ABSTRACT What is happening in literary culture that critics and scholars believe the way we read novels today is troubled? Writer-critics like Zadie Smith have argued that the value of the novel be reconsidered according to an earlier tradition of realism, which evokes an increasingly complex world by which readers can be roused to ethical knowledge of other people. Smith’s formulation tells a story about the way we connect the reality of the novel and our own reality, a story of which literary scholars have begun to question the very possibility. This essay engages a debate between Dorothy Hale (2020) and Timothy Bewes (2022) that has significant consequences for reading, if Bewes is correct to question critical approaches that treat literature as an object of analysis and to theorise, instead, that the contemporary novel has its own, unapprehendable ‘thought’. But if thought is unapprehendable, how can criticism survive? Answering this question, I read J.M. Coetzee’s Elizabeth Costello (2003) as a novel that foregrounds thought, not, I argue, as in Bewes’s negative formulation but necessarily as a positive power that manifests a life. In this case, realism and criticism survive as precisely the nonsubjective thinking of impossibility required for less troubling times.