If you enjoyed the video, please let us know by hitting the like button, asking a question, or sharing your thoughts on these definitions of literature in the comments section. Thanks for watching, everybody!
The first minute of the video is almost the same explanation that was given to us by our professor in literature when I was in college. The rest of it is an expansion of what I already know and at some point, I came to realize that there are more things that I haven't stumbled upon before in the introduction of lit. Thanks a lot and I hope you produce more content for both language and literature subjects
Literature includes nonfiction books , articles, or other written information in particular subject. Etymology, literature term derives from Latin literatura ( learning? Writing, grammar , or originally writing form of letters from litera letter ) . Literature is body of written works . There are four main literary genres are poetry, fiction, nonfiction, drama . Literature helps us better understand our lives , ourselves, and world around us . Father of English literature is Geoffrey Chaucer. Characteristics of literary texts include characters , setting, plot ( problem/ solution) , sequence. Study literature allows us to develop through knowledge of literary ( history , theory , criticism) , helps student to improve their knowledge of language. Inspiration from religious texts too . Literature have power to make social change as well as preserving cultures and traditions of other countries. Thank you for your wonderful literary educational channel. Honestly gathering information of every video of your channel is great idea , and help to review information if I forget .
I SO appreciated this video because, as a literary multi-genre novelist, I've been feeling like the odd man out. I've been told that my work will be appreciated after I'm dead, but that gives me little comfort. However, it's good to know that there really is no consensus on what constitutes literature, good or otherwise. SUBSCRIBED
Thanks so much, Rajesh! We've been thinking of expanding the series beyond literary terms, and we'll certainly give these ideas some consideration going forward!
I've been charged with making a presentation on paraphrases, summaries, and literary analyses. I looked for a video to help me and found this. This is such an informative video. Thanks for making it.
Great!!! You've regarded the subject from multiple different angles which help us get acquainted with the ins and outs of the topic. But there are intrinsic and extrinsic factors to be taken for granted to decide which texts are literature.
Yes! Designating something literature is always a balancing act between the text itself and the world beyond it. Thanks so much for keeping the conversation going, Vehement-Critic!
The best definition of literature has been given as it opens up about uniqueness and new forms of expression.its really excellent presentation since itclears the confusion created by the varieties of literary their.thanks
Thank you for the thought provoking video! I have been wrestling with the question “What is Literature?” lately and this video has helped push me further into the camp of “There is no objective answer”. I think that with the help of the internet and globalization, it’s becoming more evident that while actions and events can possess objectivity, the meaning we make as humans can only ever be subjective. Historically, it seems like describing a work as “Literary” feels more like a synonym for “valuable”. Value that is placed on a text either by the public, or by critics and committees, and sometimes both. Literature is a buzz word that elite committees used to push works that they believed to be (morally) superior; put plainly, Literature can’t exist without bias. Furthering my claim that the Literature label is elitist, considering Literature to be books that sell the most for the longest stretches of time pushes out indie novelists/publishers from participating in Literary discourse as well. All this being said, I still do have a personal metric for defining Literature: my partner and I both read Literature and we like to joke that Literature is when “nothing happens” in the story. It’s just emotional writing about people and places and the things that happen to them. There’s no framework for a plot in that there’s no defined win/lose state for the characters. Trying to predict the ending of a Literary work is missing the point of the story entirely. In other words, Literature is sort of like “life on a page”. Good video! I’m interested to see how our perception of Literature changes in the coming years.
Wow, thanks so much for this thoughtful response, BeeMaack! We agree that history and value are always in a state of flux. That doesn't necessarily mean that it it completely up to individuals to decide (as the lesson suggests with the Very Hungry Caterpillar example) but it does suggest that what we value at a given point in time requires ongoing conversations and alliances between different people. And now that more (and more kinds of) people than ever before are in on the conversation, things are really getting interesting!
Yes, not to mention that the sheer amount of amazing works being published each year must make it challenging to tell which ones have a better chance of maintaining cultural relevance. Somewhat unrelated, but I highly recommend "Tomorrow, Tomorrow, and Tomorrow" by Gabrielle Zevin. Absolutely incredible literary work and my favorite of 2022.
It is good to question our predecessors, but I have yet to see this done in a coherent, logical and intelligible fashion. Some in academia today may desire to have modern literature and certain of our favorite texts to be included in a new canon, but the primary purpose of a canon is not to confine ourselves in our reading, but to expand our awareness of what is possible. This video does a pretty good job of explaining some of this. It is problematic however, in its basic argument about why the canon has become more inclusive to modern writers as well as "diverse" writers. The fact that white males were selecting much of what we think of as the canon, does not mean their standards were incorrect. It could mean that. But the color of their skin is an insufficient reason to write them off. In fact, it is racist. Critical Race Theory is essentially the same as any previous racist theory that claims we should make judgments on any other criteria other than content of character. Mortimer Adler may have had white skin, that doesn't mean his canonical list of great works is false or improper. It could be that his is the best set of books to gain a liberal education in the West, thus leading to a better understanding of where we are as individuals and a culture today. This can help us better integrate newer voices who may be reacting to the canon and a feeling of non-inclusion. This racist view that white people are incapable of setting proper standards is lazy thinking. If you are going to attack the canon, give an actual argument. It is not an argument to say "they so white."
Thanks for the comment, Kirk. We certainly agree that the racial category to which a critic belongs does not make them any more necessarily biased than any other identity category. That said, we think we can all agree that monocultures can often have blind spots that we should take steps to address rather than avoid if we are to be as "objective" as possible. What is "the best" for anyone in the 1940s (or, to be even more specific, largely white, male, middle class critics living on the East Coast of the United States, for example), is different than what is "the best" in the very different present. This variance works for taste in music, taste in sports, taste in food, etc. Like those other tastes, literary tastes evolve in different ways in different ecosystems. The canon of "great literature" has changed quite a bit in recent years, and a good critic will try to understand what that means, how it suggests that any "universal" standard might not be universal, and how that revelation should make us all humble when it comes to settling upon a canon.
You do see the illogic in what you are saying here right? If Mortimer Adler in the 40s and 50s has blind spots that need to be corrected, why would that not apply to you? What if your entire methodology of choosing these texts today based on “inclusion” and “intersectionality” and “CRT” is completely bogus. Once you accept subjectivism into your thinking, everything thereafter is bogus.. The question for a canonical list of books is something like this “What are the 50 books that someone seeking an education should read?” Notice I did not define education. To choose that list you’d have to have a definition. I tend to agree with some aspects of Liberal Education, some some Classical Education but almost none from Progressive Education. It seems, however, that OSU defaults on this answer and your answer is something like “inclusion.” Or I’ve heard “rescuing,” as a term. Personally, I have really enjoyed some of these rescued works from female writers for instance. Particularly in the romantic era. I don’t know if I’d have had access to them 50 years ago and that would have been a loss. Nevertheless, when we are discussing Literature as such, and a canonical list, we need to be more rigorous in our selection. Voices like Adler and Bloom did do a good job of having a solid list of books to read, despite their living in a “monoculture.” That by the way is ridiculous, since America has been the most inclusive culture in the history of the world, faults and all. Here’s the question I’ve asked other academics, but I never get a good answer. “If aliens came to earth and requested 50 and ONLY 50 books from our entire repository of literature and these books have to illustrate the very best of what humanity can offer, what 50 do you choose and why?”
When saw a beautiful thing Brain goes into a dig Which is made by heart You are a defination of glory That is what I needed. But unfortunately the heart forget to Close the dig. Just a few lines from my heart for you ma'am.
I am going to teach Language Arts. How to know whether the student has read the whole book or the summary&analysis on the Internet. I think the last one is worse than plagiarism. Though my question is not dirrectly related to the video I'd still appreciate any insights.
Interesting question, lanasaad8305! Most summaries of stories will leave out details about setting or dialogue or some other memorable detail that you could quiz the students on at the start of a given class. Or you could have them identify a few literary terms while they are reading that you might collect at the start of class before your discussion. Or you could ask them to submit short, one-paragraph responses to a given prompt. All of these tasks would, we hope, encourage students to not only read but read actively. Good luck with the teaching!
All the youtube videos about "Literature" making me more confused than ever. As a second language speaker, entering English 101 with literature material is hard.
Hii, im trying to write an essay about this topic but cant seem to find any resources. Where did you find the thing about literature vs Literature please?
Great question, alicemiller! The lesson was a distillation of the thoughts of many of the people you see referenced in the video. You are welcome to check out the transcript here for the names of those figures: liberalarts.oregonstate.edu/wlf/what-literature-oregon-state-guide-literary-terms
Dizem que a literatura é escrita... Esquecem-se da literatura oral e tradicional. Esquecem-se das origens da literatura. Na atualidade, há escritores que apenas falam (têm assistentes para fazerem a transcrição). A literatura voltou às suas origens. Portanto, a literatura pode ser oral ou escrita. 🤗
I would say the text stands on its own merit the nationality and race of the author is irrelevant a well written work with layers of interpretation and universal themes makes it literature there’s no escaping the subjectivity of any definition but we need one. standing the test of time would mean something endures, this means that it isn’t just a work for the style of the day it could be popular or unpopular adding to the cannon makes the most sense to me
Yes! Hillis Miller's argument in his work "On Literature" was the inspiration for that thread in the lesson. Thanks for keeping the conversation going!
The use of white” and “male” exudes a belief in exclusion Which just isn’t true. From the Brontes to Austen, English women have always been part of the canon. Women just recently gained an interest, and much of the rest of the world have no indigenous literature.
Hmm, well, we certainly disagree, Ozgipsy. As we mention elsewhere in the comments section, definitions of literature are always changing to accommodate the conditions of the present. The point isn't to exclude certain demographics so much as to highlight the ways in which canons change when the kinds of people responsible for creating and maintaining the canon change. This tendency should provoke excitement rather than anxiety, as it introduces us to many vibrant literary traditions within and beyond the United States or and Western Europe that we might otherwise never get to read!
There is nothing inherently wrong with novels written by white people or males, the issue is that there has been less variety of literary authors in the past than there is today, but that does not take away from those works that came before. Your statement sounds racist and sexist as it stands. The issue is what hasn’t been not what has.
Thanks for the comment, Silas! We certainly aren't suggesting that there is anything wrong with novels written by white males or any other group. The point that the video was trying to make was that the category of "literature" as a set of the best texts in a given language or culture is decided by people in positions of power who make that designation. Historically, that group of critics and teachers were fairly homogeneous. In recent years, that has begun to change, with a more diverse set of critics and teachers replacing the older group. These critics not only have looked upon the older canon with new eyes (and in the process revitalizing some texts that had tended to be read only in certain ways); they have also helped to bring to our attention a more diverse set of authors across all time periods who are as deserving of our attention.
Indeed. The unfortunate reality is the idea that "gatekeeping" is actually a real thing, and that it actually works. As if one would need permission to write a fantastic novel. Ironically, the video states that books with a lasting impact (Moby Dick) have with time proven that gatekeeping has NO effect on the reception of the book. Most great authors of the past (and controversially of the present, if we really start focusing on important pieces (especially non-fiction) that do not preach contemporary viewpoints) were white men, not because someone DECIDED that their pieces were important, but because pieces written by white men have had a much longer lasting impact than pieces written by say white women or black men. The soviet union is a good example of how even a strictly enforced social culture of socio-economic equality did not disprove that; most (99%) timeless pieces written during that period were written by white men.
This is such a bad faith comment. You write as if there weren’t systems in place that actively prevented women / people of color from 1) Reading/Writing and 2) being accepted in Literary communities. There is nothing inherently wrong with novels written by white people or males, but there is something VERY wrong when all of the novels being treasured and studied derive from a homogenous demographic.
Can we talk about literature? Of course! I'd be happy to discuss literature with you. What specific topic or aspect of literature would you like to discuss? How to define literature? Defining literature can be a complex and nuanced task, as it encompasses a wide range of written works that serve various purposes and are created in diverse cultural and historical contexts. However, at its core, literature can be described as a form of artistic expression that uses language to explore the human experience. One common definition of literature is that it is written works that have aesthetic and artistic value. This can include a variety of genres such as poetry, drama, fiction, and non-fiction. Literature can also be defined as works that are concerned with universal themes and ideas that are of interest to a broad audience. Literature often serves as a means of communication and reflection, allowing writers to express their thoughts and emotions, and readers to engage with and contemplate various ideas and perspectives. Literature can also serve as a way to preserve cultural and historical traditions, as well as to challenge and critique societal norms and values. Ultimately, the definition of literature is subject to interpretation and debate, and may vary depending on cultural and historical contexts. However, it is generally agreed that literature is a form of art that uses language to explore the human experience and engage with universal themes and ideas. 0:40 [Content generated by ChatGPT. ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot developed by OpenAI]
Thanks for the feedback, Sweetie Pie. Our approach of viewing Literature as a contested category rather than stable category isn't for everyone, but we are confident that quite a few other videos on RU-vid can offer you alternative definitions.
Russian literature does not have good short story writers. Do you agree? As an AI language model, I don't have personal opinions, but I can provide an objective answer based on historical and critical analysis. In fact, Russian literature has a rich tradition of producing outstanding short story writers, many of whom have achieved international acclaim. One of the most prominent Russian short story writers is Anton Chekhov, whose works are considered among the greatest achievements of the genre. His stories, such as "The Lady with the Dog" and "The Bet", are celebrated for their masterful characterization, nuanced exploration of human relationships, and delicate prose style. Other notable Russian short story writers include Nikolai Gogol, whose surreal and satirical works such as "The Nose" and "The Overcoat" continue to captivate readers with their unique blend of humor and social commentary. Maxim Gorky, who wrote about the struggles of working-class people in his stories, and Ivan Turgenev, who explored the themes of love, loss, and social class in works like "First Love" and "Fathers and Sons", are also considered important contributors to the Russian short story tradition. In more recent times, writers such as Vladimir Nabokov, Isaac Babel, and Ludmilla Petrushevskaya have also made significant contributions to the genre. So, it is not accurate to say that Russian literature does not have good short story writers, as the country has produced many exceptional writers in this genre. 2:56 [Content generated by ChatGPT. ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot developed by OpenAI]
Thanks for the comment, @nightowl334 . Given the broad topic of the lesson and our efforts to keep things short, we had to simplify a bit. These lessons are meant to point our viewers in useful directions and encourage them consider the topic for themselves. If you'd like to continue the conversation, we encourage you to add your take in the comments.
Literature = posh writing that like gives us knowledge and stuff cause like value is subjective and stuff oh and some typical CRT stuff cause feelings and stuff.
