Notes

In his speech "A Passion for Books", Richard Glover uses his experiences to talk about a couple of main points. Mainly, how literature can help people reach beyond the boundaries of nations and class in order to empathize with each other in a human way. He also talks about how literature can help you "turn your mind outwards". He starts by relaying a scene from Tolstoy's novel Anna Karenina. In this scene, she is tormented at having to send her young son away to her husband. She considers telling her lover about her distress but realizes that he would not care. She also realizes that upon seeing his dismissiveness, she will not be able to love him anymore. This is how it's explained by Glover in the speech. However, I have not read Anna Karenina and do not know how accurately I have explained it. Glover goes on to say that this scene makes us empathize deeply with Anna and makes us want to offer her comfort. Before that moment, she'd been a bit of a spoiled aristocrat not deserving of much sympathy. She was an unrelatable figure, a Russian aristocrat. These are things which Glover and most readers are not. However, Glover argues that this powerful scene crosses all fictional societal boundaries. It shreds away all pretenses of class, of nationality, of time. It shows her in a raw emotional state that we, on some level, can all relate to. It makes us empathize with her in a purely human way.

Glover also talks about Shakespeare and the controversy surrounding him. Some don't believe that Shakespeare was the real writer of his works. One of the things that Shakespeare is known for is his description of Venice from The Merchant of Venice. Some argue that he wouldn't have been able to describe Venice if he had never been there. They point that Shakespeare is known to have never traveled abroad. However, Glover argues that he may have read about Venice from books. He uses this to emphasize his point. He expands on how books can absorb you and make you see the things being described vividly in your head. Glover also mentions Steven Pinker's book The Better Angels of Our Nature. In this book, Pinker argues -- through graphs and statistics -- that violence has decreased over time. Along with these statistics of violence, he also includes statistics of literacy. He draws a correlation between the increase of literacy and the decrease in violence. Glover uses Pinker's points to make his own: once people read about how someone has suffered, they become less eager to take part. This, argues Glover, is the power of empathy through literature.

Glover also talks about how literature can help us become less narcissistic. Instead of turning your thoughts towards yourself, you can turn them towards a character. You can forget about your own problems for a while. Instead, you can care about the troubles of a character. Glover says that this is an exercise in "turning your mind outwards". This pairs well with his point about empathy. He also talks briefly about how deeply involved in the world of literature one can truly become. He relays to us an anecdote in which he, without meaning to, uses the slang from Wodehouse's The Code of the Woosters. Glover speaks about how many books introduce you to a world of its own. They either do it metaphorically (like in historical novels) or literally (in fantasy). He also makes a rather long point about masculinity, and how he was unsure about it. Glover tells us about an experience he had. He, his wife, his friend, and his friend's wife all came together to build a house. They had purchased a cheap plot of land in the countryside. They went through many troubles but had great fun along the way. He says that this experience helped him "become a man", so to speak. For the first time, he was sure of his own masculinity.

I think that his points fit together fairly well, for the most part. His point about empathy easily interweaved with his point about narcissism. They also fit in well with his point of being in another world when reading. However, going from there to masculinity was a little bit of a rough transition. Glover softened this transition with anecdotes about his time spent reading. These anecdotes turned into his time spent building that house. The anecdote format links the points together. He offered quite convincing evidence, such as the scene from Anna Karenina. Hate Anna as you might, the emotions she feels in that scene transcends her character. It is the situation itself that many feel for. Many people have been in a similar situation, and can thus empathize. His point about Shakespeare is also very easy to understand. I'm sure that many can picture a place they've never been to quite vividly in their imaginations.

I agree with most of the points he made. Novels rely on audiences empathizing with the character, after all. While I never felt much for any of the characters in Anna Karenina, I can understand why he brought it up. Empathy was always a bit of a skill to be learned to me. Literature has definitely helped a lot. The point about narcissism is also something I can agree with. It's hard to forget the feelings I experienced while reading many books. I remember clearly the conflicted empathy I felt for Daisy in The Great Gatsby. The permeating sense of misery I experienced right alongside Billy in Slaughterhouse-Five. Sharing in Winston's thirst for freedom and distress at being caught in 1984. These are all experiences that stuck around and contributed to my growth as a human being. I find it fascinating how deeply we can feel for letters typed onto a page. How much anger, sadness, or happiness those letters can stir in us. However, I was a bit confused at his bit about masculinity. As pretentious as it may sound, I never really cared about things like femininity. I find it difficult to understand why some people take it so much to heart.

Overall, I found Richard Glover's speech quite entertaining. Especially so with the multiple jokes peppered throughout. I agreed with the majority of his points. However, I found myself confused nearing the end. Glover presents a lot of good evidence, including his use of Anna Karenina and the Shakespeare controversy.