Writings on literature
literature
Scholarly research
Research by scholars into the literary past began almost as soon as literature itselfâas soon as the documents accumulatedâand for many centuries it represents almost all the scholarship that has survived. The most extensive text of the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh, the first of the worldâs great classics, is a late Assyrian synthesis that must have required an immense amount of research into clay tablets, written in several languages going back to the beginning of Mesopotamian civilization. Many Egyptian poems and the philosophic creation myth known as the âMemphite Theologyâ survive in very late texts that carefully reproduce the original language of the first dynasties. Once the function of scribes was established as essential, they invented literary scholarship, both to secure their position and to occupy their leisure. The great epoch of literary scholarship in ancient times centered on the library (and university) of Alexandria from its foundation in 324 bce to its eventual destruction by the end of the 4th century ce. Hellenistic Greek scholars there developed such an academic and pedantic approach to literary scholarship and scholarly literature that the term Alexandrine remains pejorative to this day. To them, however, is owed the survival of the texts of most of the Greek Classics.
Roman literary scholarship was rhetorical rather than analytic. With the coming of Islam, there was established a far-flung community of scholars who were at home in learned circles from India to Spain. Judaism, like Islam, was a religion of the book and of written tradition, so literary scholarship played a central role in each. The same is true of India, China, and later Japan; for sheer bulk, as well as for subtlety and insight, Asian scholarship has never been surpassed. In a sense, the Renaissance in Europe was a cultural revolution led by literary scholars who discovered, revived, and made relevant again the literary heritage of Greece and Rome. In the 19th century, literary scholarship was dominated by the exhaustive, painstaking German academician, and that Germanic tradition passed to the universities of the United States. The demand that every teacher should write a masterâs thesis, a doctorâs dissertation, and, for the rest of oneâs career, publish with reasonable frequency learned articles and scholarly books, has led to a mass of scholarship of widely varying standards and value. Some is trivial and absurd, but the best has perfected the texts and thoroughly illuminated the significance of nearly all the worldâs great literature.
Literary criticism
Literary criticism, as distinguished from scholarly research, is usually itself considered a form of literature. Some people find great critics as entertaining and stimulating as great poets, and theoretical treatises of literary aesthetics can be as exciting as novels. Aristotle, Longinus, and the Roman rhetorician and critic Quintilian are still read, although Renaissance critics such as the once all-powerful Josephus Scaliger are forgotten by all but specialized scholars. Later critics, such as Edgar Allan Poe, Charles-Augustin Sainte-Beuve, Hippolyte Taine, Vissarion Belinsky, Matthew Arnold, Walter Bagehot, Walter Pater, and George Saintsbury, are probably read more for themselves than for their literary judgments and for their general theorizing rather than for their applications (in the case of the first three, for instance, time has confounded almost all the evaluations they made of their contemporaries). The English critics have survived because they largely confined themselves to acknowledged masterpieces and general ideas. Perhaps literary criticism can really be read as a form of autobiography. Aestheticians of literature such as I.A. Richards, Sir C.M. Bowra, Walter Benjamin, Susanne Langer, and Ernst Cassirer have had an influence beyond the narrow confines of literary scholarship and played in their time something approaching the role of general philosophers. This has been true on the popular level as well. The Dane Georg Brandes, the Americans James Gibbons Huneker, H.L. Mencken, and Edmund Wilsonâthese writers were social forces in their day, proving that literary criticism can play a role in social change.
In Japan, the overthrow of the shogunate, the restoration of the emperor, and the profound change in the Japanese social sensibility began with the literary criticism of Motoori Norinaga. The 19th-century revolution in theology resulted from the convergence of Darwinian theories of evolution and the technical and historical criticism of the Bible. For many 20th-century intellectuals, the literary quarterlies and weeklies, with their tireless discussions of the spiritual significance and formal characteristics of everything from the greatest masterpiece to the most ephemeral contemporaneous production, can be said to have filled the place of religion, both as rite and dogma. In the last decades of the 20th century, though, Anglo-American literary criticism was criticized for its failure to be âliteratureâ and for its dependence on jargon.
Future developments
In a worldwide urban civilization, which has taken to itself the styles and discoveries of all cultures past and present, the future of literature is quite impossible to determine. Further muddling predictions are the uncertainties posed by the invention of the Internet and artificial intelligence (AI). On the one hand, some writers have argued that the World Wide Web has democratized writing and literature, allowing authors to have their work read by the masses as they intended without the âmiddle managementâ of publishers, literary agents, and editors. Similarly, with the advent of digital technology and smartphones, readers can access the great works throughout history on a whim, at any time and any place, without leaving their homes or stepping foot inside a library or bookstore. On the other hand, these inventions have exacerbated concerns in the literary world about copyright infringement.
For those who define literature as writing that originates in the human imagination, the rise of AI introduces ever more questions and concerns. Can a poem or novel produced by a robot be classified as literature, especially given that AI large language models have been trained on the works of human writers or that the robot may have been prompted by a human user? And does this translate to intellectual thievery (not to mention an existential crisis)? Ironically, these questions were once the speculations of science-fiction writers; in the 21st century they have become an all-too-real conundrum for writers and readers of all stripes.
