/lit/ - Literature

>>8793928
But, they are told to think for themselves. MFA students are not (er, at least not supposed to be) children incapable of developing their own styles and tastes. We want to learn from masters of the craft because they are masters of the craft, so the respect you're talking about is inherent (i.e. not institutionally derived).

You might read Saunders' own essay before assuming so much about the narrative of black-box universities you seem to want to build:
>http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/my-writing-education-a-timeline

A small example from that essay is the dose of perspective he gets from Tobias about "not losing the magic". It really boils down to a rift in understanding how education is supposed to work. Yes, you can and should self-educate by reading books, etc. But education at the MFA level (at least at the respectable ones that we're talking about) should not be (though could become, in unfortunate cases) a power play. What would honestly be the point of that? The teacher talks and student listens, but they also develop a relationship in which the student talks and teacher listens, too. The teacher-student respect isn't meant as a barrier but as a bond of trust, where one can trust the other to provide thoughtful, helpful criticism. If you can't trust people on that professional level, then MFA is not for you.

Also, when you say...

>Doesn't the teacher hold power of the students final grade, along with letters of recommendation, interviews, and other resources they have the power to provide the student?

...you're conflating "resources" and networking opportunities, which are things you're buying into via the MFA program, with "grades". And no self-respecting young- to middle-aged-adult ought to be threatened by a bad grade if the teacher doesn't like their work. If the student pushes themselves anyway, does the required word counts, readings, etc., gets and gives valuable feedback from the mentor teacher and classroom peers, then who gives a shit about a grade? You'll pass, perhaps without an A but certainly with a valuable education.

>>7859087
I got you.

>>7523566
This sounds a lot more palatable than a 75-78% range.

Also, what does /lit/ think of the book (Markson's book, that is)?

>>7497724
>41
>never

>>7492538
I haven't read enough into it yet to discern whether it's a new way of approaching mathematics/abstract systems or one extended dick joke.

The code is run on a tool called Coq, after all...

A general PSA to OP and his reddit ilk: Remember to quote previous posts so we know who you're responding to. Thanks xdXD

>>7338695
This guy is inspiring as hell. A work of IJ shitposting so far-reaching and earnest, that we have in our midst the writer we deserve (jeremy1122), even if it's not the writer we need right now (darknight foster wallace).

What would we classify this ironic, shitposty, long-form work which is largely concerned with the prototypical post-irony work as?

>>7323327
I read it over the course of my last two years of high school. He posits a few things about computers that are pretty irrelevant today, but most of the first ~700pages aren't concerned with that. There are long stretches of dry parts, but at that age, having not read any other lit, the book was mindblowing and literally changed my worldview. Now, I'm not sure that it would have the same effect. That's not to say it isn't just as clever, or smug, or interesting in the sense of combining sentiments and knowledge from different fields, though.

My recommendation, if the length is intimidating: Read the first one or two chapters entirely, the dialogues (the short italicized chapters in between all of the meaty ones), all of the rest of the chapter introductions, and then critical analyses of the book that you find online.

>>7295466
>>7295472
but did you even make train noises (hypothetically)?

>>7235453
>statistics be damned
agreed, math major here and I wish I'd never studied stats. Theoretical stuff combined with /lit/ inclinations is a God-tier combination, though

>inb4 "obtuse". heh.

>>7178404