Death and autobiography have been closely associated since the beginning of life writing studies. From Paul De Man's seminal article "Autobiography as De-facement" (1979), we have been aware of the "restoration of mortality by autobiography" (930). Furthermore, different scholars have dealt with the idea of death as prompting "scriptotherapy", that is to say, the need to write as part of the process of healing or consolation before imminent death. As Susanna Egan explains, the "ultimate, or foundational, relationship of life with death has always been important to autobiography" (Egan 12). Specifically, much recent autobiography deals with terminal illness, the process of dying and the facts of death. In fact, life-writing genres that specifically deal with the experience of death are proliferating in a variety of forms, visual and verbal, digital and non-digital, etc. In the wake of the memoir boom, we find autothanatographies (also called end-of-life memoirs or death memoirs), narratives of aging, illness memoirs, etc, which often function as counter-narratives in a Western culture of denial.

The belief that reading stories is a good means to promote empathy and to improve character education has led educators to use literature at different educational levels. However, it is often the case that this potential that literature can offer does not reach actual students, primarily because the two functions of literature, `prodesse et delectare¿¿to teach and to delight¿are not sufficiently acknowledged as inseparable: students are frequently forced to choose between reading for pleasure and reading for moral improvement. Thus, focusing more on the reader, and exploring what reading for pleasure actually entails, we could use literature more effectively to educate our students¿ characters. Specifically, this chapter aims to explore how a more phenomenological and experiential approach to literature would help improve contemporary reading and teaching practices. Generally labeled `post-critics,¿ there are a number of scholars who argue for the need to focus more on readers and who propose alternative readings¿reflective (Rita Felski), creative (Derek Attridge), or rhetorical (James Phelan). This chapter ends with a brief reference to my experience in teaching in a Core Curriculum program within this phenomenological framework that focuses on the actual students¿ experience and responses to literature.