/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3637004]

>Picking courses for the fourth (and final) year of my degree in English literature
>There isn't a single option in the second semester which doesn't belong to the 'school of resentment' - feminism, eco-theory, post-colonialism, etc.
>Two courses in 'Black American' fiction, another one on 'working-class fiction from New Zealand', plus a Northern Irish equivalent
>I don't live in any of those countries
>This isn't even a bad university

I'm not a racist, sexist or nationalist. In fact, I think great literature necessarily transcends the limitations of those categories. I don't hate anyone. I just love literature.

I just want to take a course in Shakespeare without a 'queer' slant, examine Conrad's use of narrative without mentioning Achebe, or unpack meaning in The Waste Land without having to exhaustively discuss Eliot's antisemitism first! Is it too much to ask?

[Anonymous No.3637013]

Shouldn't have majored in English in the 21st century.

[Anonymous No.3637015]

>BAWW STOP MAKING ME THINK ABOUT THINGS I DON'T WANT TO THINK ABOUT ;_;

[Anonymous No.3637016]

>>3637013

Like I said before, I just love literature.

[Anonymous No.3637019]

Looks like you might actually have to learn something useful this year instead of studying literature for the sake of studying literature. Fancy that.

[Anonymous No.3637020]

>>3637016

Then why don't you want to read literature written by certain races, ethnicities, and classes?

[Anonymous No.3637022]

>>3637016

>you have to major in English to love literature

Boy you done fucked up.

[Anonymous No.3637023]

>>3637016
I feel ya man. English programs just aren't what they used to be. I'm not sure there's any going back.

[Anonymous No.3637027]

>>3637004
I'm truly sorry OP. In all honesty, I think majoring in classics is the best option these days for anyone who really cares about literature and wants to leave the fad identity politics behind. But obviously that doesn't really help you.

The best thing you can do is talk to previous students, even meet with professors to discuss their courses, and figure out which of them are really interested in critical discussion of the literature and which just want to shove their ideologies down your throat.

[Anonymous No.3637030]

>>3637019
>feminist studies
>queer studies
>post-colonialism studies
>minority studies

>useful

Oh God, haha. There can't actually be people who believe this, can there?

[Anonymous No.3637032]

>unemployed for almost a year now
>getting closer to being well
>apathy is lifting
>start to take good care of myself
>regain the ability to enjoy simple pleasures
>don't feel like shit when waking up in the morning
>no need for self-destructive behaviour anymore
>happiness is gently creeping up my spine
>i quietly shudder and smile at the birds looking for worms in the morning dew
>standing in front of the window
>this coffee is delicious
>i'm going to do exactly what i want today

[Anonymous No.3637035]

>>3637032

Who are you quoting?

[Anonymous No.3637036]

>>3637035
Epicurus.

[Anonymous No.3637043]

>>3637036

Where did he say that?

[Anonymous No.3637046]

>>3637032
I hope you have a good day anon!

[Anonymous No.3637047]

>>3637019

No literary analysis is 'useful', don't be ridiculous. I chose this degree knowing that its utility was purely emblematic - I'd get a bit of paper that would arbitrarily improve my career prospects. I'm not labouring under any illusions, I don't think the feminist theorists should either.

>>3637020

It's rather that I very much do want to read literature written by certain writers. They interest me and they're canonical, it shouldn't be an excessive demand. I think that these modern schools of criticism should be open to those who're thus inclined. However, other - more 'traditional' - approaches should also be available.

>>3637022

I clearly didn't say that, friend. However, I'll never have another opportunity to do nothing but indulge my passion for literature. A literature undergraduate obviously isn't the only person who loves literature, but he's probably in a better position than anyone else to explore that passion.

>>3637023
>>3637027

Thanks, gents.

[Anonymous No.3637050]

>>3637043
De Rerum Labora, second scroll.

[Anonymous No.3637052]

>>3637046
Thanks, friend.

[Anonymous No.3637054]

To be fair modules in world literature would be okay. I wouldn't mind trying Northern Irish literature.

But agree on irritance on having to analyse works from a certain political perspective.

[Anonymous No.3637068]

>>3637054

I totally agree, the course is probably great and presumably employing the expertise of one of the professors. I'm not even opposed to courses with a clear political agenda. Honestly, it's just irritating that my university hasn't offered alternatives.

[Anonymous No.3637152]

>>3637068

In your four years, you have never studied traditional Western literature?

[Anonymous No.3637170]

>>3637004
I started reading Eliot completely cold, knowing nothing about him nor having read any criticism around him and the first thing I thought was "Man, this guy really doesn't like Jews." It's fairly inseparable from much of his work.

While I'll concede that many of the people who have worked to dislodge the canonical works haven't always spent that much time with them, you sound like a blithering idiot.

>>3637027
>classics

Much of the really recent stuff in Classical Studies revolves around the role of women in ancient societies. Classics is pretty fractured by those who try to impose a conservatism on it in reaction to this.

[Anonymous No.3637174]

no you don't love lit

laterz

[Anonymous No.3637179]

I don't think a person studying post-colonial theory necessarily needs to resent anybody to appreciate its uses. Rather, to study it is to study how what is left out in the creation of narrative is as important as what is left in; consequently, from that a person learns what motivates the story in the first place. At least, with what I've studied of it, that's the essential core of the theory. Its origins were politically motivated, but from what I've gathered it is also useful to read literature from a particular epistemological angle.

That being said, it and those other schools you've listed tend to attract people who do resent in one way or another. I'd want to distance myself from them, too.

[Anonymous No.3637186]

>>3637170

Fun fact: Deconstruction and the revival of criticism on the Romantic poets that was a part of it was in part because Harold Bloom and his Yale colleagues could not stand T.S. Eliot.

[Anonymous No.3637188]

>>3637068
>clear political agenda

lolin

you prefer it when it's not clear i.e. more to what you're used to? how the fuck do you even consider yourself to have enough insight to do well at literature?

[Anonymous No.3637189]

>>3637152

Of course, but we studied all sorts of literature in the first two years of our degree. It was a kind of general summary, textually and critically. Also, we didn't get to pick what we read.

However, the honours component has had a real scarcity of 'traditional' options.

[Anonymous No.3637190]

>>3637047
>No literary analysis is 'useful', don't be ridiculous. I chose this degree knowing that its utility was purely emblematic - I'd get a bit of paper that would arbitrarily improve my career prospects. I'm not labouring under any illusions, I don't think the feminist theorists should either.

The thing about studying feministic theory, minority studies, post colonialism and such, is that they have real world applications and teach you about why the world is the way it is, and ho it can (or can't) and should (or shouldn't) be fixed.

Those are actually important things to understand.

[Anonymous No.3637198]

>>3637189
maybe it's because there is no need to study traditional shit anymore and you have to read literature from marginalised populations now

[Anonymous No.3637200]

>>3637189
>Of course

Then what are you complaining about? Your university has the variety you're calling for.

What, exactly, do you want? Every semester to have a nice, safe Western literature course that you can take so you can avoid thought you don't like? Did you come to university just to sit inside your comfort zone for four years?

[Anonymous No.3637204]

>I just want to examine Conrad's use of narrative without mentioning Achebe

Fucking pleb. Do you want to even think about what you're reading beyond the level of "cool dialogue" or plot points.

Learn to love contextualising works or art and it will open up worlds for you. Start reading more history and knowledge up if you really want to bother with literature or you're just going to be entry level forever.

BTW post-colonialism is an amazingly interesting field of study. Get some knowledge of Ireland and Africa's post-colonial history.

Works:

Declan Kiberd's "Inventing Ireland"
Achebe's books, any of them
Sembene's film "Xala"
Benedict Anderson's "Imagined Communities"
Some Frantz Fanon essays

Go, now, and do it.

[Anonymous No.3637209]

>>3637047
>No literary analysis is 'useful', don't be ridiculous. I chose this degree knowing that its utility was purely emblematic - I'd get a bit of paper that would arbitrarily improve my career prospects. I'm not labouring under any illusions, I don't think the feminist theorists should either.

You sound like a lazy, entitled prick. Intellectual laziness is the worst kind.

[Anonymous No.3637222]

>>3637189
why not just read and study "tranditional" stuff on your on?

Look at it like this: if your school had just giving you courses in traditional studies, you'd just be performing endless self masturbation, reading and learning about things you already agree with. At least this way there's a chance you learn about stuff you don't already like, and you can STILL read traditional stuff on the side.

That's probably the reason the cirriculum is set up the way it is. The board figures all you middle class white kids already read all traditional stuff, so here's to hoping e can teach you about things outside of your little perfect suburban life.

[Anonymous No.3637228]

OP:
>I don't live in any of those countries

What a pathetic excuse.

>School of resentment

Seems like you resent being made to think for yourself.

>I just love literature.

Really? How can you appreciate complex literature like Joyce or Proust to its fullest if you don't have a knowledge of either history, mythology, politics or philosophy?

[Anonymous No.3637231]

>>3637004
>I just want to take a course in Shakespeare without a 'queer' slant, examine Conrad's use of narrative without mentioning Achebe, or unpack meaning in The Waste Land without having to exhaustively discuss Eliot's antisemitism first! Is it too much to ask?

Yes, welcome to the Jew-manatees

[Anonymous No.3637235]

>>3637209
How is him not being a careerist but doing what he likes intellectual laziness?

[Anonymous No.3637238]

>>3637004
>degree in English literature
NEET thread?

[Anonymous No.3637240]

>>3637238

Do you even know what NEET stands for?

[Anonymous No.3637241]

>>3637235
He doesn't like being made to think about themes, subtexts or contexts of the works he's reading, hence, he's lazy.

[Anonymous No.3637255]

>>3637190
>feministic theory, minority studies, post colonialism and such, is that they have real world applications

No they don't.

>about why the world is the way it is, and ho it can (or can't) and should (or shouldn't) be fixed.

Funny how what should and shouldn't be fixed is always decided through the lens of left-wing social theory. All of those (X)-studies are all about eliminating dissent and imposing radical world-views on people.

[Anonymous No.3637257]

>>3637241
I don't get that from what you quoted.

[Anonymous No.3637261]

>>3637222
Props to this guy. The point of literature classes is to make you read things you wouldn't otherwise read, and to broaden your perspective on the world.

ESPECIALLY IF YOU WANT TO BE A WRITER, you need to be able to think from multiple perspectives. Writing with a feminist/ethnic/etc slant will make you a more mature and empathetic person as well as a better writer.

Note: I'm not saying you have to adopt any of these philosophies as your own, it's just good to get out of your head a little every once in a while.

[Anonymous No.3637264]

>>3637204

No, you're right. I just want to talk about 'cool dialogue', that's my level. The critical opportunities afforded by Conrad's prose are limited to the literary equivalent of a thumbs-up. That's what I believe.

I have read a lot of post-colonial theory, all of Said. I am familiar with the theory and its contextual framework. It is one method of critical exploration, I appreciate that, but there are others.

>>3637200

Did you even read what I said? I'm talking about the latter half of my degree, both 'schools' were covered in the previous two years. Romanticism is, unequivocally, a major part of English literary history. It should be possible to offer a single course (of literally dozens) in it, given its obvious influence. I can't see how that is controversial.

>>3637190

Identifying references to the malevolent patriarchy in Anne Radcliffe's 'Mysteries of Udolpho' won't change the world.

>>3637170

'Much of his work'. Provide examples from four different poems and I'll sign up for White Guilt 101 tomorrow morning.

[Anonymous No.3637271]

>>3637264
>Did you even read what I said? I'm talking about the latter half of my degree, both 'schools' were covered in the previous two years. Romanticism is, unequivocally, a major part of English literary history. It should be possible to offer a single course (of literally dozens) in it, given its obvious influence. I can't see how that is controversial.

If you're saying that every upper level course completely ignores western literature, then I would just say that you went to a shitty university and be done with it. Because what you're describing sounds like a caricature or a shitty university.

[Anonymous No.3637274]

>>3637241
Themes and subtexts aren't necessarily politically motivated.

I agree that understanding context is valuable, but I do think we're losing sight of why "great" books are considered great, and simply trying to impose some worldview on a text solely for the sake of giving ourselves something to do.

Sometimes this can be insightful, but criticism should be ancillary to literature. I think academies forget this sometimes.

[Anonymous No.3637276]

>>3637255
>Funny how what should and shouldn't be fixed is always decided through the lens of left-wing social theory. All of those (X)-studies are all about eliminating dissent and imposing radical world-views on people.

Funny how right-wingers are always so butt-hurt about the majority of intellectuals and enlightened people being left-wingers.

Fucking Americans and their right-wing disease of the mind that they keep selling to everyone else.

Notice how all the most backwards countries in the world today are emulating America's selfishness and laissez-faire economic policies.

It's so fucked it's laughable.

[Anonymous No.3637280]

>>3637004
>I'm not a racist, sexist or nationalist.

[Anonymous No.3637279]

>>3637264

>malevolent patriarchy (used mockingly)
>White Guilt 101

Oho, someone's politics are starting to show a bit. Methinks you might not be as open to minority literatures as you're trying to let on.

[Anonymous No.3637282]

>What a pathetic excuse.
Uh, what? If he doesn't life in New Zealand, maybe working-class literature from the country isn't particularly relevant to him. In any case, I don't see how he is making excuses.

>Seems like you resent being made to think for yourself.
Have you ever actually taken classes like the ones he mentions? Have you taken a look at the theory? School of Resentment is a perfectly apt name for it, and the classes are often peopled by extremely resentful individuals.

>>3637228
> How can you appreciate complex literature like Joyce or Proust without examining it in the context of a priori feminist theory developed in the last 50 years.

Do you even listen to yourself? He didn't say he was annoyed about learning "history, mythology, politics or philosophy?" He said he was annoyed at only being allowed to view it through the lens of extremely recent identity politics. But I guess by your logic no one appreciated Joyce until Afrocentrism.

[Anonymous No.3637286]

>>3637274

>but I do think we're losing sight of why "great" books are considered great

And why is that?

[Anonymous No.3637291]

>>3637274
What do you propose people do then?

Serious literature is steeped in one or all of the following: philosophy, mythology, politics, intertextuality, literary reference, history, allegory, historical allegory, or the historical context of the time the piece was written.

For instance, any reading of Yeats' "Second Coming" without knowing about the time in which is was written is completely voided as a result.

[Anonymous No.3637292]

Yeah, I have the same experience at my university. Very very feminist slanted. The "History of ______" courses are vastly outnumbered by "Women and Gender in ______" and pic related. Here's a bit of a taste of the priorities in my Roman history class - these are the four questions I'll be answering on the exam:
>How can we use the Laudatio Murdiae and similar eulogies and epitaphs to study women in the Roman world?
>How is this poem typical of Roman attitudes to sexuality and gender?
>How does this passage illustrate Roman theories and prejudices regarding race?
>What light does this passage shed on the nature and social purpose of the spectacles that took place in the Roman arena?

I was classically educated (more or less), and from my perspective, only one of these questions is proper history, especially in the context of a class called "History of Rome". I have absolutely nothing against social history, to be clear, but you'd think a class like that would have at least an equal focus on the political sphere.

"School of resentment" is very apt. Everything seems to have become relative to modern sensibilities and the cause du jour, while my education stressed objectivity, and trained alienation from the subjective. It really feels like they're spoonfeeding the millennials.

[Anonymous No.3637295]

You know what's fucking disgusting? When feminist critics pigeonhole King Lear into an anti-patriarchy statement.

Holy fuck you fools, it's larger than that.

[Anonymous No.3637296]

>>3637282

>He said he was annoyed at only being allowed to view it through the lens of extremely recent identity politics

Yeah, I mean it's not like Joyce's Irish identity isn't fucking central to his work or anything. His feelings of being colonized twice over by the English and the Catholics are just recent identity politics nonsense.

[Anonymous No.3637297]

>>3637291
Any HISTORICAL reading of Yeats' poem, I meant to say.

Yes, you can get all flowery and relate it to ANYTHING, but that's critical wankery.

[Anonymous No.3637300]

It may be best to take the classes with subjects you can see yourself meeting in the middle with just to be done with it. I don't think it'll be so bad, and afterwards you can put the semester behind you.

[Anonymous No.3637304]

>>3637292

>still believes there is objective history

Wow, really? I thought all you guys died out around the fin de siecle.

[Anonymous No.3637305]

>>3637282
>Uh, what? If he doesn't life in New Zealand, maybe working-class literature from the country isn't particularly relevant to him. In any case, I don't see how he is making excuses.

It's a pathetic excuse because I know about African post-colonial history and literature and I've never lived in or been to Africa.

Fucking moron.

[Anonymous No.3637307]

>>3637305

Why would you care about people that are different from you? What are you some kind of dirty liberal?

[Anonymous No.3637308]

>Minority literature
>Good

[Anonymous No.3637309]

>>3637307
0/10

Trying to get a rise.

/lit/ isn't full of /int/ brain-dead right-wing cunt scum.

[Anonymous No.3637310]

>>3637276
I am a left-winger you utter cunt, and I am not American. I still recognize that arbitrary, unfalsifiable social theory is not an acceptable template for "fixing" the world, and I despise the way academics pushing X-studies eliminate dissent with an iron fist. In any case, the number of "intellectuals and enlightened (whatever that means) people" is completely irrelevant to the strength of your position.

>Notice how all the most backwards countries in the world today are emulating America's selfishness and laissez-faire economic policies.
When did anyone bring up selfishness or fucking economics? What does the worth of your precious feminist theory have to do with selfishness? Are you just taking every opportunity to interject pre-prepared, self-righteous diatribes into unrelated discussions?

[Anonymous No.3637311]

>>3637296
Well said.

[Anonymous No.3637312]

>>3637309
>/lit/ isn't full of /int/ brain-dead right-wing cunt scum.

Yeah it is. I was just being an ass, but yeah it is. Just look at this thread.

[Anonymous No.3637313]

>>3637310
I can feel your butt-hurt.

My anus pulsates for you.

[Anonymous No.3637315]

>>3637312
They're all pretending, too.

[Anonymous No.3637319]

>>3637296
OK, the point your making is obvious. However, reducing Joyce's work to that alone does nothing for it.

Literature is an art form--perhaps THE art form--and not merely an artifice of sociology. Not all encounters with it have to be "critical" (though obviously this is important and necessary to be a serious student).

[Anonymous No.3637320]

>>3637271

It's the best university in my country, top twenty in the world.

>>3637241

That's exactly what I like being 'made to do'. Do you really think that political readings afford the greatest depth? Have you ever read any literary criticism that doesn't belong to these - narrow, however significant - categories?

>>3637228

It's not that I don't want to read literature by the 'marginalised' but that I think you should be able to do either. I'm talking about availability such as it relates to contemporary academic practices, not my personal literary tastes (as so many contributors to this thread seem to think). The 'school of resentment' is Bloom's term. Like him or not, his euphoric readings of Hamlet will make it abundantly clear that someone can do plenty of thinking about literature without necessarily involving politics. Are you really denying the possibilities of other readings? Readings which broadly examine the very nature of reading, writing and reality?

>>3637222

The issue, for me, isn't even strictly textual. I think works like Don Juan should be available, but I could live without them. The major problem I have is that we're forced to understand every text through a very focused lens. I'm not, as someone suggest above, incapable or unwilling to work hard to discover deeper meanings. In fact, to use the same example, I'd say that questioning whether 'Conrad was racist or not' is actually a very shallow response to a text with immense depth.

[Anonymous No.3637324]

>>3637310
Yes, he probably is. Everyone loves to bring up America, even when its irrelevant.

Behold, America's greatest imperialism; the imperialism of minds. Preoccupation is the new occupation.

[Anonymous No.3637328]

>>3637310
>What does the worth of your precious feminist theory have to do with selfishness?

Who said I was a feminist?

>Are you just taking every opportunity to interject pre-prepared, self-righteous diatribes into unrelated discussions?

Hypocrite, much?

>I despise the way academics pushing X-studies eliminate dissent with an iron fist.

Citation needed. Maybe you go to a moronic closed-minded Uni, but at mine we were allowed to think freely.

>When did anyone bring up selfishness or fucking economics?

Can't we digress for a minute? No? Iron Fist? Seeing your hypocrisy again?

[Anonymous No.3637332]

>>3637319
>However, reducing Joyce's work to that alone does nothing for it.

STRAWMAN! WOO! No one is claiming that we treat Joyce purely as a post-colonial author.

>Literature is an art form--perhaps THE art form--and not merely an artifice of sociology. Not all encounters with it have to be "critical"

Sadly universities aren't very keen on offering classes on going "Oooo~" and "Wow!".

I tried to get my university to open a degree on Wow studies, but they weren't convinced.

[Anonymous No.3637335]

>>3637320
>It's the best university in my country, top twenty in the world.

And it's still pretty shitty. Fancy that.

[Anonymous No.3637339]

>>3637320
>In fact, to use the same example, I'd say that questioning whether 'Conrad was racist or not' is actually a very shallow response to a text with immense depth.

If that's the depth you get to with Heart of Darkness, your college is fucked.

The study of colonialism in that novel is deep. Crack into it.

[Anonymous No.3637343]

>>3637332
You legend.

I wish I could kiss you.

[Anonymous No.3637352]

>The level of pure plebery from OP

[Anonymous No.3637365]

>>3637332
You seem like someone so entrenched in the academy that you can't enjoy something for simply being a well-told story.

I understand coursework in this isn't very practical, but it's this type of relationship with literature that I feel is ultimately undervalued. I think more literary types would do better to attempt truly encountering some work on a personal level rather than focus on pissing contests and petty arguments.

We're trying too hard to make it a social science or something, and it just ISN'T.

Also, I'm not saying this is something that there should necessarily be a COURSE in (not OP, btw), but that I think so few people encounter classic literature as something other than an academic subject.

[Anonymous No.3637376]

>>3637365
Why on earth have you chosen literature to study?

You can't just read a book and say "I liked this part" and "this part was cool" and "the themes are love and death".

[Anonymous No.3637379]

>>3637339

Like it or not, there are fundamental questions being asked by Conrad about consciousness, epistemology and existence which absolutely go 'deeper' than anything explored in Said or Achebe. 'What it is to be' always precedes 'What it is to be as [insert specific category]'.

>>3637335

The trend in my department is endemic. This is applicable to most of the top literature departments in the world. I'm trying to open up a conversation, do your best to ignore my specific case and make some points.

>>3637332

I have been continually, and I think clearly, arguing for variety. I'm not against any critical approach, per se, just against any of them holding a monopoly. And, as you well know, reducing the alternative to 'wow!' is as pointless as reducing feminism to 'moan, moan, moan!'.

[Anonymous No.3637389]

>>3637376

This absolutely isn't what anyone is suggesting. I think you know that. If you've read enough criticism to participate in this discussion you obviously know that there's more to the approach you're describing than that.

>>3637352

That mustachioed gentleman would almost definitely be on my side.

[Anonymous No.3637388]

>>3637379

How was the curriculum organized up to this point, OP?

[Anonymous No.3637393]

>>3637389
>This absolutely isn't what anyone is suggesting. I think you know that. If you've read enough criticism to participate in this discussion you obviously know that there's more to the approach you're describing than that.

Then PLEASE FUCKING EXPLAIN YOUR PLEB THEORIES.

[Anonymous No.3637391]

>>3637379
Like it or not, consciousness, epistemology and existence are all facets to be viewed through colonialism first and foremost, for it explains Conrad, and Kurtz's, world view, much like understanding Nazi ideology lets us see why they committed such horrible, disgusting acts without any conscience.

And don't go arguing about the "banality of evil" as it just doesn't hold up on its own - it works in the context of a deeply entrenched colonial or fascistic world-view.

[Anonymous No.3637392]

>>3637376
I didn't, really. I just enjoy it.

>You can't just read a book and say "I liked this part" and "this part was cool" and "the themes are love and death".

And why the fuck not?

Not every reading (in school or out) has to be made through some analytical lens.

[Anonymous No.3637396]

>>3637365

>You seem like someone so entrenched in the academy that you can't enjoy something for simply being a well-told story.

Not at all. My enjoyment of a work and my study of a work are quite apart from one another.

>I think more literary types would do better to attempt truly encountering some work on a personal level rather than focus on pissing contests and petty arguments.

You just said it. Personal level. Academics are not personal. Academics are about study, not gushing over how neato Eliot is.

>but that I think so few people encounter classic literature as something other than an academic subject.

This is true. Those few people are called 'literature students'.

Honestly, you know what it sounds like what you want? Religion. No joke. I'm serious here. It sounds like you want professors to preach the Gospel of Western Literature.

[Anonymous No.3637397]

>>3637389
>This absolutely isn't what anyone is suggesting.

You're wrong. See this:
>>3637392

>>>>You can't just read a book and say "I liked this part" and "this part was cool" and "the themes are love and death".

>And why the fuck not?

>Not every reading (in school or out) has to be made through some analytical lens

[Anonymous No.3637402]

>>3637379
>The trend in my department is endemic. This is applicable to most of the top literature departments in the world.

Well then maybe there's some weird thing going on where the 'top literature' departments are especially shitty. Because my average as fuck state school has a pretty nice balance of upper level traditional lit courses and upper level minority lit courses.

[Anonymous No.3637406]

>>3637365
I don't think anyone is trying to stifle that sort of relationship with literature -but again, you cannot major in awe.

[Anonymous No.3637407]

>>3637396
Thatsa good'a comment.

[Anonymous No.3637414]

>>3637392

[Anonymous No.3637419]

>>3637391

The colonial appurtenances are a vehicle for more intrinsic (and, to my mind, interesting) suppositions about language and reality. The epigram to Eliot's 'Hollow Men' clearly illustrates his appreciation of the novel's existential dimension. That's all the verification I need. Besides, Achebe admitted as much, though he took ethical exception to that kind of metaphorical exploitation.

[Anonymous No.3637423]

>>3637396
Again, you're constantly placing this in the context of a college or university.

My entire point the whole fucking time has been, hey, literature is more than that. I think formal students lose sight of that.

How many people who don't encounter it as an academic subject even experience it? No one. Culture isn't even experienced that way anymore, and that fucking sucks. That's my point.

Also, don't conflate me with other anons to manipulate the point they're making.

[Anonymous No.3637429]

>>3637423
>Again, you're constantly placing this in the context of a college or university.

Because that's what we're talking about, dude. If you want to cry over the fact that no one reads anymore, go do it somewhere else. That isn't what this thread is about at all.

[Anonymous No.3637430]

>>3637419
>The colonial appurtenances are a vehicle for more intrinsic (and, to my mind, interesting) suppositions about language and reality.

Jesus dude, I'm trying to civil, but that's some wankey way of making a bad point. Our points can coexist - you've made your point less valid by invalidating mine. You don't always have to refute. As pathetic as it sounds, we're both correct here to an extent.

[Anonymous No.3637433]

>>3637423
Confirmed troll

[Anonymous No.3637442]

>>3637393

Well, if you were to open Paul H. Fry's 'Theory of Literature' then it'd be the contents of pages 1-259, with only the final forty dedicated to the school you're defending. Plenty to be going on with, I reckon.

[Anonymous No.3637456]

>>3637442
>Cites one book as his analytical compass.

Pleb

[Anonymous No.3637458]

>>3637430

I know! Christ, I've been saying all along that I want both to exist. I've only started to get snappy because the responses I've gotten have been consistently combative since the offset.

And, contrary to >>3637423, I'm exclusively talking about academia here.

[Anonymous No.3637463]

>>3637458

>I've been saying all along that I want both to exist

Both do exist. This is an issue with your lit department. Go yell at them. Can this thread be over?

[Anonymous No.3637464]

>>3637442
I'm not a defender of "one school". Where have you got that assumption from?

Fucking strawman bullshit.

[Anonymous No.3637471]

>>3637464

My argument is for diversity of critical response. If we're somehow opposed then you're either helplessly parochial or just someone posting Simpsons pictures who got caught in the crossfire.

[Anonymous No.3637476]

>>3637471

Which 'one school' is being defended by anyone in this thread? I would like to know as well.

[Anonymous No.3637481]

>>3637476

schoolofresentment.

[Anonymous No.3637483]

>>3637471
>My argument is for diversity of critical response.

How have I intimated that I'm against that? You're strawmanning again. Fuck sake.

>If we're somehow opposed then you're either helplessly parochial or just someone posting Simpsons pictures who got caught in the crossfire.

Opposed? To what?

Also, you only post pictures of Hugh Laurie. Does that make you special? If you like House, you're a pleb, Fry and Laurie is pseudo-intellectual pleb entry-level try-hard pap. Blackadder is his only good work.

[Anonymous No.3637484]

>>3637481

Oh would you grow up? Jesus. Bloom's polemics are fucking obnoxious.

[Anonymous No.3637491]

>>3637481
No one has been defending one school.

We've been assaulting OP's flagrant ignorance to critical theory, history, philosophy or anything that isn't "wow" or "golly gosh" gusging at a text.

[Anonymous No.3637494]

Alright, I'm going to bed. My cunt of a girlfriend ran over some tramp nigger earlier today, but she's back home now. Going to rape her to Rule Britannia and then hit the hay.

[Anonymous No.3637496]

>>3637491
flagrant ignorance OF I meant to say. Excuse me, indeed.

[Anonymous No.3637499]

>>3637494

You shouldn't be so abusive to your hay.

[Anonymous No.3637500]

>>3637494
Ah, he runs off when he's challenged.

Typical Brit.

[Anonymous No.3637513]

>>3637483

You haven't seen Jeeves & Wooster? Worth a watch.

>>3637491

No you haven't. You've repeatedly intimated that by denying the validity of certain approaches (though really I only ever argued against their 'singular validity') I have exhausted the critical potentialities of literature. Since that point, I've just been saying that there's more to 'everything but the school of resentment' than 'gosh, golly, wow'. I tried to illustrate that with a simple example - Paul Fry - and nobody really responded.

[Anonymous No.3637519]

>>3637513
>You've repeatedly intimated that by denying the validity of certain approaches (though really I only ever argued against their 'singular validity') I have exhausted the critical potentialities of literature.

I have never denied any approach. I am all for aesthetic readings of literature, but those can't be all the tools you use. It's like only looking at the use of colour in a Hieronymus Bosch painting; there's so much more in there than that.

You're an EXPERT at strawman arguments, I'll give you that.

[Anonymous No.3637527]

>>3637019
>feminism, eco theory, post colonialism
>useful
oh ho ho ho stop right there criminal scum

[Anonymous No.3637534]

>>3637519

Well, perhaps you haven't, but this is /lit/ and I don't know who I'm responding to.

Posts such as -

'He doesn't like being made to think about themes, subtexts or contexts of the works he's reading, hence, he's lazy.'

'Seems like you resent being made to think for yourself.'

and

'Fucking pleb. Do you want to even think about what you're reading beyond the level of "cool dialogue" or plot points.'

Were made in response to my desire to ' take a course in Shakespeare without a 'queer' slant, examine Conrad's use of narrative without mentioning Achebe, or unpack meaning in The Waste Land without having to exhaustively discuss Eliot's antisemitism first' and while you're obviously not responsible for them, they do (implicitly) prescribe a singular approach. Or, rather, a series of approaches belonging to a general tendency. It's no wonder I'm straw-manning so much, I'm replying to several people, most of whom are probably taking the piss.

[Anonymous No.3637556]

>>3637534
No, you actually got all my comments there.

Let me explain to you why you can't just talk about aesthetics alone in one word:

Banality.

Everything you can say about how it is written has been said a million times. Now, with other theories lenses strapped on, you'll only be banal by a smaller margin. You'll be treading over less covered territory, and you MIGHT just be original and make a unique observation.

Do you want to dissect the iambic pentameter of poetry? Can you write essays on aesthetics alone or a dissertation? I'd say it would be a stretch.

>Were made in response to my desire to ' take a course in Shakespeare without a 'queer' slant, examine Conrad's use of narrative without mentioning Achebe, or unpack meaning in The Waste Land without having to exhaustively discuss Eliot's antisemitism first' and while you're obviously not responsible for them, they do (implicitly) prescribe a singular approach.

No, we're all against your ignorance of other approaches.

Do you think the one way about everything? Once you start to actually read the theory you're complaining about, you'll realise how wrong you are.

And it does show that you haven't read any of it.

[Anonymous No.3637558]

>>3637527
>post-colonialism not useful

Brain donor confirmed

[Anonymous No.3637610]

hey maybe with marginalised populations becoming more and more prominent in tertiary education, they felt the 'political agenda' of wealthy white man literature was being pushed on them too hard.

basically everything that you're saying is just wrong

[Anonymous No.3637614]

>>3637527
is that it? is that literally all you have to add?

[Anonymous No.3637672]

>>3637556
>wanting classes that expand on the basics of the schools that aren't LGBTPOCALHAPBETSOUP studies under abranch that's not anthropology
>He just doesn't want to read and discuss/critique anything that might challenge his patriarchal/white man/reptilian/ciskingdom/whatever the new, hot other in x-studies is. I certainly hate to say it but there's a reason the humanities are looked at with the eye that we're a bunch of political activists who just want an open forum to whine about white guilt or promote militant activism. And that sort of shit (not providing an expansion on the basics that aren't semi-political in nature) is a huge reason that humanities are seen as a fucking joke.

[Anonymous No.3637675]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrt6msZmU7Y

[Anonymous No.3637683]

>Fourth Year of lit degree
>Haven't exhausted Shakespeare, Conrad, Eliot, and other literature giants yet.

By this time, you really should have already studied those works and should be broadening your horizon. Sure, a course about feminism or racism is bullshit, but a course about Black American fiction or Women authors would do you well.

[Anonymous No.3637690]

> according to /pol/, you're not learning anything if the book isn't about feminism/white guilt crap

[Anonymous No.3637699]

>>3637683
I'll agree there, I don't mind the specialty literature of x (heck I know I'd take a course on Anglo-Irish or just Irish in general literature). But that's not OP's point, he's pointing our how the analysis portions of his schools literary English courses are pretty much, breeze over some basics that are general, then you get to choose between discussion with a heavy emphasis of politics or nothing at all.

[Anonymous No.3637715]

>>3637699
No, OP is a lazy shit who is making excuses for having no intellectual curiosity.

[Anonymous No.3637718]

>>3637699

I don't think that's universally true. It wasn't really the case in my college.

[Anonymous No.3637745]

>>3637032
Whenever I make a nice cup of coffee I always drink it in like two minutes, it's so annoying.