Blog Response #1: What is “Literature by the Numbers”? ~or~ Flipping the Bird, Socks, and Led Zeppelin

To me “Literature by the Numbers” immediately implies the measurement or quantification of forms of literature. There are many ways one could quantify literature, and there are many ways one could define the word “literature”; let’s start with the latter issue first.

“Literature” is a term that gets argued over more than one might think. From my perspective, the defining points of literature are that it (1) tells a story and/or (2) conveys or explains a person’s thoughts. I would argue that any entity that completes either (preferably both) of these two functions is a form of literature. This would include books, video games, songs, paintings, and artistic arrangement of plants. Even flipping someone off could be construed as a form of literature, if the purpose is to convey the thought that you are very mad at someone.

Image result for kid flipping off gif

Regardless of the form of literature, you can always quantify it in some way. But in which way to do it? This brings us back to the first issue, regarding the way in which to quantify literature. It is a bit more difficult for me to discern, so I asked myself another question: “Why? Why do my socks always disappear after putting them in the dryer?” Then I realized that that question is besides the point, we are talking about literature here. A more on topic question (although about equally as baffling) would be “Why would you want to quantify literature?”

Image result for socks lost in dryer

I, personally, have no inherent interest in quantifying literature, although someone apparently does *coughAislinncough*. But whatever your reason for doing it, that reason will tell you how to go about the quantification.

Let’s say, for example, that you want to know which song lyrics (from all the songs in the album How the West Was Won, by Led Zeppelin) are the most difficult to understand. You would be able to get numbers from Google about which song lyrics are most often searched (besides “Stairway to Heaven”, that song will have been searched thousands of more times by each of the new guitarists who are only learning to play so that they can get ladies). These numbers could lead you to start quantifying the syllable/time ratio of each verse, in order to discern which lyrics must be said fastest, and therefore would be hardest to catch. You could continue to do many kinds of measurements of each song until you were able to compile a compelling argument as to which song’s lyrics are truly the most difficult to understand. In this way, you have subjectively analyzed an objective art form, which could appeal to certain peoples’ need for solid facts. (By the way, my vote is for “Immigrant Song”, at least that recording of it. I frickin love the song, but it took my forever to figure out what he was saying.)

220px-led_zeppelin_-_immigrant_song

The point is; The end (the reason you want to measure literature) justifies the means (the way in which you quantify literature). I know that’s not how you’re suppose to use that saying, but it worked well, and I’m the one writing this blog, not you.

So. long story short (I know, too late for that), to me the important part of “Literature by the Numbers” is the quantification of literature. And the reason you are quantifying literature is as important as the way you are quantifying said literature.

Thanks for reading, I’d love to hear your thoughts on the matter; feel free to comment below. Now go out and do some quantifying!