I wonder if literature is a good medium to convey messages with, and how good it is compared to other methods. I understand that comparing the effectiveness of literature to other mediums is hard, but it doesn't have to be "5/10" compared to "6/10". I ask this question because I am contemplating the value of literature. If the purpose of literature is to conveying a message, isn't the complex symbolism and similar that a majority of authors use a limiting factor for its effectiveness of conveying a message? Doesn't this limit literature to a small amount of intellectuals? Is the purpose of a literary work most often to convey a message, or is it something else?
This is a great question considering I myself have debated this issue internally during much of my high school years. What I have come to conclude is that literature is a good medium to convey messages. "Why?" one might ask. It is because well-written literature can convey a message while entertaining the reader at the same time. The reason why we study literature over time is because we as readers can grow intellectually just by trying to understand what idea the author is trying to get across throughout the entire story. Yes, there are other forms of writing (prose, essays, articles, etc.) which convey messages that are straightforward and to the point. How many of those other forms of writing can entertain someone at the same time?
While I believe literature is a good medium to convey messages, it is not the only medium. Whether or not someone considers literature the best medium is up to that person.