AboutGarrett Z Expertise As an instructor of literature and the humanities, my experience is as broad as the experience I have gained in the classroom. As a published author and journalist, I have first hand industry experience. Between the two, I have the experience, knowledge, and research experience that could certainly answer any questions that may be asked of me.
Experience Quite specifically, as an instructor I am an extremely well qualified candidate as an initial resource as well as a person who knows specifically where to gather the correct information at any given time. As a published journalist and novelist, my experience broadens into the fundimental understanding of the craft and its application and business. I was also previously an AllExperts expert several years ago, and was well received by all who I helped.
Organizations Sigma Tau Delta, the International English Honor Society.
Publications All of the following are published or broadcast in Massachusetts unless otherwise noted. The Boston Globe, The Fitchburg Sentinel and Enterprise, The Worcester Telegram and Gazette, The Miller Hall Folio, WGBH PBS Channel 2 Boston, WBUR 91.3 FM NPR Boston, The Wentworth Transcript (A&E Editor), and WXPL 91.3 FM.
Education/Credentials A.S. Wentworth Institute Of Technology
B.S. Fitchburg State College
M.A. Fitchburg State College, Thesis "The Modern Twain Epoch"
Question This may not be your field, but I thought I'd give it a shot. Let me know if I need to direct the question to someone else.
A year ago I entered an essay contest at my university. The topic was "How your major will change the world", or something similar. Being an English Major, I of course wrote about the potentially awesome impact literature can and does have in the world. As some of my examples, I used Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Ghandi, etc.(as my non-fiction examples)as examples of literature's power for good. As examples for its power to harm I gave Stalin, Hitler, Mao, etc.
In response she sent me back some notes on my essay. Two of them are as follows: "I don't know that these individuals area considered literati. Luther, Paine, Thoreau, and King all wrote non-fiction. We typically think of literature as fiction, poetry, and drama. In fact, those are the literary genres. Non-fiction (although some lines are currently blurring with the advent of the memoir) is not usually perceived as 'literature.'"
And in response to the Hitler, etc.: "Were these individuals really inspired by literature? They wrote, but again, like the other examples, they didn't write literature. (I don't know if Stalin wrote.)"
Is what she is saying accurate? I'm not trying to rub it in her face, or challenge a decision, I have since transferred schools. I am genuinely interested, though. When the entire first half of the Norton Anthology of American Literature is devoted to non-fiction and sermons, her comments do not seem accurate.
Does a speech, even if it is recorded after the fact, considered literature? How about other non-fiction?
Sorry this post is so long, I just wanted you to have all of the information. Thanks in advance.
Answer Taylor
First, I want to preface what I am about to say with a few disclaimers... What I am going to say is opinion and not necessarily something that I have applied in any research capacity, although I do have some evidence for what I am going to say that backs up my opinion. Second, some of what I am going to say is going to be contradictory because in order to breach the topic of what literature is and why speeches are or are not included, I think arguments can be made on both sides...
So, first, your teacher used the word "traditionally." But we know that when you receive a packet of information at a meeting for, say, a financial adviser or a work training, when there is something being handed out, the word "literature" is applied to that particular context as well... So, lets call her response Literature with a capital L. Then, lets make you a little more confused - Literature comes from the Latin root 'littera' (letter), or, familiar with letters. When you graduate with your degree in English, you will be able to call yourself a "man of letters," but the entirety of the time you will specifically be referring to the written word, not just limited to our familiar correspondence. In the west, Literature is fiction and nonfiction, but elsewhere in the world and also in the U.S., we often exclude particulars such as song lyrics, dime romance novels, and other texts that have only momentary cultural/commercial implications.
Ready to be more confused? Take a history of Literature class and you will likely study Gilgamesh, Beowulf, Sir Gawain, and other texts that originated in the oral tradition. That is, they were told before people even began to write things down, so technically even the origins of the word and applications of it were strictly speeches.
Okay, now on to my opinion.
I agree and disagree with your instructor just based on what you quoted. I disagree in the sense that to exclude anything of the written word would not be considered literature if it is nonfiction. The memoir is not necessarily a new thing, and there are many elements of older texts that are nonfiction that we consider great literature - Samuel Pepys' diary, for instance. I do agree in the sense that there are some people that you quoted - and most notably the politicians like Hitler - whose work was often written by someone else and only delivered by the speaker. As a matter of fact, a nonfiction book that changed the world and likely influenced Hitler, The Communist Manifesto, skyrocketed Karl Marx into a position where Marxism is even a very important way to look at literature. So, the question remains, did these people write what influenced the world, or was it something/someone else? Ghandi wrote a lot (when it was published, his complete works spanned 100 volumes), and influenced many people, so I think you are very right in that sense.
I think where the argument on both sides goes awry is that maybe the instructor is concerned that as an English major, you are looking at the power of politics and not the power of the written word. The quote she used in referring to Hitler seemed to be questioning your essay's thesis, NOT whether or not writing is influential - the question arises - were you writing about how influential literature is, or speeches to drive public opinion and inspire generations of followers.
So, I do want to clarify and make a short answer of what I wrote here to satisfy you... Here it goes. I hope that what I have here makes sense and that if you have any further questions feel free to respond to this...
1. What is Literature? I think it is an influential body of the written word that is generally accepted by humanity that lasts through time and space.
2. Can nonfiction be literature? Certainly.
3. Can speeches be literature? It depends. Some really influential speeches were all about the speaker, some were written by ghost writers or propagandists, and some were really meant never to be written down and just heard.
4. Is your instructor right? I think that there is confusion. My opinion is no on nonfiction not being literature, but again I think that there is possibly confusion of what she meant. I also think that there is confusion about what she was trying to say in her notes - that possibly she was really commenting on the cohesiveness of your essay and what you were trying to accomplish.
Once again, this is mostly opinion, and I hope this helps!
