Knowledge is power. I’m sure we’ve all heard that line before. It’s clear then that non-fiction and useful forms of literature such as encyclopedias and maps are powerful.
If someone were to horde a huge collection of textbooks, including all the ones still in print, we may consider it a huge consolidation of power, where those who have access to this private library are more powerful than us common folk who can only afford to own so many books. Subscribers to JSTOR and Elsevier are quite lucky in this regard.
If that’s the case, then what about fiction? What about Stephen King? Shakespeare? The Great Gatsby? What about a huge library of snugly fireplace literature, best enjoyed with a hot beverage?
Perhaps owning a library of non fiction is to owning a library of fiction is what owning a hospital is to owning a gym?
fiction can pose questions and thoughts in ways that non-fiction never could.
Like, for example, Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein. do you think it would have been cool of her to pursue the questions posed in that book- humanism, the nature of life, sapience and the power of creation; the hazards of science and morality of research gone amok- or do you perhaps think maybe posing it as a story raised induring questions?
What about The Day The Earth Stood Still, written at the start of the Red Scare- and questioning the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction?
How about the plethora of books looking at sexuality under the guise of fantasy? do you think, through the years, those authors would be safe? Or any of the fantasy and scifi, or the speculative fiction that dares ask ‘what if…’ around some uncomfortable topics? Like freedom.