Joseph Conrad on "brute force"

This passage from The Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad captured my mind as I was reading.
They were conquerors [the character Marlow is speaking of the Romans in Britian], and for that you want only brute force - nothing to boast of, when you have it, since your strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others. They grabbed what they could get for the sake of what was to be got. It was just robbery with violence, aggravated murder on a great scale, and men going at it blind - as is very proper for those who tackle a darkness. The conquest of the earth, which mostly means the taking it away from those who have a different complexion or slightly flatter noses than ourselves, is not a pretty thing when you look into it too much. What redeems it is the idea only. An idea at the back of it; not a sentimental pretence but an idea; and an unselfish belief in the idea - something you can set up, and bow down before, and offer a sacrifice to . . . "

Here's the question - can belief in an idea be unselfish? Does the answer to that question depend on whether one shares that idea (and is willing to offer a sacrifice) only when others express a desire to share that belief or whether one thrusts that idea at others with the expectation that they too will be willing to offer a sacrifice to the idea?

If you think about what Conrad's character says through the lens of the war in the Middle East, does it give a different perspective?

Is Harry Potter worth reading?

I recently had an interesting conversation with a young man - a writer, an earnest artist - about the value of commercial fiction (as opposed to literary fiction). The question at hand - is Harry Potter worth reading?

My young friend's take, as I understand it, is that commercial fiction adds no value to one's store of knowledge or understanding and is, therefore, not worth the time it takes to read a book like those in the Harry Potter series. He said that you may as well just go see the movie.

I say there's room in the world for both commercial and literary fiction. Both play a role. Sure, the intent of commercial fiction is to entertain. But, there's a residual benefit.

It's about literacy.

People that read have larger vocabularies and - because they know more words, understand those words, and understand, perhaps intuitively, how to construct a sentence and paragraph - have better written communication skills. Knowing more words gives them more words to express themselves verbally as well. (I'm sure there are studies out there that support this notion, I just can't find them at the moment.)

Anecdotal evidence supports this idea. Of all the students that I've had come through my university classroom, the ones with strong communication skills were the ones that read for fun. The ones that struggled the most were the ones that were never exposed to reading as a form of entertainment.

Literary fiction is fiction for those that want something more than entertainment from their books. It's for people that look to books as a way to expand their minds, stretch their horizons. And, sure, it's a shame that more people don't embrace literary fiction; that it's become something for connoisseurs rather than the common man.

So, all you commercial fiction writers and earnest artists out there, what do you think?

As I Lay Dying

What kinds of books do you read? My current favorite is "As I Lay Dying" by William Faulkner.

In June, I decided I would spend the summer months reading modern classics - loosely defined as prominent writers from the 1900s. My favorites so far have been books that explore the complexities of the characters.

What jumped out at me in "As I Lay Dying" was the way Faulkner explored the character of Bundren by showing him through the viewpoints of those around him and their interactions with him. We know Bundren better than he knows himself. Here's what the reviewers on Amazon had to say about it.

Run to your local library, check out this book (it's relatively short) and tell me what you think.