Literature: The Bridge Between the Past and Present

Written by Jordan Fenske

Have you ever felt oddly connected with a character in a story? While writers craft their stories using their own biases, beliefs, and their own perceptions of the state of society, it is up to you, the reader, to form your own opinion of the story being told. Writers are able to use their work as windows into the lives and time of the people they write about. While characters in classic literature are often fictitious, they still embody the values—good and bad—of the society in which they live. Through time, many characteristics in society have evolved, but there are some eternal qualities about human nature and the human mind that authors draw comparisons to certain values to emphasise and explore.

One tale that’s as old as time is the concept of popularity. In classic literature, this is usually seen as social class. The lesson we often learn from these characters of high notoriety is that they would do anything to maintain their status, which often leads to their demise. In S. E. Hinton’s The Outsiders, she depicts a society divided into two rival groups: the Socs and the Greasers. The Socs are the socialites who are the epitome of the upper class while the Greasers make up the lower class. Despite the characters in the novel being all quite young, even they display the true horrors spawned from class differences. The story follows a group of Greasers who believe themselves to be outcasts of society; kids who do not fit in because they are not as well off or educated as the Socialites.

Modern-day media portrays this issue often, suggesting that money equals power and media allows us to consume content from celebrities such as Mr. Beast, the Kardashians, and Elon Musk, with their main draw being their wealth and lavish lifestyles. We, as a society, admire these people and the idea of materialism. Both Hinton’s Socs and modern-day celebrities are respected solely because of their status. Similarly, classic literature will describe characters who don’t necessarily fit into the social mould as troubled, weird, or irredeemably different. Holden Caulfield from The Catcher In The Rye, for example, is a very controversial character—beloved by many readers but essentially hated by the rest of the characters in his story—for his outlandish traits and nonconforming nature. People, especially youth, have a tendency to cast out those who do not fit in and may even go as far as bullying them for these differences. These characters and people show that for centuries, humans have really valued societal acceptance and we as people, especially when young and easily influenced, mirror these desires found in literary characters.

Literature also teaches us to value courage. Who doesn’t love reading a story about a brave person who defies all the odds and succeeds in the end? While many of us have never fought to regain a throne, survived a zombie apocalypse, or escaped a city overrun by violent AI robots (at least I haven’t), we admire the bravery these characters possess and hope to instil some of that within ourselves. In Jane Eyre, Jane herself defies what society and her superiors dictate a woman should or should not do. Displays of early feminism in classic literature and media have carried on into modern-day movements. Margaret Atwood’s infamous The Handmaid’s Tale recently made massive appeals in the media as Americans cite it in support of the recent overturning of Roe v Wade. Society values the evaluation and discrimination of the text where women are portrayed simply as child bearers of a heavily patriarchal society. Literature where women are described as strong and fearless still empowers modern-day women.

Likewise, classic literature teaches us that no hero can be perfect; it sets realistic standards for how to be brave. In Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, Guy Montag understands the wrongs he and his fellow firemen have committed against society by concealing knowledge of the past and actively works to reverse the censorship of literature and the media. With contemporary issues such as the Ukraine, Iraq and China conflicts, where governmental bodies censor media from the outside world, the value of information and the people who stand up for their freedoms is omnipresent. Literature shows us examples of literary heroes who challenge their governing power in the fight for the greater good. In the monochrome world depicted in Lois Lowry’s The Giver, Jonas, a young boy who learns the knowledge of what the world used to be, seeks to educate himself and the rest of his society on what is being kept from them. In his fight, he goes against everything he has ever known. This courage allows him to change and potentially even save the world. He, along with the other courageous characters aforementioned, have become outstanding role models for people today. As people, the values we uphold inevitably shape what determines social standing. Classic literature has the power to shape these values, but can also teach us the errors in them. By learning from these texts, we’re able to take away valuable lessons from the characters’ mistakes, successes, and goals to prevent the same tragedies from happening in our world.

Written by iana abrigo

Long gone are the days of meeting a romantic interest in a coffee shop or book store. Long gone are the days when rain was the indicator of an emotional climax between two lovers (think The Notebook or Megamind). Long gone are the days of bearing boomboxes outside windows or yelling, “But daddy, I love him!”. I guess the latter could still happen–granted you’re telling daddy you’ve fallen for the moderator of an Animal Crossing server on Discord.

Often, when we consider romance, we turn to Shakespearean sonnets or films starring Julia Roberts as their female lead. However, as we make the gradual shift to a more digitalised society, we have to consider how the face of romantic relationships is changing. The very concept of ‘e-dating’ exemplifies this. When I say e-dating, I’m referring to a form of long-distance relationship where the partners involved develop their connection exclusively online. This means no secret rendezvous in which you’re greeted with a gentlemanly kiss on the hand, unless this happens to be occurring at the pizzeria on Club Penguin Now, that doesn’t sound like anything ideal and I suppose no one’s going to be writing a sonnet about it any time soon. Besides, there are a few qualms about e-dating that would irk the average classic romance enthusiast.

First of all, there are obvious concerns for safety. Yes, because “Kyle” is conveniently 19 years old the moment you say you’re 17. Even though he was reminiscing about the first time The Simpsons aired only a few moments ago. And “Kyle” might not even have your best interests at heart. For all you know, he’s only into you because you remind him of his favourite anime waifu (who reminds him of his mother). Beyond that, e-dating lacks a physical aspect often critical in romantic relationships. We inherently want to be felt, to be touched, to be known down to every birthmark and every scar. That’s a tad difficult when you and your e-person are divided by a dusty laptop screen. However, the most jarring predicament of these online relationships might be one of authenticity. Can we even consider a relationship formed online as something real?

I mean, since everything is occurring in digital space, we can disregard it without a second thought, right? With the rising omnipresence of digital technology and spaces, we have to acknowledge how social media changes social customs. In comes terms such as ‘digital dualism’ and Nathan Jurgenson’s ‘IRL fetish’. The former refers to how we delineate a significant distinction between the online and offline worlds—with the latter being considered as objective reality. However, this distinction is false. Our refusal to believe so comes from that aforementioned ‘IRL fetish’ where we believe being logged off is better because it means we’re living in the here and now. However, to put it frankly, the here and now involves digital technology, and anything that occurs online happens to be just as real as anything that occurs offline. Even when hidden behind a profile picture of Kermit The Frog, the person you’re talking to is still a person. This person has history and interests and flaws. Therefore, you will still be perfectly capable of developing feelings for them. The only thing that differs is the way you connect with them, when your relationship is based online versus a traditional, offline affair. Even then, those ways of showing love aren’t inseparable.

Though I met my first boyfriend at a Theatre Sports competition (let’s not talk about it), a lot of our relationship occurred online, especially since we lived on completely different train lines. At that time, I was a fifteen year old girl with no geographical prowess. But even if I didn’t know how to use Google Maps, I was a prodigy when it came to Instagram. We texted, called and were heavily reliant on technology to maintain our relationship. Back then, the epitome of romance was being tucked under my blanket, the blue light frying my eyes as we texted about David Attenborough at 2am.

To some extent, he and I weren’t any different from my friend’s friend and her e-boyfriend whom she had met on Roblox. According to my friend who had sat next to her in class, being present when they were on calls “felt just like third-wheeling”. They played games together, watched shows together, discussed their futures together. Even if they weren’t exchanging kisses under the stars, they demonstrated their affection towards each other in ways that left them both satisfied. I mean, is chivalry dead or is it just telling your e-girlfriend to hop on the private voice channel on Discord? Regardless of whether romance takes the shape of a text message or not, it still remains as a way of saying to each other, “Let me be human with you.”

So let’s call until one of our devices combust, send each other cute memes attached with the text “us?” and most importantly, let’s put our Minecraft beds next to each other for romance’s sake.

Content Warnings: references to violence, murder and killing; minor references to animal cruelty