Do you have preference for any particular type of purpose, in a novel?
Interesting. I agree that I probably require an artist to have a philosophical outlook - to have a sense of philosophy. But this can be subtle or not overt and that is where I agree with you concerning Shakespeare and Dickens. There may be artists who disdain a philosophical ‘intent’ and are concerned with ‘mere description’, but that in itself is a philosophical outlook and if they have a clear sense of what they are up to, and are talented, then it’s all the same in the end. A great artist could write what some would consider gibberish and it would be great and it would be philosophical.
Shakespeare for instance wrote with a clear sense of humanity’s nobility and folly. Rigid distinctions, for instance between people who claim to be of one religion or another, are seen from a perspective that renders those distinctions nearly nonexistent, yet without the kind of distancing or ‘turning off’ which would make him fall into a misanthropic attitude. He takes people seriously and laughs at them at the same time. To me this is a very sophisticated philosophy, and Shaw seems a bit silly to me to not see it that way.