Has social media killed the literary star?

Al-Taleb cites other important texts in his introduction, including The Twilight of Literary Culture by Jean-Marie Domenach (1995), The End of Literature (2011-2012), which comprises two volumes with studies and papers from international symposiums, and Marx's aforementioned Farewell to Literature (2005), among others.

Moving beyond theory

Compagnon presents several arguments to debunk the idea that literature is dead. "What can literature do? In other words, why does literature matter?" he asks. "As we venture to address this question, there is no harm in appearing as naïve individuals, who may seem somewhat out of touch with the times."

Compagnon contends that we tend to treat literature as a theatrical issue, instead of simply discussing its intellectual, artistic, ethical, and big-picture importance. Nowadays, he argues, there seems to be a new book coming out every few months arguing the insignificance of literature, which strengthens our imperative to take a step back and evaluate its true value.

Compagnon is exceptionally equipped to tackle these issues, not only because he has held the position of Chair of Literary Studies at Sorbonne since 1994, but also because he wasn't always a literary scholar.

Once a bridge engineer, he underwent a significant career transformation after being deeply influenced by lectures from renowned figures in the humanities (including Foucault) at the Collège de France.

Compagnon was taken by these intellectuals and decided to change the course of his life. Eventually, he submitted his doctoral thesis, making further academic advances in his field. And he's never looked back.

Debunking major claims

Presumably, Compagnon understands the spirit of science, which informs his approach here.

In the past, there have been some big claims from big names – Nietzsche saying God is dead, Roland Barthes saying the author doesn't matter, and Fukuyama saying history, science, and modernity have met their demise, too.

Now, there's the idea that literature might be in trouble, too. To the sciences, the humanities might seem like a foreign language, and in the end, science seems to emerge as the dominant force in human knowledge.

But a question continues to bounce off the walls of university halls: What's the point of literature?

What good does it do when we already have philosophy (which is also in crisis), psychology, and sociology? Can it truly retain its relevance?

Compagnon quotes Émile Zola, saying: "The truth is that the masterpieces of the contemporary novel say much more about man and nature than do serious works of philosophy, history and criticism."

"As an exercise in thought and an experience of writing, literature corresponds to an undertaking of gaining knowledge about humans and the world. The novel, as it delves into the practical, ethical, and human aspects of existence, embodies profound philosophy, abundant wisdom, and valuable knowledge," he continues.

"Should knowledge remain purely theoretical? The ancient Greeks categorised knowledge into theoretical and practical domains, just as Aristotle did. Literature is a practical undertaking that is indispensable to the author, but also a theoretical one, as will become apparent."

Compagnon examines the genesis of this tension between literature and the sciences within a French context. He discusses literature in a broader sense and specifically looks to the state of French literature and its crisis since 1852, when educational reforms gradually pushed classical languages and the humanities to the fringes of early and secondary education.

He perceives this as the start of an unfortunate schism between knowledge and literature, re-iterating that "above all, it is literary knowledge that we must rise up to defend."

Four comprehensive arguments

Compagnon's lecture revolves around four primary arguments.

The first is that literature, and especially poetry, is the art of imitation and imagination, as Aristotle puts it. These are things that humans naturally have a tendency toward. Not only that, but literature serves as a fundamental means of education and refinement.

Compagnon cites Jean de La Fontaine (1621-1695):

"Fables are not what they appear to be.

The merest animals in them act as wise counsellors.

And bare advice never does anything but bore.

In stories lies the moral.

Through these tricks, one must educate and entertain."

He also emphasises the role of literature in conveying deeper meaning, stating, "Rare are the tales in which there is no moral lesson."

"With literature, the concrete replaces the abstract, and example replaces experience," he adds.

Moving into his second argument, he suggests that literature helps to shape freedom. According to Compagnon, literature has been part of every revolution. It's the only voice that prevails when all others fall silent; indeed, literature lives where nothing else can survive.

As witnessed in the French Revolution and its literary works, as well as in the Arab world with figures like Mahmoud Darwish and other influential poets, literature remains outside the political sphere, while thoroughly exploring its implications.

Taking language to new heights

In his third argument, Compagnon states that literature and poetry are linguistic healers. They preserve the vitality and newness of language, and they go beyond our basic understanding of words and letters.

Literature discovers the limitations of language and establishes new heights for it. It's essential for the enrichment of any language – protecting it, repairing it and correcting its flaws.

Compagnon emphasises that literature doesn't have to be practical or utilitarian. Its value lies in its imagination and creativity, even in a world that puts money and production on a pedestal. This is especially important when capitalism reigns supreme.

In his fourth and final argument, Compagnon focuses on the decentralisation of literature.

Despite its limitations, literature holds political power. It's intertwined with our freedoms, knowledge, ethics, and even philosophy.

"The modern power of literature makes it an antidote to philosophy, a counter-system or a counter-philosophy. Superior to philosophy, literature takes over from it and revives it," says Compagnon.

He also invokes philosophers, saying, "Michel Foucault never treats literature like a device of power in the same way he would the other discourses. Eluding their general regime, literature remains a preferred reference located outside of philosophy. Foucault showed that all discourses were in fact literature."

This means that all discourse is literature and literature holds within itself all forms of discourse. It's the sum of all possible communication, and therefore it is primary and important and cannot be eliminated.

Above all, literature is where different forms of expression are created and shaped.

A battle worth fighting

Compagnon, after concluding his arguments, ridicules those in the literary field who refrain from defending it, even as other fields discover its unique value and importance.

He mentions, in particular, cultural history and the philosophy of ethics.

"As a source of inspiration, literature helps us develop our personality or our 'sentimental education', just as religious readings did for our ancestors," he says.

"It helps us gain access to a sensitive experience and to knowledge of morality which would be difficult, or even impossible, to obtain in the philosophers' treatises. It therefore makes an irreplaceable contribution to practical and speculative ethics."

Compagnon is unsure whether he makes a strong enough case to silence doubters, but he asserts that literature will never disappear, which remains his eternal commitment.

Further exploration

Compagnon delves into other debates, as well.

When it comes to cinema versus literature, and the prevailing belief that the visual arts trump the written word, Compagnon provides a philosophical counterargument.

"All forms of narration, including film and history, speak to us of human life. The novel, however, does so with more care than the mobile image and more efficiently than the news in brief, for its penetrating instrument is language," he says, praising the "prolonged solitude of reading".

"That time is my own. I could no doubt suspend the play of the film, put the image on pause, but it would still last one and a half hours, whereas I am master of the rhythm of my reading and of the approvals and disapprovals that it arouses in me," he adds.

Ultimately, Compagnon quotes Samuel Johnson's assertions that "the only purpose of writing is to enable readers better to enjoy life, or better to endure it" and "culture may even be described simply as that which makes life worth living." 

Compagnon believes that literature is indispensable to an understanding of the human condition, stating: "Those who read the best writers know most about the world and live better."

Rising value of literature

He further quotes Herman Broch, as cited by novelist Milan Kundera: "The only moral of the novel is knowledge; a novel that does not uncover a hitherto unknown segment of existence is immoral." 

He adds: "Literature thinks, but not in the way that science or philosophy does. Its thinking is heuristic (it never ceases to seek), non-algorithmic: it proceeds by feeling its way along, without calculating, through intuition, with flair. It's like a hunting dog in every sense of the word."

Unlike those who assume literature is dead in the modern world, Compagnon finds that literature's importance is only growing.

"My teaching, in its theoretical, historical, but also critical vocation, will bet on literature and on its rising value. Its project will be to assert that the dispossession of literature, which began a long time ago, perhaps since the beginning of time, will never end."