Wednesday, August 21, 2013
Welcome to the AP Lit. blog for Mr. Miles' class! Keep in mind that these entries should be relaxed, but substantial. For your first entry, talk about what you think of Perrine's categorizing of escape literature and interpretive literature, paying special attention to his footnote on page 6 regarding commercial and quality fiction. Can you think of films or books that fall into those categories? What are they? Does his analogy about some writing being more "nutritious" than others make sense? When do you think we crave the "sugary" kind, and why?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No child likes to eat their vegetables. They are always the food group to be pushed and spread around to make it appear as though we have eaten some. Corn, Lima beans, broccoli, all victim of this harsh discrimination. However, our mothers tell us that "they are good for us" and they will "help us grow strong". Yet, as we grow up, most of us find that they are not that bad, (except Lima beans, those are still gross). By then, we have matured our taste buds and do not feel forced to eat them. They can be eaten at our own leisure, as we do with every other portion of our plate. Literature is the exact same. When we are immature readers, we just want to skip the Fitzgerald and get to the J.K. Rowling. However, we need the interpretive literature to "grow up strong" as readers. Sure, escape literature is great for a dessert, but it is not substantial. You can live off of it, but you will not be able to function as well. I usually crave the sugary literature after reading something difficult, or doing some critical thinking. I want to eat my dessert after I finished my vegetables.
ReplyDeleteThe literature we usually enjoy most tends to be the sugar. I think examples of these sugary books, even though I thoroughly enjoyed them, are the Harry Potter books, any Nancy Drew adventure, most children stories, the Twilight series, The Hunger Games series and anything by Sarah Dessen. Although I would categorize them as escape literature, they do have lessons and take-aways, no matter how thin or cheesy a vampire and werewolf fighting over a girl seems. The protein novels are most likely on the personal shelves of professors and English majors, and cannot be found in most public libraries. They are the Tzu, Shakespeare, Hawthorne, Dickens, Austin, and Twain. They are dense, thick, and confusing. You cannot skim the page and get the full meaning, or easily digest it. It takes work and practice to really get the full value of it.
I would say that most adult readers are immature. They are not forced to read literature, and therefore, do not. They would rather read about a brave, young solider charging into battle against an alien race than a poor, young socialite moving in next to a rich, mysterious man who throws extravagant parties. They are lazy, and do not see the value in the interpretive literature. Yet, we know deep down that we should be eating vegetables with every meal.
One of the main reasons why I love reading is because it widens my view and allows me to see different perspectives without actually living through certain experiences. While I agree with Perrine’s conclusion that literature falls somewhere on the spectrum of enjoyment and understanding, I’m not sure I fully understand his claim that, “unless [literature] expands or refines our minds or quickens our sense of life, its value is not appreciably greater than that of video games, bridge, or ping-pong” (Perrine 3). Literature can be a great learning tool; however I feel that sometimes “enjoyment” literature is a necessity ever once in a while. Sure “enjoyment” literature may not exercise our minds as much as literature categorized as “understanding”, but I think it is necessary for us to take a break every once and a while and read “enjoyment” literature. It helps us appreciate well written texts, showing us what aspects a well written piece of writing has. I know Perrine never says “enjoyment” literature has no value, however, I think it has more value than he gives it credit for. It also, allows our minds to take a mental break; all work and no play is never a good formula. For example, comic books can help inspire creativity while also giving the mind a break. They don’t have a hugely significant literary meaning in society; however, they do contribute to one’s imagination and allow a person to escape from reality for an hour or two. “Nutritious” writing is a necessity though, and should be the main choice of reading or those who wish to expand their views and gain insight and knowledge.
ReplyDeleteThe analogy definitely makes sense; I think every piece of literature can fall on the enjoyment-understanding spectrum. Those pieces of literature which fall on the upper (more “nutritious”) half of the spectrum should be more frequently visited than those on the lower half. Still, we crave the “sugary” literature because we need that escape and mental break sometimes. Like I said, I don’t think the “enjoyment” literature is a complete waste, I think it can inspire our own creativity and show a contrast between the two sides of the spectrum. A good example would be the Song of Ice and Fire (Game of Thrones) series verses the Twilight series. A Song of Ice and Fire series has many intricate story lines which continue throughout the entire series with underlying themes that reveal insights about human nature. Each character has a specific value to the themes the series reveals and each action is carefully planned out to assist in characterizing these themes. While the Twilight series is entertaining and well written, it is not as valuable as the previous series. Why? Twilight does not have as many literary tools and does not “illuminate some aspect of human life or behavior” (Perrine 4) as well as A Song of Ice and Fire (of course one could argue against this but this is from my personal observations). Twilight is still a well-written, entertaining, and successful series. It just does not have as much literary value as something more “nutritious”, like Perrine was trying to say. Just like balancing a meal, literature from both sides of the spectrum are good in moderation. (p.s. sorry this is so long)
Perrine's points were well written, interesting, and informative. His explanation of this scale, ranging from what the author calls escape literature to interpretative literature, was a fresh and vivid manifestation of the way he sees the contents of books. His unique prose and simple yet deep analysis of books was equally impressive. Perhaps my only criticism is how Perrine negates to focus on explaining what categories of books lie in the scale, making it sound as if he is trying to create an arbitrary system for judging the quality of books. Sure, there is escape and interpretative literature, but what is between it? The credibility of some of his points was lost here and the whole message certainly suffered. An elaboration of the importance of escape literature and the various vices of interpretative literature would have made his point three dimensional instead of completely flat. However, it wasn't difficult to discern that Perrine was expressing a viewpoint rather than attempting to be the god of fine literature. He was using his own reading as a launchpad for the scale, basing it off of his literary predilections. To reiterate my point, it sounded too much like he was trying to force his opinion onto the reader. The strongest part was his footnote about commercial and quality fiction. Looking at different tropes and cliches of the commercial and the unbiased statements about the quality fiction made it a joy to read. Even with that piece, something still subtly bothers me about the idea of putting literature into different categories. There are just too many different stories, themes, and writing styles to be able to categorize a book.
ReplyDeleteUsing the scale Perrine has set up, many different works of media can fall into that space. Bland action movies and stereotypical romantic comedies have been released in theaters since the beginning of film. Commando, the 1985 film starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, is complete fluff. It isn't smart, unique, or interesting in any way. Watch that movie, though, and you will be entertained the whole run time. It's completely escape. However, Die Hard, the Bruce Willis action flick, is escape, but it is also very smart and (most importantly) awesome. The high quality book series Harry Potter, despite all its great themes, falls under the escape category. Other examples would include The Expendables, Twilight, The Da Vinci Code, and the Naked Gun. The film Raging Bull is the complete opposite (interpretative). The movie is rooted firmly in reality and it explores the psyche of a boxer. Despite the boxing scenes there is not an antagonist and the resolution does not have the same fulfillment of John McClane defeating Hans Gruber. Other interpretative films and books would be, American Beauty, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, The Godfather, The Catcher in the Rye, and Manhattan.
Nutritious isn't the right word for such a comparison. You could say that you would have to read the most "nutritious" books in order to have the best benefit, but books that are escape serve a purpose too. Each one is important but just in different ways.
We crave the "sugary" kind when we no longer wish to explore the ourselves but to explore a world that ourselves could never dwell in. This yearning comes from being disinterested or fed up with humanity around us. It is a natural urge to question, but sometimes we have to pretend we're John McClane.
I think Perrine is totally justified in categorizing both literature and readers into certain groups based on characteristics. His footnote on commercial and quality fiction really captured my attention because his synopsis of most commercial fiction really did encompass every easy summer reading book I've ever read and every book I gobbled up as a younger child. It made me wonder what percentage of literature out there would be considered 'quality' fiction by him....I would wager not a majority. It also makes me realize how hard it probably is to write quality fiction and have it sell. Many writers who are considered 'classics' now had little success during their life time; Fitzgerald and Thoreau were two authors who sold hardly any books during their lifetime, but after their deaths, became extremely well-known. I'm glad that Perrine took the time to address the difference between commercial fiction and quality fiction. I think as teenagers we sometimes forget that there is more out there than Twilight and The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants, and so it was an eye-opener to read how easy it was to predict the plots of such books, and how similar they are.
ReplyDeleteI think that a lot of what EVERYONE reads is commercial fiction, whether they are an adult or teenager, simply because commercial fiction is easier to read. Not many people like to sit down with a copy of Walden for an easy read after work. Most popular work out there today would probably be considered commercial fiction by Perrine. Again, Twilight became an extremely popular book AND movie series, both in teenage girls and middle-aged women. 50 Shades of Grey is an adequate example, too. I hardly think people will be talking about the literary quality and lessons learned by that book in 50 years. It's more likely they will be talking about the controversial topic and the instant popularity.
The nutrition analogy really proved Perrine's point. It made his topic understandable to all of us, because we all went through that phase where veggies were the most disgusting food ever. But aside from the fact that we can relate to it, it also really paralleled the topic he was talking about, which was the differences between immature and mature readers and the types of literature each reader enjoyed. As little kids, we of course don't want to eat green things-- we want to eat candy and sugar and ice cream, but for the most part, that is okay. With at least some veggies in our diet, we can survive off of sugar, because our bodies are young and can handle the shock to our systems. Books are the same way: when we are younger, the commercial fiction is okay for us to read because we're not ready for the big stuff, the quality fiction. As we get older though, we begin to transition into the quality fiction, mostly because school requires us too. Our parents start to make us eat our vegetables more because we need to grow stronger and healthier. But we are all going to have that craving for sugar (and commercial fiction) often. I know I personally like reading the books like Twilight and other girly romance novels because I want to read something that reflects what's happening in my life. If I have a similarity with the main character, it makes me feel comfortable and safe. I want to read something that reinforces and relates to my struggles and triumphs in life.
Upon opening a book you are diving into an entirely different world. There are so many different worlds to choose from, and depending on the person you are and the lesson you want to learn, there is a certain book for you. Every novel you pick up should have a theme that will move you in someway, somehow, but Perrine argues that some books are purely for entertainment and pleasure with little to no deeper meaning. The nutritional value of different books is easy to agree with and there are of course books that will strengthen you more as a reader and as a person than others. What the author brings to the table and what you are will to accept also contribute to the nutrition you eventually obtain. At first glance, books such as Twilight, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings or other such fantasy books look merely like fluff or “escape literature” because the main ideas seem quite ridiculous; vampires, witches and wizards, evil creatures and a magic ring. But I think if one allows themselves to reach deeper into the meaning of these stories, you can find something as beautiful and moving as you would find in such “interpretive literature.” No matter what piece of writing you are reading, Perrine himself explains that, “The experience of humankind through the ages is that literature may furnish such understanding and do so effectively-that the depiction of imagined experiences can provide authentic insights.” Even with an idea as unrealistic as magic, there is potential there for the human heart to be transformed in a way to provide understanding to the deeper questions of life. Although they may not make us think as hard as Shakespeare, Twain or Fitzgerald’s masterpieces with brilliant life lessons, we find both forms of enjoyment and understanding in all literature.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I’m not sure if the reader is ever fully mature. There is always the part of us that wants to go for the enticing and quick paced fantasy/action over the high level lexile ranged novels. Even after years and years of studying and pondering high level reading material, does anyone completely understand or desire to understand exactly what the author is trying to say? Maybe that’s part of the beauty of reading. That you’re never fully mature and it gives you a chance to explore who you are and what you truly care about and stand for through any kind of book you want. In the end, as Foster says in “How to Read Literature Like a Professor” there is only one story. There is never something purely unique or original because there is a story that will forever live within the pages of every book and the heart of every hand that has ever touched those pages. A valued message will always be conveyed through that single story, and though it may be made from millions of different perspectives. There is a moral engraved in those words that every author so carefully crafted for any reader looking for answers.
Am I immature?
ReplyDeleteOf course I am. I like to make "that's what she said" jokes, and today I got excited when I found out that Build-a-Bear is opening a store in Park Meadows Mall. In spite of this admitted childishness, I never considered myself an immature reader until Mr. Laurence Perrine decided to tell me that I was one. And to be honest, I don't care what he thinks of me and my literature selection. I feel that a reader should be judged on their ability to take substance from what they read, rather than the "literary value" of their choice. If I can be inspired and learn valuable lessons from both Seuss and Shakespeare, aren't I a talented reader?
I also disagree with the scaling of escape to interpretive, as it casts the term "escape" in a negative light. Last I checked, an escape is always a positive experience, whether a overworked, stressed person is escaping to Tahiti or Nemo and Dory are escaping (or es-cap-ey-ing) from danger. I aspire to write TV shows, specifically sitcoms, and I can think of no better compliment of my work than someone who feels that my world that I create helps take them out of their busy one for even a scant hour. In Perrine's scale, escape is the opposite of substantial, which may be true in some cases; however, many of the best books I've ever read are probably "escapist" on his spectrum. If a reader connects profoundly to a book, I believe that it is a success.
One aspect that Perrine assesses very accurately is the commercial vs. quality debate. The booming vampire market is an example of fads gone overboard to make a buck. A perfect union between two characters or a white fences, 2.5 kids outcome is always popular but never stimulating in this sense. I've never read or watched Game of Thrones, but I've heard that the author kills off well-liked characters left and right. I find this fascinating and refreshing.
As for the nutrition comparison, I can relate personally to this: I struggle with a lot of food (besides being lactose intolerant), and basically eat like an old person: vegetables, chicken, fruit and grains. My own personal paradox is that I make possibly the most delicious brownies on Earth, thanks to a ridiculously amazing family recipe. The point is, I function well on a hearty diet of healthy foods (i.e. literature and required reading). Yet, in my eyes, a brownie every once in a while is good for the soul, and far more memorable than all of the nameless salads that I consume on a daily basis. In this way, escape literature may not be nutritional, but it is pretty dang satisfying.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think Perrine's categorizing makes total sense, but when one reads this passage it seems that he makes these two types of writing styles total opposites. His description of escape literature really correlates with the books I like to read. These books are entertaining and there is not too much thinking involved, though I would not call myself an immature reader. The categorizing of the two types of writing makes sense, but categorizing people into mature and immature readers does not make sense. I have been in advanced language arts since 8th grade, so I suppose he would categorize me as a mature reader, but if I had things my way he would categorize me as immature. There is indeed a gray area when it comes to categorizing people the people who read fiction.
ReplyDeleteThe footnote on page 6 almost makes me feel like the people who read quality fiction are an elite group of people, and only they can understand the deep meaning of the story. Everyone else who reads commercial fiction is just part of this large group of any, regular people.
The first story that comes to mind when I think of quality fiction is Romeo and Juliet, this story was a tragedy and can have a deep meaning, but it also had violence and a love piece to it. Now on the other hand, the hand of commercial fiction, are stories like Harry Potter and Twilight. Both of these examples are just for entertainment and are shallow.
Personally I am always craving the "sugary" kind of fiction because it entertaining. After reading a whole bunch of quality fiction my brain needs a break and all I want to read is commercial or escape fiction. People crave escape literature when they need a break from their stressful life.
Perrine’s chapter on “Escape and Interpretation” in his novel, Story and Structure categorizes literature into escape and interpretive literature. However, books and novels aren’t the only forms of entertainment that fall into those two categories. Movies can also be separated into escape and interpretation. There are many escape movies which include: Pirates of the Caribbean, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, The Avengers, and just about every ‘chick flick’ ever made. Many escape books are: Twilight, The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants, and The Percy Jackson books. Although these books and movies may be very enjoyable to read and watch, they do not provide any real sustenance to feed our rich desire for answers and insight into raw human emotion, love, morals, and what really matters. They only add a little sugar, fluff, laughter, adventure, sex, and suspense to our ever-wondering lives.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there are some books and movies that open our minds to the big questions of the world: How do our surroundings shape our identities? Is freedom ever free? What makes a hero? Does love require sacrifice? Many books give this insight: The Great Gatsby, The Secret Life of Bees, Gone With The Wind, Wuthering Heights, The Hunger Games, and so many more. The movies that provide thoughtful insight to these types of questions include: A Beautiful Mind, V for Vendetta, Jakob the Liar, and even Mulan. These books and movies provide the inspiration for deep personal thought about what’s important in the world, and even feed you answers to some of life’s most pressing questions about why we’re here and what we’re doing.
So if these wonderful books and movies feed us such substantial food for thought, then why do we crave those sugary, fluffy pieces that purely let us escape for a little while? Because escape is fun. As much fun as reality is, and as amazing as it is to suddenly have clarity in your life on a certain moral topic when you watch a movie or let yourself get lost in a book, there is no feeling like laughing hysterically for 2 hours while watching a group of men ride imaginary horses while clicking two coconuts together or reading every word as quickly as you can to figure out if Bella and Edward spend forever together. We crave the sugary movies and literature because they let be someone else for a little while before we have to pick ourselves up and watch or read something that will leave us satisfied and ready to tackle the world with our new found knowledge.
I'd like to think every piece of work has intrinsic meaning, beyond just entertainment. That everything I have read has impacted the way I am. I don't think it's wrong to say that if you love something, or hate something, or disagree with something, or relate to something, or learn from something, that it has shaped you. And if the book you're reading doesn't do any of that, why read it?
ReplyDeleteIt's possible to only read things you like, things that suit your world view, and maybe it's wrong to never examine other opinions, but if so that's the fault of the reader not the books. If as Perrine says such readers exist (which I'm sure they do) who only read sugar stories, with a plucky protagonist, a hint of romance, and a ride off into the sunset with the characters "FIN" overlaid, that regardless of the existence of enjoyment type books, these people would not read interpretive literature, unless they were specifically pushed to. These expectations are not created through literature alone, but also film, the modern media, and perhaps even a culture that is used to expecting a happy ending in their own lives no matter what they do.
In fact one of my main issues with the article, is its non-mention of other media forms. Perrine even uses video games in opposition to what literature beyond enjoyment should be. I don't know if anyone has ever been moved by Tetris, but I do know people who would speak to the effect of an emotionally charged, or interesting cutscene, or storyline within a game. He also ignores media such as Film, Television, Music and Music Videos, and even Comics, all of which can have strong impacts, change views, introduce different points of view, and fit his theory, whether you believe it or not.
Some of the stories I love most have been of the cookie-cutter variety. Sometimes the simplest story can drive timeless points home even more than we had believed them before. They can remind us of the truly important things to value: Friendship, Love, Individual Strength, Goodness, and Purity. These are some of the things I am reminded of even with a simple story as Cinderella. Maybe your most important stories remind you of different things. You can take a story like Cinderella, and take it to mean some day a Prince Charming will come and sweep you off your feet, but you could also remind yourself that bad things sometimes happen to good people, but the strength and heart that person shows in that time can make beautiful things happen.
Perrine makes some interesting points in his chapter, mostly concerning escapism and interpretive literature. He even goes so far as to say that some literature has significantly more value than other literature, which is not necessarily untrue. However, I disagree with the idea that interpretive literature is something we are forced to read, whereas escape literature is something we want to read. This really takes away from the idea that the two are ends of a spectrum, rather than two separate entities. I think we prefer to separate the two into categories, so that it is easier to explain to ourselves. Either we are reading something for fun, or we are reading something for benefit- there seems to be no in-between. What about books by Jodi Picoult or John Green? Steven Chboski or Suzanne Collins? Most of these authors have books that have been made into movies aimed at teenagers, but does that lessen the affect they have on our culture, morals, and personal identity?
ReplyDeleteRecognizing the spectrum is important because most novels aren't inherently black and white. Yes, in the bookstore there is the "Chick Lit" shelf and the "Classics" shelf, but what about all the other ones? What about mystery, or religion? The fiction books in these sections probably couldn't be classified until they were picked up and skimmed through. Even then, they may not be easily discernible. What makes something purely escapism literature? Is it the wording, or the plot? Although it shouldn't be every book I read (as Perrine pointed out), I like books with plots concerning teenagers because I can connect to them on an incredibly basic level- we are both teens. We are both going through the same basic struggles, whether the character in the novel endures more or less than I do. Does this make me an "immature reader"? I can appreciate Austen and Fitzgerald, certainly. But that doesn't mean that I cannot also appreciate The Hunger Games and understand the underlying political message and view on society heading towards dystopia. I don't think that the fact I loved Harry Potter lessens my ability to comprehend Shakespeare.
Either way, it is important to remember the spectrum, and that not only are books closer to one end than the other, books also have pieces of escapism and interpretation in them. I return again to the Hunger Games example: does rooting for Team Peeta or Team Gale improve my ability to mature as a reader? Of course not. But does understanding the complexities of media exploitation and governmental control over society help shape the way I see the world and approach other literature, such as 1984, another dystopian novel (and yet probably classified as interpretive literature)? Absolutely.
Elli Streifer
Reading literature can make me feel like I am running on a treadmill; it seems like I am going nowhere and I really want to puke (yes, I am talking about you J. Alfred Prufrock). However, I do have a tendency to finish my runs, no matter how painful, and luckily I have the same tendency with reading. Looking back, all the high school English books I have managed to finish have benefited me in some way, even if that is just better preparing me for the next book. The same cannot be said about escape reading, even if I want to say the kidnappings and explosions in the Clive Cussler books are going to help me with my career as a deep cover CIA agent/hit man. With all of this in mind, I see where Perrine is coming from when he calls interpretive reading the protein of the diet and escape reading the sugar that destroys our health. I do not totally agree with his statement, but there is certainly something to say for this perspective.
ReplyDeletePerrine seems to have the notion that we should all worship at the feet of Hemingway, Bradbury, and Orwell while we burn the disgraceful J.K. Rowling and Stephen King novels. By all means, the great literary writers are incredible teachers. I was somewhat skeptical about this fact up until a couple of weeks ago, but I am happy to say that Thomas Foster did a great job of showing me that with some analysis there is an extreme wealth of information in these literary works. The teachings of great men like Shakespeare are passed on for multiple generations for a reason, so we should definitely pay plenty of attention to the stories that these men tell. However, I am not so sure that escape reading should be considered a sin. People crave a good story, and usually they are happy to not have to think at any deeper levels to figure out what the story means. This is why the Twilight series, action books, and romance movies are so popular. There is no reason to fight human nature in this regard, it is better to just let it go because chances are we will take something out of any story that we are told.
With all of this in mind, I would like to present my own metaphor. The interprative reading is like going to shop at Whole Foods, whereas reading for escape is like choosing King Soopers instead. Sure, Whole Foods may have more benefits in its products, but going to shop at King Soopers is still fine and will leave a person much healthier than not going to shop at all. King Soopers shoppers should not be looked down upon because they do in fact benefit by going to the store.
It has always been very clear to me the difference between deep stories and surface-level candy-corn stories to which Perrine refers to as “commercial fiction.” What he fails to recognize is that his gaze is too narrow. He festers on preconceived roadblocks to his thinking. One notable example of this fallacy is when he writes off science fiction as fluff literature, from which a mature reader can take no value besides simple entertainment. Some of the most profound novels and short stories I have read fall under the category of science fiction: Fahrenheit 451; Nineteen Eighty-Four; The Last Question; Frankenstein; Brave New World; I, Robot; Ender’s Game. I took particular issue to this claim, because this list encompasses many of the most thought-provoking and symbolic pieces of literature I have had the pleasure of reading. Their content is symbolic and literary, and honestly often felt like, as Olivia would put it, “eating my vegetables.” To be fair, the world of science fiction has evolved in recent decades from a genre of vapidity to one of immense depth, but Perrine should recognize that the precedents of society ever-expanding, which makes sweeping point-proving generalizations difficult to make.
ReplyDeleteAnother such example of Perrine’s gaze being woefully too low is when he criticizes video games as the most intellectually dampening form of storytelling in existence. Yes, deep thinking usually comes in the form of writing. Yes, the vast majority of videogames leave something to be desired in the intelligence department. But not all. This is important to me, because video games are a growing and maturing medium. The more we stereotype them as purely commercial entertainment, the harder the struggle becomes for genre pioneers like Daughty Dog’s “The Last of Us”, universally praised as the ultimate post-modern “novel” of 2013, inspired by Cormac McCarthy’s The Road. No, this is not a product placement for PlayStation; I simply intend to communicate that “interpretive literature” can take the forms of more than just literature. Dead Poets Society. Shawshank Redemption. Fight Club.
Ultimately, yes, it is crucial that we make a distinction between meaty literature and vanilla ice cream literature. In my mind, I would much rather devour a medium well hamburger than a pint of ice cream any day. This also tends to be my stance on fiction. It is easy to get sucked into reading one commercial fiction after another because they are written to be like reading downhill, whereas “quality” fiction cares not whether it is downhill for the reader, but rather that we take a journey that may just be uphill both ways. Nutritious literature will always be the ones that stick with me. As a reader who gets headaches from reading, I tend to save my appetite for those books that leave a mark on my thinking, rather than books I can just fly through.
When you read a book you become entranced in a whole new place, sometimes you don the armor and sword of a knight or burst through a flaming house as a firefighter. Perrine had some good points full of insight and knowledge that I wouldn’t of thought about unless I had read his article but in other instances he had some other points where I completely disagreed. I had to look at the date when this article was published and it said 1988, I think one of the reasons he said the things he said in the article is because of when he wrote this. 1988 and the modern day 2013 is a big difference and I wonder if Perrine would have the same views as he did when he wrote this.
ReplyDeleteBooks like “Twilight” and movies like “Wolverine” can fill your head with superficialness if you focus on it too much but a healthy dose of it once in a while can leave you with a healthy lifestyle and long as you read others like “Othello” and even once in a while watch a documentary.
I myself prefer the “sugary” kind of reading compared to the “nutritious” kind. There can still be meaning inside those sugary books and it is a lot of fun throughout whatever journey your book brings you along. When reading the “Wild Geese” poem I saw (or more likely thought) that one part of the poem was based on primal instinct. Primal instinct is hunger, thirst, the will to survive, seeking knowledge and pleasure. I think one of the reasons “sugary” books appeal to us so much is because it is our instinct, it just depends on who you are. For some, reading Shakespeare would be considered pleasure reading but in my case I would prefer a book with war and violence in it instead of Shakespeare. Although Perrine would most likely argue that my taste has little to no meaning to draw from I think that it depends on what YOU personally take to heart. I could find meaning in any book that I want, either from past experiences or personal thoughts that others do not have. If Perrine did not have such a hard set opinion maybe he could of seen that you can find meaningful ideas in both subjects. Just like eating food, nutrition can get boring after a while and sometimes you need to mix it up by eating sugar or junk food. But be careful, just as you get fat when you eat too much junk, so can your mind with superficial commercial fiction.
According to Laurence Perrine, we as readers, “spend precious time on works of imagination” (Story and Structure 3) for two reasons: Enjoyment and understanding. Perrine further classifies fiction into two types of literature: literature of escape and literature of interpretation. The first type, literature of escape, is solely for entertainment and to “escape” the reality of the world. I think the primary reason why we find enjoyment in escape literature is because we are able to connect with the author. For example, in the Twilight Saga, Stephanie Meyers, the author, writes about an ordinary girl falling in love with a perfect and beautiful being. This fantasy fulfills every present day teenage girl’s dream; thus, the reader is able to relate to the character. The second type is literature of interpretation. Perrine describes this type of literature as an analytical story with “an insight – large or small – into the nature and conditions of our existence” (4). Authors of interpretive literature will often analyze the flaws or taboos of our society. For instance, in the Great Gatsby, Scott Fitzgerald depicts the corruption of American society during the Prohibition Era. When we analyze a novel like Great Gatsby, we become keener in understanding the structure of our world. Appropriately, Perrine compares fiction to food. Much like food, there is literature that can benefit us and there is literature that can be “harmful to our health” (7). I believe that there are works of fiction that benefit us more than others, but that varies on the specific reader. Rather than categorizing certain literature as “sugary”, we should be encouraged to read both commercial and quality literature. By reading commercial fiction, we learn what society is focused on and their mindsets, and by reading quality fiction, our knowledge on the world grows.
ReplyDeleteAs someone who loathes categories, I was rather surprised by the fact that I didn't despise everything Perrine had to say in Escape and Interpretation. Perrine argues that media, particularly books, are not made equal and introduces a spectrum from commercialism (escape) to quality (interpretation). Unlike Perrine, however, I strongly believe that even escapist media has original and important aspects to be taken away by the reader, viewer, etc. Just as humans cannot be siphoned into two categories, the encounters they have with media cannot be limited to nutritious or causing-diabetes-sugary.
ReplyDeleteUpon looking at my bookshelf, I find myself conflicted by what may or may not be of value to Perrine. There's the obvious instances, such as McCarthy's The Road and Fitzgerald's Gatsby though I myself find that I took a great deal more away from King's story of a father trying to murder his son (The Shining-also, The Shining has so much more to it than Jack attempting to wring Danny's neck, I promise) than McCarthy's of a father desperately struggling to save his son. Initial reading of Escape and Interpretation would have made me feel like a bumbling idiot for this though on further inspection, I realize that human experience will fluctuate a novel's place on the spectrum of commercial and quality. As an aspiring filmmaker, I find this spectrum to be incredibly applicable to film. There are filmmakers like Michael Bay and Edgar Wright (don't get me wrong, I hold Edgar Wright in high regard. Michael Bay, not so much) and while Shaun of the Dead may be an absolutely awesome movie, there will not be the same universal degree of substance in it that you would find in any one of Stanley Kubrick's films.
I find that when it boils down to what is nutritious and what is literary junk, too much of one thing is never good and literary arsenals should be comprised of both the protein and the cavity-inducing sugar. When I fall into fits of sadness, I'm not going to reach for The Old Man and the Sea to provide comfort that I can find with far more ease in Harry Potter. Likewise, when I look within myself to reflect on things that have impacted me most, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is of infinitely greater value than If You Give a Mouse a Cookie. It's imperative to cultivate a healthy literary mind but what fun is it if you can't read some classic Batman or watch Mean Girls?
There is some much literature today, all so different that I find it very difficult to place them in just two different are not exact, and is not back and white, but I still think that a book can be escape or interpretation based off what the reader took out of it. Any book can give the reader deeper insight or understanding to the world, weather it has a happy ending or not, just like any book can be an escape for whoever is reading it. Its not plausible for people to be “immature readers” merely because they find a greater enjoyment of “escape” literature, or a certain type of literature, we all have a preference or type of literature more that we enjoy others. The way Perrine writes these, he seems to almost be biased, and one could assume that he himself prefers interpretation literature from the way the whole essay he is saying none of this is absolute, than furthering than furthering say how just liking escape can “leave us with with merely superficial attitude for life” and “ distort our view of reality”, yet nothing negative is said about interpretation literature. Although I disagree with Perrine’s thinking, one could say books like Fault in our Stars by John Green is interpretation literature (although I found it both escape and interpretation) and Divergent by Veronica Roth Escape literature.
ReplyDeleteThe footnote on page six about commercial fiction makes me feel like they are stereotyping whole genres of books, that have these storyline or aspects of these characteristics and saying that they are all the same and less original; that there is a formula, or given way to write them. It is almost saying that quality fiction, is made with more meaning and work, thus is better than commercial, and people that read it have more understanding and reading skills than those who do not.
His analogy about writing being nutritious makes sense, and I agree that books all have different nutrition value, but I disagree with him saying that escape literature may be “ adulterated and harmful to our health”. Not just all escape literature is harmful, but too much of either one has the potentially have negative affects rather than positive, and a good balance of both is what it really takes to remain healthy. To much Interpretative can be bad too; it can be understood or interpreted differently to people, and can also distort reality in depressed and cynical way if read to much. I think we crave the “sugary” kind of writing because it gives us a break away from the hardships in our life, and reminds us that there is still good, new, and magical things in the world, and gives us hope, and a fresh view of the world and the life we want for ourselves. It gives us some of the insight, and expectations we had as children, before the stress, worry, and hardships. Just like adults, children have an understanding purely given to them, that we adults no longer can acquire, and the “sugary” kind of literature gives some of the knowledge back to us.
When I first started to read this article, I thought that the separation of these two kinds of books was an obvious mistake, because it is more complicated than just escape literature and interpretive literature. I am glad that he admits that it is a scale. The spectrum of literature is wide. I love Ender’s Games, which is both escape and interpretive. It is sci-fi fantasy, but he also approaches philosophy and complex ideas in an accessible way because it also is very sugary. With the knowledge that he was discussing a scale not two categories, I think it is hard to disagree with his separation. I think of the difference between say Fast and Furious, which is all about two things (action and sex,) and Matrix or Lord of the Rings which are actually complicated and meaningful, but also entertaining. Books have the same scale. Twilight versus Pride and Prejudice. Both romances, but Pride and Prejudice clearly has more thought and meaning. (I never have actually read Twilight so I don’t actually know what I am talking about, but it is the poster book for escape fiction.) I think we have all experienced good books, bad books, entertaining books, and boring books. My only complaint is the scale can be more complicated. Some are boring but meaningful, while some are exciting and not meaningful. Some are political or humorous. There are more aspects to literature when determining value, but as far as just escape versus interpretive, I think it is hard to deny the scale exists.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the sugar analogy goes, I think it makes sense, but is not the best analogy. I think we all have enjoyed sugary books, as well as sugar itself. In my experience, when I start soccer season and get in shape again, my body starts to crave healthy foods. It needs the more complex forms of energy. It needs protein. I think this is also true with books. As we read high quality books, and “get our brains in shape,” our brain craves quality books and not sugary books. I have come to enjoy quality movies much more than pure surface level movies. And as I see more of them, the more I try to only watch quality movies. I am not quite there with literature, but I think as I read great literature, the more it tastes good.
I do not agree on now extreme Perrine is being when it comes to escape literature. It is very hard for me to believe that reading a substantial amount escape literature will become the reality of that person, that their reality and fantasies get mixed up. I have reading science fiction books and it is one of my ways of escaping, however I can easily tell the difference between fantasy and reality. These days it is very hard to be original when it comes to writing. I feel like quality fiction is very hard to find. When it comes to commercial fiction, there are many examples of it like many of the Disney movies or Marvel superhero movies. There are many books and movies where the main character who happens to be a girl, needs saving. I believe that because these types of entertainment many readers are starting to enjoy books where the girl is the heroine like in the books The Hunger Games and Divergent. I agree that some books are better or more “nutritious” than others. Some books are just not good for people to read, like Fifty Shades of Grey. Why do people want to read stuff like that? Many books are good and can make you question and think about the government or the quality of life. The Hunger Games book created many questions for me like is the government secretly trying to take over. Now this might conflict the fantasy versus realty but to me seems like a realistic question. I think we crave well written books that have a complicated plot that keeps us questioning and wondering what is going to happen next. We as humans are very curious and we ask many questions that are hard to ask and many of these books keep us questioning.
ReplyDeleteBlack or white. Which is it? Do you fall under one of these categories? Probably not. You cannot force millions of people into to an “either or” situation. There is a wide array of new and interesting people. Along with books. Can it really be accurate to push a piece of fictional literature into either escape or interpretive as Laurence Perrine may seem to do in Story and Structure? No, and some may think that this was Perrine’s intent when writing “Escape and Interpretation.” However, I think he offers a wide spectrum of literature. He seems to draw a deep ravine through the two types of literature at first glance of the chapter. Once read further he states: Escape and interpretation are not two great bins, in one or the other of which we can toss any given story. Rather, they are opposite ends of a scale” (Perrine 4). A scale means that there are different variations. Some books can lean towards interpretation but contain some escape hidden in the lines of the novel. In this chapter Perrine does seem to fail to mention variations in the scale and focuses on the ends of the scale. Not intertwining them. That is up for the reader to decide.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Perrine’s footnote on page 6. There does seem to be a classical formula followed for commercial fictions. Always ending in an “happily ever after.” Now that I think of it, almost all the books I've read in my lifetime have been commercial fiction. And even though I know the ending every time, I still find immense pleasure in reading them because they offer a perfect life that everyone wishes they had. And as for quality literature, I find myself being obligated to read these during school. You would think that these would be unenjoyable for a 16 year old in lala land, but I find myself being infatuated with analyzing the artistic intent of the literature.
Some obvious films that fall into the category of escape and commercial are Twilight, Harry Potter, and Valentines Day because the plot is obvious and simple. I think an example of a quality movie could be The Kings Speech. His analogy of some pieces of writing being more nutritious makes perfect sense. Some literature has more abstract messages. They use more literary devices; they have deeper meaning everywhere you look. I think we crave the “sugary” kind when we are feeling emotionally unhappy or just looking for that temporary escape. Most times it offers a straight forward gateway to an imaginary world that we all want to enter. We are often times sucked into them because it has an emotional tie to the reader. The reader easily connects to the characters and because emotionally invested in them. And the journey they are endeavoring on.
Reading this story, I found the lines between "sugary fiction" and "nutritious fiction" to be quite blurred. And that's not just because I am a terrible example when it comes to eating healthy! There are many fiction books I have read that Perrine would, according to the opinion prominent in this text, most likely describe as "sugary" (Harry Potter, for example) that I have found nutrition in. I thought it was unfair to categorize a book as "full of fluff" when people with different opinions, like me, could find it with some nutrition (and vice versa).
ReplyDeleteI initially found Perrine's categorization to be unfair, but his quote; "Having established a distinction, however, we must not exaggerate or oversimplify it. Escape and interpretation are not two great bins into one or the other of which we can toss any given story. Rather, they are opposite ends of the scale, the two poles between which the world of fiction spins" changed my mind. He obviously understands that not every story is all sugar or all nutrition. I like the way he describes the categorization as a scale between two poles; however, I don’t think he accounts well enough for all the space in-between those two poles.
I agree completely on his idea of escape literature and interpretive literature. I, for one, would not want the Harry Potter series (and nothing else) to be the entire course-load of my college English class. Well, I would but...how much real-world information would I gain from that? I would need more substantial books to learn life skills that will help me succeed in real-world English. I completely agree with Perrine that some writing is more nutritious that others. It does make sense, and the separation between the two types is needed, in order to better fit the need of the reader(s) and the situation.
I think we crave the "sugary kind" of fiction when we need a distraction in our life. It may still be giving you bits and pieces of nutrition. I say, as long as you don't over-eat enjoyment literature in relation to interpretive literature, there isn’t any problem. You can have your commercial fiction cake and eat it too!
Perrine's categorization of all books either being escape literature or interpretive literature has a truth behind it, but doesn't necessarily capture the whole idea. I believe that a lot of literature's "nutritional value" can be based not only off of the content, but the reader, and the use/meaning that it supplies to them specifically. There seems to be somewhat of a fine line between some escape literature and interpretive literature, and it's also possible, I'd say, for them to cross over.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of commercial and quality fiction, I would definitely agree that writers do tend to create easily commercialized writing formulas that they stand by and hardly stray from in order to sell books. The first formula that I, and most people, tend to think of is the classic hero's story, which is used in many books throughout time. There are many different books and films, especially more recent ones, that Perrine would definitely categorize as escape literature. A few examples would be Harry Potter or Percy Jackson, though I think that there is still some things to be learned from them.
Perrine's analogy to some writing being more "nutritious" than others definitely makes sense. I'd say that the reason that most people tend to crave "sugary" literature is as a way to escape, as Perrine would say, from their thoughts and their day to day life. Though it may not be as nutritious as some interpretive literature, I think that escape literature is still a great thing to mix into one's library.
The first statement I have about the categorization is that the basic idea is that there aren’t really categories, and that interests me. I like how a book is not, can not be, merely escape or interpretive, and there are infinite possibilities of where it falls on the spectrum, and that these possibilities are not just opened by the author, but the reader as well. It is especially interesting how he mentions commercial and quality fiction, where commercial is meant to make money, and quality is meant to... well, have quality. Commercial films and books could be things like The Avengers, Men In Black, and Narnia, while quality films and books could be The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, The Kite Runner, and Enemy at the Gates. But there can’t be solid black and white there, either, because someone might want to pick up a few coins because of a truly remarkable book. The best part of this, though, is that he does not exclude readers from their own spectrum. This opens even more possible interpretations of all texts. A text that tends to be extremely interpretive in the hands of one reader may completely skip over the mind of another reader.
ReplyDeleteWe may crave “escape” literature for that very word: escape. We wish to get away from the problems of our own lives, and an easy way to do this is to pick up a book and place ourselves in a different reality.
I agree with the above statement. You don't read a book based off category. You read a book based off quality. You won't not read a book if it's interpretive literature but has the reputation as being a great novel that's easy to read and entertaining. Books such as To Kill A Mockingbird and The Great Gatsby are novels that fall under interpretive literature, but that are also easy to read and entertaining. Just because a book is categorized as interpretive literature doesn't make it not fun and readable.
ReplyDelete-Brendan Till