Article Debate

After my reading of the two seperate articles by George Will and Stephen Greenblatt, I have come to the conclusion that both views hold truth in themselves. I would like to explain both of their views that are expressed in the aticles. After reading the first article, Literary Politics, written by George Will on April 22, 1991 in an issue of Newsweek i found him to be a person who strongly believes that all literary works were influenced by some political agendas and feelings. He says, “The reductions of the study of literature to sociology, and of sociology to mere ideological assertion, has a central tenet: All literature is, whether writers are conscious of it or not, political,” (111). What he is trying to say is that everything that a writer writes, is rooted with some sort of political meaning. In Stephen Greenblatt's article The Best Way to Kill Our Literary Inheritance Is to Turn it Into a Decorous Celebration of the New World, published in The Chronicle of Higher Education on June 12, 1991, he fires back against Will's beliefs. He states "delegitimizing its founding text and ideas,” (115). What he is saying is that when professors "translate" the meaning of a text, they are corrupting or ruining the meaning and placing the authority into the hands of the critics. I feel that there is some truth in which both authors are saying. I believe that some literary works are politicaly based or has a certain amount of political inflence. But I also see the other side being that not all literature is politicaly influenced but is influenced by the culture. Various pieces or literature are based onb culture, such as 1984. The governement manipulates reality to make the Party seem perfect, and holds complete control over its citizens. I believe that every form of literature conatins a cultural influence.