Possibly dumb starter take, but has anyone ever gained, achieved, or advanced anything from trying to define what constitutes a literary text
First year of literature academy (What'd be an english mayor course in the USA, I think) and the question of "What is literature" has come up often, mainly in literally theory, where it's the central question.
And... and it's nothing. Reading and talking about it, it's nothing. There was a single development in the field when estrangement was described and that was like 200 or 300 years ago, and it's laid flat achieving nothing ever since. Entire tomes to ask "What makes a text litelary" and the answer is paragraphs upon paragraphs of shrugging their shoulders because it's a cultural thing so it can't be defined exactly.
I mean, I'm not the type to want to know what I can pull out of a book with a syringe and inject into a newspaper to make it literature, I agree that you can't, but I find it odd that it's such a central, repeated question when the answer is, to put it succintly, "Idk, you know it when you see it.".
Is this just me missing something or is this just a question that hasn't achieved anything yet gets weird amounts of discussion, time, and print? Is this just elitists who want to gatekeep high art and adhd people who's manic about classifying everything into square boxes angry at round pegs?