It seems that the only way to discover whether something is interesting or not is to look within ourselves. For instance, were we to solely base our opinion on personal experience and interpretation, the answer would be entirely individual. The human experience is so varied that were this to be accurate, everybody would have completely disparate interests. Rosenblatt states that ‘the reader brings to the work personality traits, […] present needs, preoccupations, a particular mood...
It seems that the only way to discover whether something is interesting or not is to look within ourselves. For instance, were we to solely base our opinion on personal experience and interpretation, the answer would be entirely individual. The human experience is so varied that were this to be accurate, everybody would have completely disparate interests. Rosenblatt states that ‘the reader brings to the work personality traits, […] present needs, preoccupations, a particular mood […] and a particular physical condition. These and many other elements, in a never-to-be-duplicated combination that determines his response to the text.’ Thus, assuming that Chesterton is correct, and said combination could not be duplicated, like Rosenblatt said, it can be argued that there would neither be classic literature, nor contemporary phenomenon’s. For that reason, one must evaluate the impact popularity has on social context. For instance, classic literature isn’t necessarily celebrated because everyone likes it, but because it’s become a prevailing trend, and possibly a tribute to strong marketing. Although, there are some people who still don’t like certain celebrated literary pieces, there’s ultimately had to be something that provoked continued interest, despite whether something has been highly advertised.
