I would like to begin this blog by mentioning that it is unbelievable that we have already reached the end of our first term as university students! In essence, we have now successfully accomplished the first step of our university careers.

Without further due, for this particular posting, I would like to place an emphasis on the literature review that I wrote. Back several weeks ago, we all read Martha Nussbaum’s article, Democratic Citizenship and the Narrative Imagination. Overall, the gist of this article concerns how literature functions as a medium that utilizes imagination to stimulate moral conscience. Nussbaum states that everybody has his or her own religion, gender, race, class, and national origin, which makes it difficult for people to have a complete knowledge of other people’s thoughts and perspectives (144). Furthermore, given that the ability to relate to others is a fundamental aspect of citizenship, literary works serve this purpose by solidifying an understanding of other people (145). According to Nussbaum, the ultimate effect as she states from Ralph Ellison is that literature could be analogous to a raft of hope, perception and entertainment that might helps to keep society afloat while progressing towards democracy (147).

While I overall do agree that Nussbaum does present reasonable and valid arguments, we realistically cannot deny that literature often creates unintended consequences in a negative manner. Another scholarship article that I analyzed for my literature review was The Relationship of Literature and Society by Milton C. Albrecht. One of Albrecht’s counter-arguments to Nussbaum is that particular literary works “tend to disrupt or corrupt society” (433). An extreme case that Albrecht mentions is taken from an argument that Albert Guerard made about how Werther by Goethe contributed to a wave of suicides (434). For this reason, censorship of certain literary material deemed as being “socially disruptive” is a practice common in different societies (433). As an extension to this argument, I have linked a video below that highlights notable examples of books that are banned in certain societies and explains the reasons for their prohibition. In fact, what I do find surprising is that some books are actually studied extensively in Canadian high schools, such as George Orwell’s Animal Farm or John Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath. This video actually reinforces Albrecht’s argument that some forms of literature do have a detrimental impact. Of course, in the end, I will agree that whether a literary work is necessarily harmful in nature is really the discretion of a state.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEldl8eL_kc

Based on the opposing views of Nussbaum and Albrecht, I reach a conclusion that the impact of literature on a society is a two-sided issue, which we can compare to many other matters in life. On the one hand I agree that literature realistically does contribute to the development of an individual’s moral conscience as well as the promotion of a just society. Nevertheless, I am also convinced that whether intentional or not, literature can also generate the opposite effect. Even if the effect is not immediate, at the very least, societies will often speculate about potential detrimental impacts.

As some final remarks, I would like to wish everybody good luck on the finals as well as a happy holiday. I look forward to another intriguing semester of ASTU.