To me, literature is a collection of written I think the Russian Formalists made an
works that reflect human life and interesting point because they focused on
experiences. It’s how people think, feel, how language works in a text rather than
and respond to different situations in the author or the story. To me, it makes
society. sense to study literature as a system of
words and structure, almost like a
To me, literature cannot be defined only as machine, because that’s what gives it its
imaginative or fictional writing because not power. I also like the idea that a work like
all works we study in literature are Eugene Onegin can stand on its own,
made-up stories. For example, in our showing that the text itself is what really
reference, there are essays, sermons, matters.
letters, and even autobiographies written
by different authors, but they are still Honestly, I think the Formalists have a
considered literature. These works are point because they focus on how a story
called literature because they express is written rather than what it’s trying to
deep ideas, beliefs, and experiences say. For me, looking at a book like Don
using effective language. That’s why I Quixote or Animal Farm this way is kind of
believe literature can be any written work cool, because you notice all the tricks
that reflects human thoughts and life, and techniques the author uses. It makes
whether it is fictional or not. me realize that literature isn’t just about
the story or message—it’s really about
I think literature isn’t just about what’s true how the words and structure work
or made-up. Even essays, historical together.
works, or religious writings can be
literature because of how they express To me, this passage is saying that
ideas and make us think. To me, literature literature works by making us notice
is about how a text connects with people language itself. It’s not just about the
and shares meaning, not just about fact or story or the characters—it’s about how the
imagination. words, rhythm, and structure make us see
things differently. I think that’s why some
If literature is 'creative' or 'imaginative' books feel so powerful, because they
writing, does this imply that history, make the ordinary world feel new and
philosophy and natural science are alive.
uncreative and unimaginative?
The Formalists said literature is
No, I don’t think it means that. History, made of deviations from normal
philosophy, and science can be very language, but normal language is
creative and imaginative too, just in a different for everyone. Not every
different way. Writing history or philosophy deviation is literature or poetry, so
requires thinking deeply, connecting ideas, you have to look at how the text
and presenting them in a way that people works in its social and historical
can understand and reflect on. Even context to understand it.
science uses imagination when creating
experiments, theories, or models. So The Formalists believed that what
being “creative” isn’t only about making up makes language literary depends on
stories—it’s about how you use ideas and context. A phrase is only poetic if it
language to explore and share sounds different from normal
understanding. speech at that time. Since everyday
language already uses metaphors I agree because literature is
and literary devices, literature too broad to be explained by
cannot be defined by those features just one rule or characteristic.
alone. Instead, literariness changes
depending on society and history.
The passage shows that literature 5. On literature being based on value
isn’t just about strange language,
but about how we read a text. When I think something is called
we take words out of their practical literature because people
use and treat them as having a believe it’s important or worth
deeper or general meaning, that’s reading, not because it
already a literary way of reading.” follows a formula.
1. On literature not being only
non-pragmatic
6. On literature being unstable
I think it’s true because some
This makes sense to me
writings are useful in real life
because what people value
but we still treat them as
changes, so literature also
literature because of how
changes.
meaningful they are.
7. On readers rewriting texts
2. On literature depending on how we
read I agree because readers
always interpret texts based
For me, it becomes literature
on their own experiences and
when we read it seriously and
time.
try to understand what it’s
really saying, not just the
literal message.
8. On values not being neutral
I think even facts are
3. On texts changing over time influenced by values because
people decide what is
I think this happens because
important to focus on.
people from different
generations see texts
differently, so what matters
before may change now. 9. On ideology and literature
For me, literature reflects
society because our beliefs
4. On no single definition of literature affect how we read and judge
texts.
10. Overall reaction
Overall, I understand the
passage as saying that
literature depends more on
people and context than on
fixed rules.