Engaged Literature

Two of the leading theorists of the second half of the twentieth century, Roland Barthes and Hans-Georg Gadamer, give us models of reception theory, that, when considered in tandem, provide one avenue for defining a bad work of imaginative literature. Barthes proposed the idea that there are two kinds of literary works, readerly and writerly. Readerly works do the work of the reader, guiding him or her in one clear path that allows no interpretive deviation, providing all the information, dotting all the i's and crossing all the t's, while a writerly work forces the reader to actively engage with the text, only suggesting models—multiple models—of exegesis. Gadamer focused on the hermeneutics of reception, how a genuine work of literature forces the reader to reach across the ages, across cultural and linguistic barriers, to meet the author half way.

Worthwhile literary works force the reader's active participation and inspire him or her to engage in the hard work of hermeneutic dialogue. Bad books do not do this. Of course, a bad book written in a past age and/or anchored in an unfamiliar linguistic or cultural milieu might force a contemporary reader to do the sort of bridgework called for by Gadamer, but once that bridge is crossed, one finds exactly what one expected. Bad books are not inevitably polemical, and good books can be polemical. Otherwise, all imaginative texts categorized as "engaged literature" would have to be categorized as bad books. However, even good engaged literature will force you to question your presuppositions and make you do some mental writing, will prompt you to engage in hermeneutic dialogue, will challenge you to exercise your brain! Bad books issue no such challenge. Their authors know their readers have preconceived ideas, stereotypes about people and paradigms, and employ them to satisfy their readers' expectations. Formulaic detective fiction and pornography are examples. Bad books do not challenge readers to think, while good books do.