Fictional literature, though fairly limited as far as public argument goes, does have its uses when it comes to the public forum. There are both benefits and limitations to this method of public argument, with limitations most often outweighing the benefits in my view.
An example of the use of fiction as a form of public argument would be any novel or piece of literary fictional writing that’s main goal is to use the development of its characters, plots, and settings to portray a particular or a set of particular themes and messages to its target audience. There are many examples of World War I and World War II based literature that target their respective events and seek to discuss different themes about the wars. There are also many novels written including such books as Invisible Man and The Color Purple that try and portray different arguments surrounding racially tense issues. The main benefit of this form of public discourse is that the authors of such books have a clean slate from which to work. None of the characters in the book have any form of ethos to reference prior to reading the piece, therefore the author can successfully craft his or her characters without being limited by any preconceived notions by the audience. In real life, nearly every public figure has some form of past history and ethos to look back on, therefore skewing future opinions of the receivers of any message that that figure puts forth. Fictional writing circumvents this problem. The other main benefit of this form of public argument is that it is possible to reach a large populous of people, therefore ensuring that the discourse can be reached by many individuals.
As far as its limitations go, there are a handful of fatal ones. The first one being, that in the real world, not many people take the time to sit down and read. Given the lifestyle of many Americans and people across the world in general, there is not much time left in a person’s day to sit down and read a given literary piece, even if that person has the desire to. In an ideal world, people would take the time to read a wide variety of fictional literature, but unfortunately, we don’t live in an ideal world. So, even though this form of argument has the potential to reach a large number of people, this potential is often irrelevant because simply put, not enough individuals take part in the literary world. Various other forms of entertainment such as computers and television take up the vast majority of people’s free time, leaving no desire to take part in the reading of literature. Finally, when you have people who do actually read, not enough of these individuals are astute enough to get the full benefit of the author’s literary work. Authors of these types of fictional writings often give meaning and purpose to every minute detail of language, but often times these well intended implementations are missed and passed over, ultimately defeating the purpose of the writing in the first place. All in all, if people were more interested in literary discourse and were better evaluators of language, this form of public argument would be more useful, but until that day fictional writing in the public forum will always be considered unfulfilled potential.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that using fictional writing as a form of public argument would be more useful if people had the time of day to read, enjoy and ponder the meanings of books. But like ray34iyf said, people in today’s society have no time to sit and read a book; people barely find enough time in the day to sleep. Yes, fictional writing as a public argument is a good idea, in the fact that it could reach large amounts of people. That is IF the large a mounts of people buy, sit and read the fictional piece. How many times have you personally bought a book that you saw on the New York Times Best Seller List thinking you would read it, but had no time? That book most likely is sitting on a bookshelf collecting inches of dust. We have all done it; been interested in a book, bought it but never even opened the cover. People do not even have time to read the printed news paper. There are websites that can link a reader to thousands of different newspapers around the world. More books need to be published through online websites, maybe then the use of fiction as a public argument would actually be useful. If people don’t have time to read straight forward, no fluff news stories, they defiantly won’t have time to soak up the meaning of a book. So even if people do have time to read a book, they most likely won’t spend time pondering on what message the author was trying to get across to the reader.
ReplyDeleteParallel to what ray34iyf said, fictional writing as a public forum will be considered an unfulfilled potential until people have the time to analyze and think about the message of a book. Fiction was most likely a great use of public argument back before the craziness of life got in the way. Invisible Man for example was published in 1952, a time still facing civil injustice; the case of Brown v. Board of Education, went on during 1954. People reading Invisible Man would be able to relate the argument of social injustice that Ralph Ellison wrote about to their own lives. In cases like this, fiction is an extremely effective public argument, but it also fit the time period where people were not as crazily busy.
If people had more time to read, fictional writing would be a useful for of public argument because of the imaginativeness it can bring to the reader. Authors put in particular messages or idea that they want the reader to grasp while still letting the reader develop their own ideas based on their own ethos. But like I said before, if people don’t even have time to sleep, they aren’t going to put in the time to develop their ethos on a particular subject or book. Even though fiction can and has been effectively used as a public argument, today’s society is not as affected by it. Anything that is on tv, the radio or the internet is more effective at reaching peoples opinions and demonstrating a public argument. Fictional books however, not so much.
You say that fictional literature is very limited, but I believe the opposite: fiction is limitless. Fictional writing offers a freedom of expression that is hard to find in public argument. There are no rules to writing fiction like in other forms of public argument. The writers are free to create whatever characters and situations they want to make an argument. They are not constrained by the rules of real life. Anything is possible in fiction which allows the writers to exaggerate or understate characteristics in order to make arguments. Also, anybody from anywhere can write a story about whatever they want to get their point across. You don’t have to be rich or famous to write a book, all you need is a pen and paper. As you mention, works of fiction also allow the writer to explore an issue without any pre-conceived notions that may doom an argument from the start. This is a huge advantage because it’s hard to look at an argument without looking at the reputation of the speaker. All these factors contribute to fiction being a limitless form of argument. The writers are not constrained by anybody or anything except themselves.
ReplyDeleteAs far as people reading less nowadays than in the past, I also disagree. I know there are TV, video games, and the internet, but people still read. People read the same amount as they read 50 years ago. Look at how many people have read Harry Potter or The Da Vinci Code. I actually think TV and the internet benefit authors. The internet makes distribution easier which allows the authors to reach a wider audience. In addition to that, the publicity gained from the internet and TV persuades more people to read books that they are not sure about.
I think it’s totally unfair to say that fictional writing will always be considered an unfulfilled potential. Fiction has been used for centuries to advance arguments. Fiction such as The Great Gatsby and The Invisible Man continue to be read years and years after they were written because the message these books send is powerful. No matter how much society changes, there has always been fiction and there will always be books, both fiction and non-fiction.
I totally agree with Adam that fiction is limitless. It has a boundless freedom of expression and there is no exact set of rules that limits the authors when addressing their audiences. Like other forms of public argument, fiction literature can still make an argument but more uniquely in the imaginary space created by the writers. By other words, the writers only need to describe the situations in an understandable language to lead the readers into the same conditions and commute the messages in it. Fictional novel normally includes very defined details of the surroundings and the events to gradually outline the readers flow in the story. Because of fiction being a limitless from of argument, the writers can also tailor the message to their possible audiences in an exaggerated or understated manner without concerning too much of their credibility but the completeness and outcome of an event.
ReplyDeleteBesides that, fiction can exist in all kind of forms in my view. The media serves the same as any kind of fictional literature. Remembering as a child, fairy tales and even Disney cartoon are mostly fiction created by folks or producers; all these are fictions or imaginary stories that have the same purpose as to educate small children. Children can still remember part of, if not the whole, stories and moral imbedded in them after years later. All these little stories have conveyed moral value in them and teach kids through the imaginary and wonderful spaces created from nothing. Thus the use of fiction is still effective and cannot be ignored. It might have its limitation being portrayed in a short movie or Internet, as it could not include many details as a novel does. It still serves the purpose of leading people to the situation and let them learn a message from it. Thus, the usefulness of fictional literature is still significant whether it is in the form of book or motion picture.