Some philosophers, like Alex Rosenberg, claim that natural science delivers epistemic values such as knowledge and understanding, whereas, say, literature and, according to some, literary studies, merely have aesthetic value. Many of those working in the field of literary studies oppose this idea. But it is not clear exactly how works of literary art embody knowledge and understanding and how literary studies can bring these to the light. After all, literary works of art are pieces of fiction, which suggests that (...) they are not meant to represent the actual world. How then can they deliver knowledge and understanding? I argue that literature and literary studies confer knowledge and understanding in at least five ways: they give us insight into the work and the world of the work of art in question, they shape our intellectual virtues, they invite us to apply various hypotheses, they deliver moral propositional knowledge, and they increase or bring about full understanding with respect to meaning, virtue, and significance. In the course of my argument, I refer at several junctures to Thomas Hardy’s Tess of the D’Urbervilles and Edith Wharton’s Summer, in order to illustrate each of these claims. (shrink)

This article is about a beautiful book by a not so beautiful author, Forrest Carter’s The Education of Little Tree. I will first reflect on the usually fraught relationship of literature and morality. I then will give a flavor of the moral fiber of Carter’s novel and then turn to some darker undercurrents, examining whether they intersect with the value of the work, whether we need them to intersect, and whether they ultimately submerge any initial judgments of the book. The (...) core issue is how and whether to continue to teach such works as worthy and beautiful literature despite deeply disturbing facts about the authors of such works. Finally, as we often have personal connections to our favorite books, how should such connections factor in while choosing whether to teach such works even if now aware of their problematic legacies? (shrink)