What you write about the quest resonates. Literature doesn’t baptize us into wisdom — it walks beside us, sometimes mocking, sometimes consoling. As you say, it’s more weather than spell.
I often think of it bilingually: in French, we say chercher un sens — to seek meaning — and the verb itself implies it may never be found, only pursued. That’s what books do. They keep us walking.
The danger isn’t that people expect too much from literature, but that they stop expecting at all. Better to set out on the road with Cervantes or Bishop, Gide or Johnson — knowing they won’t save us, only remind us to keep going. Or at least to laugh at ourselves when we mistake windmills for giants.
And maybe the real question is more philosophical: what in us can actually be saved? And what are we really hoping will endure?
I had to think about this quite a lot as it’s challenging in many ways. Your conclusion helped immensely.
One aspect of your argument helped - literature, books can inform, entertain, allow us to “live” many lives, but not, solely by themselves and one’s reading of them - alter a person. It’s what we do with this that matters - do we think on it and internalise or incorporate some (or try to). Do we practise life as found therein? Much to digest here. Thanks George.
Absolutely nailed it. We write about people. We write stories about people. We write them as well as we possibly can. But the moment we write to change people or instill ideas and beliefs or to indoctrinate, we become mere preachers, usually poor ones. Our job is to use our god-given talent for writing stories we ourselves have been given and not bury it in the ground.
To read is to listen, and humans have been doing that long before there was writing and books. To listen you have to be part of a group, a family, a group of friends, a tribe, a society, a world. Why do we feel the need to listen? Comfort, safety, love. In Paradise (f ex a loving family) there was/is no meaning and no search, but as we step outside (or get evicted by an angry and jealous god, or displaced by war, or death of a loved one) we face questions and must begin our search for meaning, hence we enter groups, we listen and we talk. Answers become stories, and stories become myths that envelope us and sometimes silence us in awe of master stories that silence all other stories. But things change and we change and the master stories lose their grip on us, hence the Gnostics, Cervantes and eventually the novelists who share their search for meaning in modern and more humble myths. We are eager to listen and read, because we are now constantly facing questions we can't find answers to in the marketplace or in school or church or on our smartphones. Reading literature is but a way to listen to other voices, and as we listen we discover voices/books/plays/substacks that speaks to us and broadens our minds, makes us see and feel in a -- for us -- new way.
I wish more folks in the literary humanities were making this argument. It's a position I've been advocating for in English education circles—a space where "books will save us!" discourse abounds.
It’s a start…literacy and being well-read may become the new differentiator that having a college degree once was. I think the tone of much of this new attention towards bookishness has been, rather predictably, snobbish and preachy…but I’ve also found through this Classics Read Aloud project that people are totally game for having fun with literature and the idea of it as entertainment again, which is great. After all, the best, most tasteful, and high-quality entertainments also help expand our minds for personal growth.
(Interestingly enough, I also get a lot of emails from adults who confess that listening to me read reminds them, fondly, of being read to by their mother when they were young. Quite a lovely association!)
A very important distinction, it's a step towards understanding but people have to do the hard work of understanding themselves
Yep
Fantastic post 🤝
What you write about the quest resonates. Literature doesn’t baptize us into wisdom — it walks beside us, sometimes mocking, sometimes consoling. As you say, it’s more weather than spell.
I often think of it bilingually: in French, we say chercher un sens — to seek meaning — and the verb itself implies it may never be found, only pursued. That’s what books do. They keep us walking.
The danger isn’t that people expect too much from literature, but that they stop expecting at all. Better to set out on the road with Cervantes or Bishop, Gide or Johnson — knowing they won’t save us, only remind us to keep going. Or at least to laugh at ourselves when we mistake windmills for giants.
And maybe the real question is more philosophical: what in us can actually be saved? And what are we really hoping will endure?
—
Dave
I had to think about this quite a lot as it’s challenging in many ways. Your conclusion helped immensely.
One aspect of your argument helped - literature, books can inform, entertain, allow us to “live” many lives, but not, solely by themselves and one’s reading of them - alter a person. It’s what we do with this that matters - do we think on it and internalise or incorporate some (or try to). Do we practise life as found therein? Much to digest here. Thanks George.
Absolutely nailed it. We write about people. We write stories about people. We write them as well as we possibly can. But the moment we write to change people or instill ideas and beliefs or to indoctrinate, we become mere preachers, usually poor ones. Our job is to use our god-given talent for writing stories we ourselves have been given and not bury it in the ground.
Thank you Henry for this really interesting and helpful post!
For pieces like this is why I follow you.
:)
To read is to listen, and humans have been doing that long before there was writing and books. To listen you have to be part of a group, a family, a group of friends, a tribe, a society, a world. Why do we feel the need to listen? Comfort, safety, love. In Paradise (f ex a loving family) there was/is no meaning and no search, but as we step outside (or get evicted by an angry and jealous god, or displaced by war, or death of a loved one) we face questions and must begin our search for meaning, hence we enter groups, we listen and we talk. Answers become stories, and stories become myths that envelope us and sometimes silence us in awe of master stories that silence all other stories. But things change and we change and the master stories lose their grip on us, hence the Gnostics, Cervantes and eventually the novelists who share their search for meaning in modern and more humble myths. We are eager to listen and read, because we are now constantly facing questions we can't find answers to in the marketplace or in school or church or on our smartphones. Reading literature is but a way to listen to other voices, and as we listen we discover voices/books/plays/substacks that speaks to us and broadens our minds, makes us see and feel in a -- for us -- new way.
I wish more folks in the literary humanities were making this argument. It's a position I've been advocating for in English education circles—a space where "books will save us!" discourse abounds.
https://substack.com/@trevoraleo/p-157742935
It’s a start…literacy and being well-read may become the new differentiator that having a college degree once was. I think the tone of much of this new attention towards bookishness has been, rather predictably, snobbish and preachy…but I’ve also found through this Classics Read Aloud project that people are totally game for having fun with literature and the idea of it as entertainment again, which is great. After all, the best, most tasteful, and high-quality entertainments also help expand our minds for personal growth.
(Interestingly enough, I also get a lot of emails from adults who confess that listening to me read reminds them, fondly, of being read to by their mother when they were young. Quite a lovely association!)
Listing men men men! I do think the Catherine Project could save people.
Go ahead and list some women… well maybe it has, my argument is consistent with that, but I can’t make very point in every piece
I would but I’m reading instead! :)
Eliot and Austen don’t count?
Hollis is noting that the “literature can save you” people are all men
They aren’t making money on the argument
Ah, I see!
Johnson assumes that betterment is worthy. I read to answer why that should be so.
Samuel Johnson did say but it moves so there’s that dude 😎
Can't do questing right now. Too busy posting. Next week looks good, though. Or maybe the next. Actually...