished – wondering why anyone would want to write a “literary” novel, why there are so many writing programs in the US now – think it’s over 600 when it was at about 30 not so long ago.
As a formerly non-literary writer who recently graduated from a literary graduate writing program, there are certain issues that I’ve grappled with regarding “literary” techniques. I tried things like ambiguity and experimental structure along with the other students and sorry to say, by trying to be too “literary”, I think my writing lost something. I think it’s about how much we do, how much it slows down the narrative. It would be interesting to know what aesthetics are taught at what schools. I imagine that the problem (if there is one) lies partially in those aesthetics. While I would always agree that a person’s aesthetics should be there own and not dictated by the market, I would also admit that every reader wants a good story. The Missouri Review measures up pretty well in that category. But many of the lit mags that I read don’t.
On the plus side, in my part of the country, there are an abundance of book clubs going against the seemingly bad trend for literary novels. I’ve also heard about some genre authors talking about the competition from “literary” authors invading their territory. I can’t imagine that any reader would put down a genre book because its well-written. So, perhaps by inches, the books being sold will be better quality.
And I’ll also tell you about a friend of mine who won a best first novel award from Barnes and Noble for a literary novel a couple of years ago and last I heard the book had gone into a second printing. (He teaches in St.Louis now.) The first novels area of Barnes and Nobels can be an interesting place.
I would like to believe in the evolutionary leap that Ally suggested. One of my writing buddies has said that if nothing else, the number of graduate writing program graduates is increasing the number of literary books sold. I did read the last Harry Potter book too, just to see what all the talk was about. (My God, a two million first printing in the US alone.) Couldn’t help but see the chinks in Rowlings’ writing armor, but she had a decent story. Wouldn’t it have been great if her book had been more polished? It will be interesting to see if the Potter books stand the test of time. Whatever people are reading, at least they’re reading. That has to be a good trend. But even if it isn’t, that wouldn’t stop me from finishing my first literary novel that hopefully, will be also be a good read.
What wonderfully detailed comments from all of you–I appreciate the thoughts. They’re interesting and hit precisely on what I’d been wondering about.
Ally, I’m inclined to agree with you–literature cannot and should not stand aloof above other forms of media and communication right now. It has distinct value, I believe, but the exact nature of this value can’t really be determined yet. We’re in the midst of a grand societal transformation, and that’s not a lofty phrase I would throw out lightly. The 21st century, in a mere seven years, has been witness to a grave revolution among the broader international community and how we all relate. I think literature serves as an important cultural grounding, a testament to the philosophy and political thougth and emotion that preceded us now–the best of records–but that the future is a whole new animal. I suppose we’ll see.
I’ve been contemplating writing a blog entry on what’s come of the Post Modern movement and where it can go from there. I’ll probably touch more on all this then.
I don’t know how far literary interest has plummeted from the 50s or 60s, but if you ask J.K. Rowling, the wealthiest woman in the UK, she should tell you its $tate is good (an intended dollar sign). Personally, the generation I grew with might have the lowest literary affinity living. I can’t recall anything of more importance than the Goosebumps series from my childhood, where RL Stein churned a new one out every 8 weeks, free from any obligation of meaning and social importance.
Seeing my little cousins fight in lines to get the newest Harry Potter gives me hope. And the books have not only led to other commercial avenues, such as the highly successful movies, but my cousin Timmy still has my 1000 page Lord of the Rings trilogy, and is now perusing volumes from Carl Sagan, to a burgeoning interest in poetry of Yeats and Joyce.
I used Goosebumps as a segway to thousands of prolific texts. But the difference between Goosebumps and HP is that HP is damn good. Damn good enough for little Timmy to read by flashlight after bedtime, and damn good enough for my 57 year old theology teacher father.
Mr. Whalen, I like your thinking and optimism. Personally I don’t have much of a doom-and-gloom mentality myself and agree with a lot of the points you make. I do think a lot of people are still seeking out literature as well as intellectually engaging with the world in new and different ways. My post arose from a lot of negative, worrisome comments I’ve heard other people make about the state of literature in the modern world.
I wouldn’t call Harry Potter the best literature in the world, but like you indicated, it’s a strong stepping stone into the broader wealth of literature. And at its core, the Harry Potter series presents a good story with strong and dynamic characters, which counts for something. Also, I laughed when I read your comments about the Goosebumps series–I have plenty of my own memories of that series from years past….