In English literature, the definition of literature has changed many times, usually in response to historical and cultural realities. It is not surprising that at a time in which the digital has started to eclipse print—the main medium for literature for 400 years—we find the former definitions lacking, and seek to find a place for literature in the digital age. What follows is a brief time-line of literature, encompassing a few different definitions, and ending with a proposed definition for digital literature.
Before the 18th Century. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) defines literature at this time as an “acquaintance with ‘letters’ or books; polite or humane learning; literary culture.” In other words, literature is equated with literacy. Those few who can read are literary and what they read is literature.
Early 18th Century. At this time literacy had become more widespread, and print works a valuable commodity. The OED definition of literature at this time reflects this: literature is “literary work or production; the activity or profession of a man of letters; the realm of letters.” At this time, literature becomes the specialized work of a few, a professional enterprise, or what we now call journalism.
Later 18th Century. This period in England is known as the Age of Enlightenment. An important enlightenment thinker in Britain was William Godwin, who defined literature as “the diffusion of knowledge through the medium of discussion, whether written or oral.” For Godwin and other British enlightenment figures, literature was knowledge that is shared; it was the means by which people become enlightened and society improved. Note that Godwin includes in his definition oral dissemination—that is, an element of sociability, of community. For Godwin and others like him, literature was the “republic of letters,” or what we might now call the “public sphere.”
19th Century: In the wake of the French Revolution, enlightenment ideals fell out of favor, since many considered these ideals to be the inspiration for the bloody excesses of the Revolution. At this point, literature becomes identified not with the public good but with private, often emotional, experience. Thus, Raymond Williams defines literature at this period as “well-written books of an imaginative, creative, aesthetic, or artistic kind.” Literature is now defined as having cultural and artistic value, as writing that transcends historical circumstance or market realities. This is largely the legacy of the Romantic movement in the early 19th century and it is important to note that this definition was the dominant definition of literature for the entire 19th century and most of the 20th.
20th Century. Raymond Williams points out that literature in this time period, in addition to its basic Romantic definition, is increasingly defined in opposition to modernity, particularly the field of electronic communications. It also becomes associated with the past, and with unreliable documentation; that is, with fiction. In this sense, literature is escapist, something we use to flee or ward off the more negative aspects of modern life.
21st Century: We are now, as a culture, in the process of coming up with a more current definition of literature, one that preserves the best of print culture while at the same time makes room for electronic forms. There are still plenty of people who define literature in opposition to electronic communications, and all things digital; and there are plenty of people who think literature has little relevance to our historical moment. A compromise seems to be in order.
Our task in ENGL278W was to think about digital objects in the context of a literature class. At the beginning of the semester, literature was defined in broad terms (just as it was generally defined before 1800), in order to consider as many electronic forms as possible. Our definition of literature was basically “literature is writing to be read.” After a semester’s worth of reflection, it seems that this definition was too broad. There were a number of questions we did not consider initially, such as:
1. Does literature imply works of cultural or artistic value?
2. Who determines that cultural value? (And should there be an approved canon of literary works?)
3. Is language (rather than just content) a factor in determining whether something is literary?
These questions came from you the students (though you may not remember voicing them!). They reflect values that you all brought into this class, your own pre-definitions of literature. In response to these questions, it now seems important to point out that some digital objects have more value than others; some are executed better, some become more popular because they reflect the zeitgeist, the current cultural moment. It seems fair that we continue to listen to the opinions of critics and scholars, people who have devoted their lives to literature, in determining cultural value. But frankly, at this point, traditional literary people (critics, scholars) know much less about the value, artistic or otherwise, of most digital objects than the “born digital” regular users of digital forms—that is, all of you! So a popular consensus is also needed.
We also need to consider the question of language. Creative use of language has always been a key part of literature, in every time period; it is the one thing that literature offers that non-verbal, highly-visual art forms do not. In digital culture, which is highly visual, there is a distinct danger that we will lose the play, and continued development, of language. If our texts lose this, they might still be considered art, but they can no longer properly be considered literature.
So for a new definition of literature that will fit our situation I propose this:
Literature is writing that is considered by both critics and consumers to be of a high quality and cultural value, in which the creative use of language is prominent.
How does this apply to the definition of digital literature? How about something like this:
Digital literature is writing that is considered by both critics and consumers to be of a high quality and cultural value, in which the creative use of language is prominent, created (written) and accessed (read) by utilizing electronic technologies.
Is this a satisfying definition of literature and a fair assessment of what we have been doing in ENGL278W? If not, you have the option of commenting upon this post, and I encourage you to do so.
Works Consulted:
Oxford English Dictionary (Online)
William Godwin, An Enquiry Concerning Political Justice (Book I, chapter IV, 1793 ed.)
Raymond Williams, Keywords (“Literature”).
