Egalitarianism

Good ol' John Wesley... After today's class I think I will forever have a soft spot in my heart for him. (By the way, I can't remember the name of the lady who spoke in class today, so you'll have to bear with me as I purposefully omit her name from this blog). I liked what the speaker had to say about his assumption of literacy. I mean, I know that we could take his assumption as a negative thing or as a positive thing. But I like the idea of a guy who just assumes that everyone must love to read and write.

A failing of mine, I think, is that I can't understand why people wouldn't be interested in talking about good books. I just assume that everyone would want to read and talk about reading. But, sadly, I am often mistaken... But I am drawn to people (dead and alive) who make the same sweet, naive, well-intentioned assumption.

Anyway, Wesley's assumption of literacy, while naive, also seems egalitarian to me. According to class today, Wesley didn't expect only the upper classes to be reading - he knew that reading was not merely an aristocratic privilege. He knew that books have value to all people, no matter what their social standing may be. I think that books are such a form of freedom. Anyone can just believe what someone says about a topic, but to read and to decide for oneself is a wonderful thing.

For example, being able to talk about major themes of "Les Miserables" is nothing in comparison to actually reading it and wrestling with the story and the ideas presented on your own.

Also, I loved how today's discussion of journals ties so neatly in with this whole class. I know that I am being far from profound here, but I liked how the speaker today reinforced the idea of journals as an examination process and a coping mechanism. This simple definition of the importance of journaling (or blogging) really helped me to see the books we've read this term in a clearer light.