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 like what you say here. And I think that in addition to the "guide" or "companion" of the text, companionship of a good teacher (Henry Oliver?) can be really useful. When I was 17 I tried to read the Great Books -- the effort fell flat. I didn't understand the context, etc. I needed a guide/companion. J'aime beaucoup aussi votre utilisation du francais; je suis en train d'apprendre la langue...lentment...:)
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.
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.
The quest image has parallels to (and differences from) pilgrimage, especially as described by Paul Elie in his book The Life You Save May Be Your Own: “A pilgrimage is a journey undertaken in the light of a story. A great event has happened; the pilgrim hears the reports and goes in search of the evidence, aspiring to be an eyewitness. The pilgrim seeks not only to confirm the experience of others firsthand but to be changed by the experience." Pondering...
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 really like this comment. I think about listening, too, as it relates to stories. Thousands of years ago, what did people do when the day's work was done and the last meal eaten? They gathered and told stories. It's kind of like what we're doing on Substack...even if AI starts doing our work for us (I don't think it will), we will have the drive to tell one another stories that we KNOW were made up by humans.
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.
“Reading can save” the aimless young men who are adrift in the modern world — I wonder if this has anything to do with sustained attention. We look at snippets of information on everything, all the time, with zero retention and shallow context. The brain is so full and so empty that there is no room for a quest. Maybe reading can save us from the technology that wants to keep us hooked and turn us back to imagination and connection.
If there does exist a work of literature that can save you from whatever pit you're in, then it has to be The Brothers Karamazov. Alyosha's last-page speech alone has incredible power
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 like what you say here. And I think that in addition to the "guide" or "companion" of the text, companionship of a good teacher (Henry Oliver?) can be really useful. When I was 17 I tried to read the Great Books -- the effort fell flat. I didn't understand the context, etc. I needed a guide/companion. J'aime beaucoup aussi votre utilisation du francais; je suis en train d'apprendre la langue...lentment...:)
A very important distinction, it's a step towards understanding but people have to do the hard work of understanding themselves
Yep
Yes! It's a back and forth with the text...
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 for saying what cannot be said enough!
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.
Fantastic post 🤝
The quest image has parallels to (and differences from) pilgrimage, especially as described by Paul Elie in his book The Life You Save May Be Your Own: “A pilgrimage is a journey undertaken in the light of a story. A great event has happened; the pilgrim hears the reports and goes in search of the evidence, aspiring to be an eyewitness. The pilgrim seeks not only to confirm the experience of others firsthand but to be changed by the experience." Pondering...
Thank you Henry for this really interesting and helpful post!
Counterpoint: it can.
Sure sure but in some very specific ways
"In a letter, George Eliot once explained that she was not a teacher, but a companion in the struggle of thought."
This is a brilliant piece of wisdom!
so good
This is really interesting Henry and I think it builds on what you were saying in our conversation which I very much enjoyed:
https://open.substack.com/pub/thecuriositydividend/p/episode-23-henry-oliver?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
yes I think we did talk about some this!
I've read this three times since yesterday and understand a little more each time. Thank you.
I need to make the thesis a little sharper I think
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 really like this comment. I think about listening, too, as it relates to stories. Thousands of years ago, what did people do when the day's work was done and the last meal eaten? They gathered and told stories. It's kind of like what we're doing on Substack...even if AI starts doing our work for us (I don't think it will), we will have the drive to tell one another stories that we KNOW were made up by humans.
Thank you, Andrew. Yes, sitting around the communal fire, listening to and telling stories about the hunt, the fight, the storm ..
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
“Reading can save” the aimless young men who are adrift in the modern world — I wonder if this has anything to do with sustained attention. We look at snippets of information on everything, all the time, with zero retention and shallow context. The brain is so full and so empty that there is no room for a quest. Maybe reading can save us from the technology that wants to keep us hooked and turn us back to imagination and connection.
If there does exist a work of literature that can save you from whatever pit you're in, then it has to be The Brothers Karamazov. Alyosha's last-page speech alone has incredible power