After reading the chapter, and weighing my options carefully, I deemed the section literature as intertextual or self-reflective construct to be something that I would personally look into. This is because of the sort of paradoxical theory that (and correct me if I am wrong) every piece of literature is just a remade, reimagined version of the previous until eventually it turns into something else entirely. It had me thinking of how literature has evolved over the years, even in just the amount of time we humans could record history, because before recorded history were just stories that were eventually lost to time but may have actually been the basis for things we know and love today. A quick example that the section gives us is when talking about the sonnet by Shakespeare My Mistress, where what is written is closely connected to metaphors used in love stories, however with his own take on the matter, and instead changing the way we read it while still using those same metaphors and tropes. It’s a fun theory to play around with for sure and I do believe that in some way everything we read or write was derived from one place and then slowly started being mixed together from different places. Even today, some movie tropes stay the same while others make it seem the same, but make it have a much heavier impact on the watchers than the ones that have been done a million times over.

     I found the “literature as intertextual or self-reflective construct” angle most interesting because it seems as though there is a paradox. This perspective argues that “works are made of other works”, whether that is from other writings or concepts, like traditions (Culler 34). A poem written by author A is really a reiteration of an idea author B had. Stories and plays are written, sometimes unintentionally, based on culture or preexisting biases. Literature is the transformation, progression, reform, or renewal of present or past literature. However, this begs the questions: What was the first piece of literature, and if we can define it, how can we be so sure? How would we know if it was not a continuation of an idea posed by someone or something else?

The brain- is wider than the sky- by Emily Dickinson shows me what literature is because of the way it makes me think and makes me think about how one line could mean two different meanings, and how she words certain lines to make them stand out to the reader. An example of it is when she states. “the brain is just the weight of god” here the reader has to think about what she means, from what I read I believe what she is stating is that the brain can absorb and take in as much information as needed, basically saying that the mind/brain is just like the sea or sky. which is why I consider it a piece of literature because it is comparing two items that are not normally compared and making the reader think. the author could have just easily related the brain to a computer and could have stated many aspects that were similar when it came to both of them yet she chose these specific words and tied them back to the brain forcing the reader to think about her statements. This is what I believe to be literature when an author has to make the reader think about the words they put in their piece of writing, which is exactly what Dickinson showed us here in this piece of poetry

In the section titled “The nature of literature” from chapter 2 of “what is Literature, and Does it matter?” by Jonathan Culler, in this section of the chapter Culler defines “literature” from several angles. The angle I found most interesting is “literature as aesthetic object”.  In this angle Cullen is basically telling us that Literature is made with a purpose to construct a reading that has different phases and emotions that will work together throughout the reading to have an end. The artistic part of literature is  the ending itself. It’s a pleasure when making literature or occasioned the writing itself. For a text to be consider as literature the text as a whole has to contribute into creating an effect, emotion or art in the reader’s mind. But it doesn’t have a purpose to inform the reader about anything or convince the reader about anything and it’s not meant to accomplish anything in the reader. Literature is made as something to entertain the reader. It has a purposiveness and a writing or story has to be tellable and have qualities that make them a good story. Also it’s not attached to external purpose. This is what makes a story aesthetic for the reader and listener. It is something that will amuse them and cause an effect in them think a something worth reading or listening. I found this angle interesting because it explains how or when a text or writing can be considered as literature as well as how literature can be an aesthetic object that readers and listeners can consume. I also found this interesting because I think literature can be an art of work and cause   readers or listeners  and it’ s mostly used in fiction stories where it has a variety of qualities to amuse the reader.

In this part of the chapter, Culler defines literature from several angles. The angle that I am most drawn to is  “literature as fiction”. The literary work is a linguistic event that projects a fictional world that includes a speaker, actors, and an implied audience. Literary works that refer to imaginary rather than historical and factual ideas. It is how the reader interprets and understands the writer’s message. I find it interesting how it can lead to multiple meanings for the audience, depending on the views and mindset of the reader. A sentence can be put out with a lucrative purpose, for the readers to interpret and make it their own. Fictional literature is not bound to factual ideology, rather it is more imaginative and thought-driven. This draws the attention of readers like me, pushing us to imagine the unimaginable. It allows us to gain meaningful insights without the fear of being wrong. Since it is interpreted in numerous ways there is not definite answer. This  leads to interesting discussions paving ways to topics that are not usually talked about in our daily life. This is why fictional literature is the most appealing and relatable angle to me.

When Culler defines literature from several different angles, he brings about the angle of “literature as fiction”. This stood out to me the most because with fiction stories comes the imagination and mind. With fictional stories, you have to think about the context of the story, the complexities of the characters in the story, the plot, what the author meant by a certain line, or, as a whole, what he wanted out of the story, or the main idea. With fictional literature comes all of these ideas and questions which makes it more intriguing for the reader to continue on observing and reading for himself because reading fictional literature is very useful. Analytical skills come into play and you always have the question yourself because the story can be very complex and misunderstood. Plus, fictional stories are very immersive and fun to read.

The section called “nature of literature” from chapter 2 of “what is Literature, and Does it matter?” by Jonathan Culler, In this part of the chapter, Culler presents us with five different angles from which to view literature: “literature as the integration of language,” “literature as fiction.” literature as an aesthetic object.” or “literature as an intertextual or self-reflexive construct.” and of all five angles, the one that most intrigues me is literature as fiction. I have always been drawn to reading fiction because I feel like it broadens my imagination and always gives me a new perspective. Also, literature presents its audience with a fictional world that employs a range of storytelling techniques making the fiction stand out more to the readers.

As literature constructs a fictional world filled with characters, actors, events, time, and audiences, what makes it even more interesting is the fact that when it comes to fiction, interpreting the characters’ words and the meaning of what the author’s intent is always a matter of interpretation. Fictional literature allows the reader to understand what the text is about, how it interacts with its context and setting, as opposed to non-fiction. For instance, according to Culler, a nonfiction discourse is usually framed within a context that indicates what it is about, such as a newspaper report, a nonfiction novel based on true events, or a charity letter which all are facts and reality and have specific goals.

Although, in literary fiction, it is possible for the author’s intent to differ substantially from what the reader or speaker takes away due to the way we think and how our imaginations work, and that is the reason I find literature as fiction most interesting. Therefore, I would say, that’s the appeal of fiction lies in how readers interpret it.