What has literature( and art) ever done to us?

[Lillefix]

We've all heard of Plato, Kant, Homer, Cervantes, Shakespeare, Dante and so on, but I doubt most people have ever read these people's works(some might have slept through a Shakespeare play). So apart from adding a couple of expressions in our languages what have they done to us? Would we think differently if any of these books didn't exist?

Take "the unknown rebel" from the Tianmin square massacre for example. He risked his life trying to stop the those tanks. Completely useless and futile, but we like to think of it as noble. Would we think the same way if Don Quijote was never written? Remember that Don Quijote had a similar incident when he thought he fought against giants(they weren't real, but he didn't know that). Would we think of the the unknown rebel as dumb and deluded if that and similar books were never written. I have absolutely no idea so I'm asking you.

 

[Cutlass]

They inspire our imagination.

 

[Drake L. Dragon]

Well, art is really sect of the subjective world, and science is a sect of the objective world. Nobody can argue about how grateful we should be because of science. However, art isn't something that either works or doesn't work. It's all up to the eye of the beholder. However, another thing that came out of the subjective world is political philosophy, without which we would still be a bunch of cavemen hunting wild game. If it's something that can neither be proven right or wrong conclusively, then it is like an art, which can neither be proven good or bad. However, it is art and culture, philosophy, and ethics, which have allowed people, in their savagery, to coexist with one another -- so that we can even be able to pursue the sciences, the tangible benefits of civilization, in the first place.

 

[Angst]

Literature and art are incidentally products of a culture in economical surplus. So, technically, it demonstrates people are doing good and serves as entertainment. I don't see anything wrong with it and practice it myself.

 

[BuckyRea]

We've all heard of Plato, Kant, Homer, Cervantes, Shakespeare, Dante and so on, but I doubt most people have ever read these people's works.

Maybe most people haven't read their works. But that's not important. What matters is that I have read them.

 

[innonimatu]

Literature and art are incidentally products of a culture in economical surplus. So, technically, it demonstrates people are doing good and serves as entertainment. I don't see anything wrong with it and practice it myself.

And no one, I believe, would like to argue that mere survival is a human life's goal. No, it's just a necessary means to enjoy seeking other goals. Lets call the sum of those non-survival goals entertainment. Art is just those pieces of entertainment which for some reason got preserved and passed on... that makes art a collection of what we think are the best goals of mankind. Some of slept through Shakespeare's plays, some of us (me) used Joyce's Ulysses as kindling, but it doesn't matter for the big picture - we all life for enjoying some parts of that vast collective collection, and possibly adding to it.

 

[SG-17]

They make people think and that is hard for so many.

 

[Luckymoose]

I've read nearly all of Shakespeare and I have to say that I'm glad I never have to read them again.

 

[GinandTonic]

It's a chicken and egg issue but many would ague that our understanding of what it is to be a human has lept with the representation of development in literature/ drama. Forgive me if a seminar from a decade ago is a little vague, but the gist of it was that the social understanding of what it is psychologically to be a person is mirrored in art, but in some instances an outstanding writer is ahead of the curve with enough persuasive skill that they significantly shape the societal norms of understanding psychology. Sommit like that anyhoo.

 

[Ayn Rand]

Yes, art has a role to play when it reinforces a culture and knowledge. Purely subjective art cannot be described as art, it is simply a form of mental illness that communicates itself to other confused minds. Good art is rare in our civilisation, but if you know where to look for it, it can be found and it has immeasurable value.

 

[JollyRoger]

Art as objective reinforcement? Guess that leaves out subjective questioning of our culture and norms as found in the typical Randian rambling.

 

[GoodGame]

Scientific Literature has made it possible to exchange knowledge leading to the discovery of devices and products which in turn make it possible to be barely literate and still functional in a civilized way.

 

[sophie]

What exactly is the argument here?

"Shakespeare is boring so therefore art is useless"

 

[Perfection]

when the robots take over useless art will be discarded with all the other human rubbish

 

[GoodGame]

when the robots take over useless art will be discarded with all the other human rubbish

THUS SPRACH the Giant Death Philistines. Resistance is futile, and your artworks will be TERMINATED!!!!!!!!!!! TERMINATED!!!!!!!!!!!!!! TERMINATEDD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Birdjaguar]

"See, how she leans her cheek upon her hand!
O that I were a glove upon that hand,
that I might touch that cheek!"
- William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet, 2.2

 

[Whiskey_Lord]

What exactly is the argument here?

"Shakespeare is boring so therefore art is useless"

Yeah, I don't get it either. Everyone reads Shakespeare at some point, but apparently some aren't quite capable of appreciating it at all.

 

[classical_hero]

Art is the best way for us to understand how a society viewed itself, since it often describes how people lived their lives and what they found fascinating. It is by studying works of art that we learn about the peoples of the past and how they acted. It is a very insightful way of understanding people.

 

[Lillefix]

Yes, but my question is rather: Do art and and literature that we have never seen or read, affect us without us knowing about it? In what way have the nonfiction works of Plato and Kant or the fictional works of Dante, Cervante and Shakespeare affected the way we think about the world. Not just directly, but in turn through works which are inspired by these authors. I think at least GinandTonic understood my question, in that he thinks it's a chicken and question. The OP might have been badly worded(honestly, was it really that badly worded?), but my point is: To what extent do artists and philosophers shape or culture and to what extent do they express the culture that is already there? And I want to know specifically how artists and philosophers have shaped our culture.

Take welfare benefits for example. Most people here agree that welfare benefits are a good thing. If the Communist Manifesto had never been written, would we still have such a strong belief in welfare benefits as we do? Or have we innately always thought that welfare benefits were a very good thing, and that no author has ever affected our views about it(at least since the introduction of the Bible)?

 

[Angst]

Christianity has, in many people's eyes, deep roots in Plato's dualism.