When one studies literature, the student is engaged with what is deemed the classical texts of literature, pieces of writing that are meant to inspire the young student as well as educate them. However, when doing the various readings of these courses, I started to notice a profound difference between these two principles. On the one hand, being inspired by a piece of writing is fundamentally subjective. What makes a young reader inspired by, for example, Hemingway, and not, for example, by Edgar Allan Poe? Why do I prefer H.P. Lovecraft to, let us say Sylvia Plath? On the other hand, our introduction to literature through classical works seems to introduce the young reader to how writing itself is performed. What are examples of good writing? How should we properly formulate our thoughts? The difference, in short, is between inspiration, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, learning about how to write.

Clearly, when a curriculum is formed with various examples of literature presented to the student, an intent is behind the selection of these texts. Why are certain texts selected and not others? Why have some writers entered the canon of literature and others have not? In one sense, the writers acknowledged as classic examples of American literature – for example, Hemingway, Poe, Faulkner, Twain, — have gained this status over time. They have been accepted by the mainstream academic community as examples of great literature.

With this selection of writers, the curriculum endeavors to introduce readers to what is judged to be the great examples of the genre. In this sense, the aim is to inspire the young reader and perhaps writer, to introduce them to new perspectives, new themes and new uses of language which will perhaps in turn produces its own sources of inspiration. This, of course, is subjective: if one is inspired by Twain, one may also hate Hemingway. The point, however, is to promote the diversity of literature and thereby potentially encourage the student to investigate literature or, perhaps, even create his or her own pieces of writing.

On the other hand, the intent of introducing literature to students is to introduce them to a formal aspect of writing. Certainly, authors such as Twain and Poe have completely different styles of writing. But I think the intent here is to present to the student a certain example of how writing should be accomplished. And there is nothing negative in this. It is rather an attempt to show how language is used in an intelligent, creative, and engaging manner. That this can be done in different ways is exemplified by the fact that we can distinguish the work of Poe from the work of Twain: these authors compel us to read their works in different ways. Yet there is also an immutable invariant to their works which make them greater writers. Part of the journey of studying literature is to uncover this secret formula, of course, not completely understand it, but rather get a sense of it.

It is this element which binds all the diverse authors, writing in different styles and treating different subject matters, expressing diverse voices and conveying radically disparate perspectives on life, together. This is something that goes beyond subjectivity. We are inspired by a work of Poe because we are drawn by horror and the macabre. This is why this writer speaks to us in a deeper sense than a writer who may have entirely different philosophical inspirations. Yet part of studying literature is about appreciating the quality of writing, regardless of what the given writer is writing about – arguably, this is what studying literature is about – learning to engage with a text that may at first glance offer nothing to us. Yet this is the fault of our own prejudices and limitations – studying literature means to go beyond these preconceptions that we hold.