He posited that a society with the absence of literature is one condemned for spiritual barbarism and is jeopardizing its freedom. This is opposed to the effects that reading literature can impact a person or society, and is hence an irreplaceable activity for the formation of a modern democratic society where individuals are free.
Llosa also states that the remarkable development of science and technology allows for the emergence of the era in which knowledge is specialized, and as a result, led to the fragmentation of knowledge into numerous compartments and divisions. A person who does not read or reads little is one who suffers from an impediment, who can speak much but can say only a handful due to his deficient vocabulary in the realm of self-expression. The impediment from which he suffers is a poverty of thought since his ideas are supposed to co-exist with his words, but is not so because of foregoing the reading of literature. The term 'literary' is also used to define a television program or a film to denote that it is boring and rarely captures the public's interest. This is how little we regard literature nowadays.
However, Llosa claims that without literature, the critical mind would suffer from irreparable loss since it is the real locomotive of historical change and the best protector of a country's liberty, which must hence be filled with literary feeding. It serves as food of the rebellious spirit, the promulgator of concepts of nonconformities, and the haven of those who have too much and too little in life. The fantasized life of a novel is better and more beautiful than that in reality, in which life is conditioned by the limits of our circumstances. Good literature is thus always a challenge to what exists since it posts subversion, non-submission, and rebelliousness, let alone allowed by the wandering minds, which continuously raise questions about life, its meaning, its functions, what it must be like, and what it mustn't be. The essence of literature is opposed to what churches and governments normally think when they impose censorship, such as its capacity to invoke a revolution or an uprising. Rather, as a poem, a play, or a novel is not collectively created, literature possesses no such power of being able to foresee these things.
There are at present certain words that add up to the current vocabularies, which in effect are of literary origin, such as quixotic, Kafkaesque, Rabelaisian, Orwellian, sadistic, and masochistic. This is how greatly literature influenced the human life. However, our inadequacies and cruelty are also mirrored in literature as it depicts horrible sexual slaughter in de Sade, as well as brutal sacrifices in Sacher-Masoch.
Llosa warns us of a nightmare, which in truth is a result not of underdevelopment but of overdevelopment attached to the development of technology alongside our very own submission to it. Llosa is afraid of a possibility of an alchemistic elimination of books, and hence, of literature in the midst of subservient stance for advancing technology. His call is to act, and more precisely to read, if