1 month ago
30
Sontag argues 'A work of art is a thing in the world, not just a commentary on the world', asserting that literature is inherently a piece of art that should be appreciated, not dissected.
I'd argue that meaning is heightened in the unobserved, literary analysis is necessary. However I do see how see feels that the artistic nature is almost removed when 'over-analysing' literature and in some instances should refrain from this process and appreciate what's in front of us.
To what extent do you agree with Sontag (or me)? Can we differentiate between what needs literary analysis, and what doesn't?
[link] [comments]
