It takes more than 1000 words to discuss the utility and non-utility of literature.

The utilitarianism and non-utilitarianism of literary aesthetics The word "literature" usually refers to literary works. It is an ongoing human activity, not a natural phenomenon. But as far as the activities it covers are concerned, it actually includes the creation and appreciation of literary works, because literary works are a purposeful activity-the result of creation. At the same time, it exists for another purposeful activity-appreciation, and is measured by its value. Even though we have a preliminary understanding of the content of so-called literary works from the perspective of phenomena and descriptions, in fact, we still can't really grasp literature as literary materials. Because all human activities are basically purposeful, unless we grasp the intention of all activities, we can't really understand such activities comprehensively. Although from the observation of pure phenomenon and description, we can really see a group of people running around a ball. Therefore, the observation of pure phenomena and descriptions is of course the basis of our understanding of literature, but on this basis, we need to actually grasp the fundamental intention of literary activities from the perspective of values and norms. This intention lies in the pursuit of literary beauty, which is what we usually call literary aesthetics. Generally speaking, it is a spiritual need. People have a thirst for knowledge and enterprising spirit, which is the character developed by human beings in the long-term struggle to transform the surrounding environment. Moreover, when people appreciate literary works, they can see themselves and affirm themselves. Marx once pointed out that human production is different from animal production, because people are conscious activities. According to the law of beauty, things are developing, and some of them produce the richness of people's first subjective feelings. (2) Hegel also said that for works of art for the masses to appreciate, the masses have the right to ask them to rediscover themselves in the works of art according to their own beliefs, emotions and thoughts, and to sing with the objects expressed. From the purpose, the aesthetic ideology of literature shows non-utility and utilitarianism, that is, human activities do not seek the satisfaction of actual interests, and aesthetic non-utility shows that aesthetics does not seek the direct satisfaction of actual interests. This non-utility of literature is embodied in the writer's creative activities and the reader's reading process. However, there is always some utilitarianism behind the non-utilitarianism of literature. Literature is direct and non-utilitarian. But whether it is indirect or internal, it has certain utilitarianism. As a discourse structure that reproduces real social life, the utilitarian surname of literature lies in its anti-aesthetic utilitarianism as a special means to realize its utilitarian purpose of reproducing social life. Guo Moruo pointed out: I admit that all arts, though seemingly useless, are of great use. "The seemingly useless here, that is to say, they are of great use on the surface. It refers to substantial utilitarianism. The great use of literature is that it can awaken society and inspire revolution, that is, awaken and inspire people to participate in the practice of changing the world (4). For example, Ibsen's play A Doll's House was introduced to China, and many young women were very excited. They saw Nora get rid of the bondage of the bourgeois husband and pursue the will of freedom and independence, which aroused the feelings and wishes of breaking through feudal oppression and yearning for individual liberation. Another example is Goethe's.