“You are what you read,” said Oscar Wild. Does that mean you are what you write, too?

Believe it or not, there was a time when the author’s personal life didn’t matter to the book. For a good chunk of the last century, New Criticism was the theory of choice in a lot of academic circles. It taught that external factors (like the author’s biography) detracted from the words and the meaning of the text on the page.

What a conundrum for today’s readers. New Criticism made reading so impersonal; or, maybe it let you completely escape into the created world without regard for modernity and politics. How have your reading choices and tastes been affected when you learn something about an author’s personal life? Can you still enjoy Mists of Avalon knowing that Marion Zimmer Bradley was accused of child abuse? Do the recent allegations against Sherman Alexie diminish his place in the YA canon? Does it bother you that Asa Earl Carter invented a back story for his penname Forest Carter to promote The Education of Little Tree as a memoir? I will admit that it affects my appreciation.

Are some sins more forgivable when taken in historical context? Sure, Kerouac didn’t write about women in a flattering way, but that was the time in which he lived, man. Right?

Is child abuse ever of a time? Where is the line? We reward authors’ work by purchasing their books and by showing up to readings and signings. So now what? Can we get a refund?

New Criticism left a lasting impression on how literature is taught in colleges, but fortunately, it didn’t win out as the only way literature is taught. Both, the intention and the result have meaning. The lens of the past and the ideas of the present can affect that meaning, too.

We don’t always have to throw out the old literature, but we can read it with a contemporary analysis and still recognize its place in history. Maybe this is the time for new stories and new literary theories to take hold.