In the previous column, it became quite clear to me what the literature should not do, to demonstrate a thesis of the author; but what he does, “describes life”, was too vague, too broad. Does literature only do that? Does music, cinema and the rest not describe life? Is there still something that, as advocated by Italo Calvino, can only be given to us by the literature? Faced with these questions, I turn to a book by Antoine Compagnon, La littérature, pour quoi faire?, which includes the first speech he made at the Collège de France in 2006.

The place of literature has decreased a lot in our society lately, but it doesn't matter in leisure, in school, in the press. It has competitors everywhere and has no monopoly. But, devil, I have proven it, it continues to provide pleasure and teaching, better, teaching, overcoming the limits of everyday life, increasing the errors of language, giving the impression of an irreplaceable, thorough and extensive knowledge of human experience, and instead of issuing rounded truths, sowing doubts, ambiguities and questions in our certainties. We read it, therefore, even if it is not essential, because it makes life more pleasant, clearer, richer, easier to live. Hey, but without a moraline, because I know people who don't read anything, and some seem happy. I do know why I read: Oh, because it makes me rather than not reading. And everywhere it has rivals, it has no monopoly, but the literature is on its side and its power is still overstretched.

A couple of weeks ago Compagnon delivered his last speech at the Collège de France. With the pandemic, I continued live. I would like you to take it out in the book, as in that first speech, so that you can come back again and again.