Politics and Literature: An Unconsummated Relationship
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1467-9248.1977.tb00465.x |
| Published date | 01 December 1977 |
| Date | 01 December 1977 |
| Author | S. J. Ingle |
| Subject Matter | Article |
POLITICS
AND LITERATURE:
AN UNCONSUMMATED RELATIONSHIP
S.
J.
INGLE
DESPITE
the obviously close relationship
in
the ‘real’ world between politics and
literature, the majority of politics students do not study works
of
imaginative
literature. Analysis brings
to
light several explanations
for
this
omission, though
none seems satisfactory. But what kinds
of
imaginative literature ought the
politics student concern himself with?
A
discussion
of
certain aspects
of
the
theory of ‘commitment’ suggest that the student of politics should
not
neces-
sarily turn to politically committed writers, but rather
to
works of obvious
literary merit, as measured by creative and stylistic qualities, range
of
philosophy
and impact upon thinking people. Finally, what may he hope
to
gain by studying
imaginative writers? This is best answered by example, and
a
discussion
of
the
work
of
H.
G.
Wells goes some way to indicate the nature and importance of the
imaginative writer‘s contributiop to politics.
Bernard Shaw expressed the conviction
that
‘fine art is the subtlest. the most
effective means of propaganda
in
the world except only the example
of
personal
conduct’.’ If Shaw,
an
active figure
in
politics
as
well as literature, was right,
and to say the least we have
no
evidence that he was not, then
a
strange paradox
confronts the student
of
politics: that little attention has been paid
to
an
area
of
potentially considerable importance. This paradox becomes more striking
on
closer investigation. After all, imaginative writers are highly intelligent men con-
cerned with human affairs and relationships; many
of
them write with the
conviction that they can influence men and events. Moreover, though they
receive little attention in Britain, writers-and intellectuals generally-are
certainly considered to be politically important
in
some societies. notably
in
France. Why have teachers and students
of
politics tended
to
ignore. or set little
store by the work of imaginative writers’?
Is
it
right to pay them such scant
attention?
If
not, what
is
it that we may hope
to
gain by studying the work
of
imaginative writers?
Richard Hoggart illuminated an important problem when he pointed out that
British social scientists are prone
to
‘mistake the technical boundaries between
academic disciplines for divisions within human experience’.2 This lapse tends to
result
in
students of politics ignoring material in disciplines not related to their
own. Yet the problem goes deeper than Hoggart indicated. For reasons which
I
have outlined elsewhere3 those who control the teaching
of
politics have, as
a
result
of
convenience or conviction, chosen
to
ignore imaginative literature as
1
Preface
to
Mrs.
Warren’s Profession.
2
R.
Hoggart,
Speaking
to
Each
Othcr.,
Lol.
1
I.
Ahorit
Litf,.crtror(London, Chatto
&
Windus,
3
See
S.
J.
Ingle, ‘Socialism and Literature: The Contribution
of
Imaginative Writers
to
the
1970),
p.
19.
Development
of
the British Labour Party’,
foliricul
Stiiciies,
XXll
(I974),
158-68.
Political
Studies,
Vol.
XXV,
No.
4
(549-562).
To continue reading
Request your trial