Attaining Manners & Social Savvy from Novels/Literature?

[astrum]

While browsing the Web, I stumbled upon the following article about how novels/literature can help us better understand human nature and improve our conduct. I'm intrigued by the author's argument. What do you think?:



http://www.online-literature.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=8963&d=1380899648
Keira Knightley as Elizabeth Bennett in Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice. Elizabeth scored highly on conscientiousness and nurturing


Researchers believe the novels act like "social glue", providing instructions on how society should behave.

In particular they believe that the novel reinforces beliefs that maintain the community and warn against destructive influences and character traits.

The study suggests that good literature "could continually condition society so that we fight against base impulses and work in a cooperative way", said Professor Jonathan Gottschall of Washington and Jefferson College, Pennsylvania.

The researchers asked 500 people to fill in a questionnaire about 200 classic Victorian novels. The respondents were asked to define characters in the novels according to their traits.

Elizabeth Bennett in Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, for example, scored highly on conscientiousness and nurturing, while Bram Stoker's Count Dracula scored highly on status-seeking and social dominance.

Dr Carroll added that while few in today's world live in hunter-gatherer societies, "the political dynamic at work in these novels, the basic opposition between communitarianism and dominance behaviour, is a universal theme".

A few characters were judged to be both good and bad, such as Heathcliff in Emily Brontë's Wuthering Heights or Austen's Mr Darcy.
"They reveal the pressure being exercised on maintaining the total social order," said Dr Carroll.

Dr Carroll, whose research is published in the New Scientist, believes novels have the same effect as the cautionary tales told around the fire in older societies.
"They have a function that continues to contribute to the quality and structure of group life."


See more here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/4239733/Victorian-novels-like-Pride-and-Prejudice-teach-us-how-to-behave.html





As I understand, there is a niche branch of literature called "novel of manners." "Novels of manners" provide insight into how certain classes and groups behaved--namely the upper classes.

I wonder if a person could use such literature to improve their communication skills and etiquette?

[AuntShecky]

While it is true that an individual reader can reach a better understanding of human nature through reading novels, as well as "learn" appropriate conduct in society,these outcomes are ancillary, not inherently required of any poem or work of fiction. It is a fallacy to expect literature to achieve a purpose, to perform a duty, to provide study guides for educating students--to earn its keep, as it were. It isn't fair to demand that a novel "sing for its supper." Art is for art's sake, nothing else.

[astrum]

It seems like UK's Telegraph is keen to write on such topics. I just saw another article related to the one in the OP:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/9604475/Good-novels-teach-us-how-to-be-human-beings.html

[cafolini]

While it is true that an individual reader can reach a better understanding of human nature through reading novels, as well as "learn" appropriate conduct in society,these outcomes are ancillary, not inherently required of any poem or work of fiction. It is a fallacy to expect literature to achieve a purpose, to perform a duty, to provide study guides for educating students--to earn its keep, as it were. It isn't fair to demand that a novel "sing for its supper." Art is for art's sake, nothing else.

I don't agree that art is for art's sake. But I would agree that what's being proposed here is a form of the long overcome structuralism. I agree with Malinowski about clanless societies and I agree with you that the art in ancillary. I think you are speaking in that context, so it has to be for art's sake a-priori. But what about the art of marketing for example? It has always been used for purpose. Take the art of handling brokerages. Have fun. Your point can be well-taken in your context nonetheless.

[Vota]

There is nothing wrong with the statement "art for art's sake" so long as it is used solely to justify the right for art to exist purely as a way of expessing human creativity, passion, beauty, truth etc.

Many works of art and many novels go beyond being this when they have something specific to say. When the artist or author is expressing an opinion, now it becomes more than an expression of creativity, but an expository or philosophical work. Almost any book has something to say about something. Right and wrong, good and bad, beauty, ugliness and more come up in nearly every book to some extent. Every book has an author, and that author can and should be held accountable for what they have to say in the sense that we either agree or disagree with what they have to say.

Many of the greatest novels have many things to say about life. There are many books that "can" provide guidance. They can provide answers or possible solutions to problems. They can expose the reader to different viewpoints or place them into hypothetical situations they would never encounter. They can enrich the reader and promote increased awareness, and increase the ability to think critically. I believe many of these and probably most of these authors wanted to say something, and they wanted their readers to listen, and think about it. Whether the reader ended up agreeing or not probably had a lot to do with the rhetorical skill of the author.

Books can be learned from. Books can be teachers. The stories they tell can teach. In some books, especially books comprised of essays or theories, the author may speak directly to the reader. In these examples the work does in fact have some "purpose" and you are literally engaging with the teacher if you are reading actively. Many times have I nodded my head in agreement with something an author said, or disagreed, or scratched my chin and had to think hard to reason out their meaning.

Books are art, entertainment, teachers, guides, and more. The key is not expecting the same thing from every book.