The Problem With Only Reading What’s Comfortable

Connor Tuttle ’27

Contributing Writer

Literature has long been a medium through which humanity can confront its condition, showing through the shiny exterior into its own contradictions and ugliness. It forces one to reconcile with our innate desires and the complexity of their own morality. However, the more I listen to book reviews, read comments online and even participate in Trinity’s own book club, I come to acknowledge how the current cultural climate is inherently pushing to sanitize storytelling. There is an increased need to ensure that the books we read align with our ever evolving social expectations. Categorizing this mindset under the umbrella of wokeism, this sets to prioritize one’s ideological purity over the raw and unfiltered expression that much literature brings. Literature as a whole seems to me to be in peril as many works, both old and new, are dismissed completely for their failure to conform to modern ways.

Current contemporary discourse on literature now revolves around its alignment to progressive views. There is an inherent expectation now that authors write with a responsibility, given their platform, to not reaffirm harmful stereotypes or promote problematic behavior. For example, “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” by Mark Twain stands as one of the most influential American novels ever written. Yet, it has been banned from schools and surely could never be written today. Jocelyn A Chadwick, president of the National Council of Teachers of English, thinks it is because “it goes where Americans really don’t want to go. We talk about race and racism and acceptance and inclusivity and equity. We talk at that, but we don’t really listen and engage in a real substantive conversation. I think that ‘Huck Finn’ will remain on the banned books list because it will remain a burr under the saddle of so many people — because it goes to the heart of what still bothers us to this day.”

While I do think the sentiment of wanting to write with more inclusiveness comes from a good place of social progression, it ultimately goes to diminish an author’s ability to explore uncomfortable subject matter. This becomes somewhat frustrating to me as there is a growing expectation for books to be a sort of moral instruction manual. I feel we have been taught to read through a lens of representation, making sure each character and their motives/story align with social views. Many seminar discussions surrounding “problematic literature” tend to immediately focus around what is “wrong” with the text and not to try and understand it in its historical context. This kind of reading lends itself to a one-dimensional way of writing and interpreting meaning from literature. Due to narrow room for error, I can see an effect amongst writers where they write more in fear of offending anyone, rather than bold and honest storytelling. 

Despite already having this sentiment and having hopes to write about it, the reading of Haruki Murakami’s “Norwegian Wood” prompted me to actualize this issue. As a novel, it is an emotionally raw depiction of the human condition. In no way is it “safe” and it doesn’t shy away from the realities of life. The narrator is unreliable and subtly misogynistic, the women in the novel lack agency and the book does not pass the Bechdel test. The characters stand without moral judgement from Murakami and allow for the characters to be deeply flawed, selfish, yet deeply human. While I recognize the novel’s “problems” and understand how it can make one uncomfortable (I too was uncomfortable reading multiple parts), it is important to have literature which sets out to do that. But read today, readers fixate on how female characters might lack agency or how the protagonist’s sexual ambivalence/detachment is irresponsible, or how the persistent presence of depression and suicide is triggering. For me, the novel reminded me that stories don’t always have to provide an answer to such worldly problems, and instead can deepen our questions. 

I fear we as a culture are losing our tolerance for ambiguity. Murakami and many other authors sought to write something that didn’t affirm our values but disturbs them and forces the reader to sit with what’s uncomfortable. While reading can be comforting, some novels serve the purpose not to reassure us, but to disarm us. As we as a culture navigate through this much needed cultural shift, I feel it is still crucial to preserve literature as a space for genuine reflection and exploration. What makes literature so beautiful is its ability to challenge our perceptions and put light to the dark corners of our humanity. To sanitize literature in the name of ideological risk is to lose the very essence of what makes it so powerful.