Perhaps that s part of the problem, though, the notion that all of learning should be able to be distilled to a 50 item multiple-choice exam. Learning isn t a synonym for testing. Likewise, let s not confuse reading literature with matching authors to titles, settings to plots, or statements to characters. Instead, let s view learning as the ability to think and to question. And let s view literature the imaginative portrayal of human endeavor and consequence as an ideal realm in which to encourage this reflection upon our own conceptions of what it is to be human.
Literary experience is neither abstract and esoteric, nor immediate and consequential.
That is to say, the events of the text, the experiences of the characters in the play, the feelings of the writer, don t necessarily shake the foundations of own world. We can turn away from the text or lay it aside. But on the other hand, the experiences represented in significant literature do inform us, do have the potential of changing the conceptual world we inhabit. Literature falls into a wonderful middle ground, where we may participate but stand back and observe, too, where we may feel pain but ease it with reflection, where we may reshape our visions in the company of good friends rather than in the more brutal world of the streets. Listening to Anne, a twelve year old, talk to her book group about Toning the Sweep and William, a fourteen year old, discuss his book choices, reminds us that even these young readers understand this dual nature of literature.