I am surprised, actually, that it took me until my fifth post to ask this question: what is literature?
The reason I ask is because if we are to maintain that literature is the best medium for ethical philosophy, we are going to need to understand what, exactly, literature is. One of my q&a questions, for example, is how literary does a work have to be? There may be degrees of literature: Republic is likely less literary than The Brothers Karamazov, but, again, likely more literary than Locke's "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding." Or is literature a binary classification?
So,
What is Literature?
To what degree, if it is a vague quality, must a work be literary?
The technical definition of literature is 'written works with artistic value'. While at first glance I thought that this was so vague as to be almost useless, on second thought I decided that, while as an independently-standing definition it really is vague, when taken in the context of Nussbaum's text it is actually quite helpful. Many philosophical treatises are focused on one goal only - to present, explain, and support an idea as accurately and in as straightforward a manner as possible. They typically omit flowery or metaphorical language because such language tends to obscure meaning. However, in some cases they may include such language, because it actually helps to explain a concept (for example, a text on aesthetics might use vivid imagery). This is problematic, because invoking emotion (which, in this context, is the goal of flowery language) relies on the subjective perceptions of the reader.
ReplyDeleteRegardless - the difference, I think, between literature and philosophical or scientific writing is the reason for using flowery language. While philosophical writing might occasionally utilise such language, the purpose of doing so is to clarify whatever it is they are trying to explain. In literature, flowery language is used for aesthetic value. It does not have to help the reader understand anything; it does not even have to evoke emotion (although in many cases this may be its purpose in literature as well); all it has to do is be aesthetically pleasing. Thus, defining literature as 'written works with artistic value' actually seems to aid in distinguishing it from other forms of writing.
P.S. I also posted this on my blog if you would rather read it there.