Is it immoral to read fiction at times of crisis?
- Thread starter Malone
- Start date
qcrisp
Grimscribe
I do weary a bit of narrative myself, but have to say I find myself disagreeing with the tone of the article more than anything. A couple of things I wondered:
a) I wonder if she would give up television in order to read more non-fiction, or whether she simply feels it incumbent upon her to give up literature. This is something I notice a lot, and I'm intrigued as to where the attitude comes from. In any fit of puritanism, no matter what stripe of puritanism it is, literature is one of the first things to get bashed.
b) She mentions Martin Amis as something she used to read. Typical, I wonder? Recently I had a long conversation at a party about literature. Someone was discussing Martin Amis with me as if Martin Amis warranted a serious discussion. I began to spout my own ideas about literature, and some time later my interlocutor said, "Ah, I think I understand. But what you're talking about are aesthetic concerns that don't mean anything to most people." My guess is that I would have got bored of Zoe Williams' library of fiction long before the age of 40.
To quote Larkin, "books are a load of crap", if you read crap.
There are some interesting comments under the article.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/discussion/comment-permalink/13357390
Etc.
a) I wonder if she would give up television in order to read more non-fiction, or whether she simply feels it incumbent upon her to give up literature. This is something I notice a lot, and I'm intrigued as to where the attitude comes from. In any fit of puritanism, no matter what stripe of puritanism it is, literature is one of the first things to get bashed.
b) She mentions Martin Amis as something she used to read. Typical, I wonder? Recently I had a long conversation at a party about literature. Someone was discussing Martin Amis with me as if Martin Amis warranted a serious discussion. I began to spout my own ideas about literature, and some time later my interlocutor said, "Ah, I think I understand. But what you're talking about are aesthetic concerns that don't mean anything to most people." My guess is that I would have got bored of Zoe Williams' library of fiction long before the age of 40.
To quote Larkin, "books are a load of crap", if you read crap.
There are some interesting comments under the article.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/discussion/comment-permalink/13357390
Etc.
DoktorH
Grimscribe
depends on the crisis. If there's a fire, hurricane, riot, or other catastrophe that needs your full attention, deal with that first. if it is global economic downturn, snowstorm outside while you're safe and warm indoors,plague/famine/war in some far-off country, or something else you can't do much about, nothing wrong with enjoying a book. fiction or nonfiction doesn't seem to matter as much as the act of sitting and reading.
Evans
Grimscribe
The implication here is that while we might be obliged to put aside - a less crudely colloquial way of phrasing the intended idea than 'ditch' - fiction in times of crisis we should still find time, and plenty of it, to consume the opinions of glib columnists in papers such as this.
A very stupid man once claimed writing lyric poetry after Auschwitz was barbaric; in fact our failure to write lyric poetry is a sign of our utter barbarity.
qcrisp
Grimscribe
Gray House
Chymist
Similar to what DoktorH said, if there is something I can do that will have an effect, I want to know about it, but beyond that, reading nonfiction is no less a form of entertainment than reading fiction is; similar to what Ligotti said in an interview:
gveranon
Grimscribe
I thought Evans was referring to George Steiner! Adorno must have said it, too. Actually, it sounds like something a lot of people might go around saying.
I like a lot of what Steiner has written, but vehemently disagree with him about poetry after Auschwitz. If memory serves, Steiner's point had something to do, not only with the inutility of poetry, but with what he considered the irremediable debasement of language under the Nazis. Again, I disagree, and wonder if even Steiner still thinks that now.
As for that Guardian article -- where is Oscar Wilde when you need him? There must be some perfect, annihilating Wilde quote out there.
qcrisp
Grimscribe
http://mindfulpleasures.blogspot.com/2011/03/poetry-after-auschwitz-what-adorno.html
I thought of Wilde, too!!
This is perhaps not the kind of pithy aphorism that you had in mind, but it seems relevant:
The Silent One
Grimscribe
The thing that really annoyed me about the article was less the idea that reading more non-fiction is of a benefit to one's understanding of the world—I heartily agree—but the utterly absurd assumption that fiction is not. Particularly the line about reading about characters that "aren't real."
In the end, what makes something "real" or "true" in a written work is not whether it duplicates what exists in this world, but whether or not it conveys through the words that comprise it a greater understanding of it, internal or external.
In other words, it is my belief that what the article proposes is, at heart, more immoral than that which it opposes.
In the end, what makes something "real" or "true" in a written work is not whether it duplicates what exists in this world, but whether or not it conveys through the words that comprise it a greater understanding of it, internal or external.
In other words, it is my belief that what the article proposes is, at heart, more immoral than that which it opposes.
Personally speaking, I find my difficulty with fiction mirrors that discussed in the exchange below between Matt Cardin and Ligotti. I've been finding it more and more difficult to make myself read fiction that doesn't reflect my own philosophy and, forgive the word, "existential" preoccupations.
TL: These days I read only nonfiction, if I read anything at all [.....]
MC: I find your move toward nonfiction to be fascinating for personal reasons, since I moved in that direction myself a few years ago. But it wasn’t voluntary. I simply began to notice that I was unable to read fiction a great deal of the time. It was as if some force within me were operating a valve and periodically shutting off my responsiveness to fiction. I encountered a mental fog, a kind of affective and even cognitive blankness, when I tried to make sense of fiction or respond to it in any way. It just seemed meaningless to me. Does this ring a bell with you?
TL: It sure does ring a bell, a tolling bell. I can no longer emotionally respond to fiction or poetry. That’s the reason I read nonfiction, and very cerebral nonfiction at that. One doesn’t need to respond emotionally to that kind of writing, which is just for the brain and not the emotions or imagination.
TL: These days I read only nonfiction, if I read anything at all [.....]
MC: I find your move toward nonfiction to be fascinating for personal reasons, since I moved in that direction myself a few years ago. But it wasn’t voluntary. I simply began to notice that I was unable to read fiction a great deal of the time. It was as if some force within me were operating a valve and periodically shutting off my responsiveness to fiction. I encountered a mental fog, a kind of affective and even cognitive blankness, when I tried to make sense of fiction or respond to it in any way. It just seemed meaningless to me. Does this ring a bell with you?
TL: It sure does ring a bell, a tolling bell. I can no longer emotionally respond to fiction or poetry. That’s the reason I read nonfiction, and very cerebral nonfiction at that. One doesn’t need to respond emotionally to that kind of writing, which is just for the brain and not the emotions or imagination.
Mr Loligo
Mystic
Some of the books that are mentioned in this article are: "if not Tony Blair's autobiography, at least Gordon Brown's and/or Alistair Darling's." When politicians are in Government, we all accuse them of being liars. Why should I expect their autobiographies to be anything other than a work of the most outrageous fiction?
Mr. D.
Chymist
Why do you think that Tony Blair's autobiography wouldn't be a work of fiction? I'm sure that his will be more fiction than any thing else. Also, he could play the "my ghost writer is better than your ghost writer" game with Margaret Thatcher and Henry Kissinger.
Concerning the original question, my opinion is that it would be immoral not to read fiction in times of crisis. We should read poetry and drama as well. We need to have the courage to be human. That is the real crisis as I see it: we're too busy with unimportnt and peripheral concerns all day and all night. It's time to read for enjoyment and strive to be ourselves. Things aren't going to get any better so we might as well read a good book.
Concerning the original question, my opinion is that it would be immoral not to read fiction in times of crisis. We should read poetry and drama as well. We need to have the courage to be human. That is the real crisis as I see it: we're too busy with unimportnt and peripheral concerns all day and all night. It's time to read for enjoyment and strive to be ourselves. Things aren't going to get any better so we might as well read a good book.
Mr Loligo
Mystic
I agree completely!
During times of crisis and national/international stress is when people can be at their most creative. Whether it is writing fiction, creating music, painting, poetry or film making. Not to mention the joy and release it brings those people who enjoy that creativity.