/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.7349231]

>University literature class
>turns into a pop-philosophy/sociology discussion class

[Circe No.7349239]

>literary theory class
>Freud section turns into everyone sharing their ~crazy~ dreams and everyone else bullshitting about their meaning

[Anonymous No.7349251]

Never really took a Literature class, but I remember that my introductory Sociology and Philosophy classes were enfuriating because of that.

Philosophers I have since learned to love were turned into feelgood, almost New Age-y garbage and Sociology basically gave us a new vocabulary to express views of society we already had.

[Anonymous No.7349264]

>>7349239
The modern classroom is just a really horrible format to teach the humanities, except for maybe history.

Teachers mostly just want to avoid awkward questions when explaining people like Freud, so they're always trying to connect what these thinkers said with "relatable" stuff that mostly leads to misconceptions, some of which will outlive your education and last a lifetime.

You only really start to learn it properly once the written word becomes your main source of information, and a majority of undergrads never go through that stage. Reading "tough books" and "classics" in school was supposed to get them accostumed/ready for this, but since we've been gradually replacing those with popular fiction it's becoming a rarer and rarer habit.

[Anonymous No.7349366]

>>7349264
Another problem is that the classes are just too free-wheeling. When discussing a text, the teacher rarely has a laid out plan or tries to dictate the conversation in a class. For example, earlier this year I had a class on the genre of Tragedy. The teacher only had one or two questions to the class per tutorial, and the rest was 'what do you think about the text, guys? Discuss it with the people around you'. Naturally from there, everybody wants to demonstrate how oh so intelligent they are, and the classes turn into an irrelevant-from-the-subject-at-hand mental masturbation session, unloading their mental jizz over everyone's notebooks.

[Anonymous No.7349370]

dfw

[Anonymous No.7349389]

>>7349231
>letting women attend university

[Anonymous No.7349392]

>university education
>turns into a massive waste of time and money and sanity

[Anonymous No.7349541]

>>7349231
>living in a remote European country
>no gender/black/gay/women studies
>no triggers/microagression/affirmative action
>half of the students don't even know what “PC” means
>no LGBT/feminist groups on the campus
>everyone's here to sincerely learn

[Anonymous No.7349642]

>>7349541
I envy you

[Anonymous No.7349646]

>American universities
>someone draws a shitstika in a bathroom
>multiple campuses shutdown and multiple high profile staff are forced to quit

[Anonymous No.7349673]

>>7349642
When I was younger, I wished I was born in the United States and went to Harvard or Stanford to get an English or history degree yet I'm glad I kept learning here when I see how it turned out. I won't have an impressive degree from a fancy university but I did study what I like along with hard-working knowledgeable people. You know, I don't even think the courses ever been worse. My former college had two Fields' medal holders who got lured by American colleges once they got their undergraduate instruction done. I think it's more a matter of financial ressources than genuine quality.

[Anonymous No.7349705]

>University literature class

[Anonymous No.7349763]

>>7349392
>university education
>turns out to be a good experience and inexpensive

[Anonymous No.7350212]

Literature studies is supposed to encompass bits and pieces of sociology, psychology, philosophy and history in order for students to learn about and understand a piece of literature through multiple perspectives. Every teacher of literature should also be a jack-of-all-trades in the humanities for this purpose.

For more information, read Rosenblatt's Literature as Exploration.

[Anonymous No.7350254]

>>7349239
>literary theory class
>Freud section

[Anonymous No.7350278]

>>7349673

From my experience, it's about as good as you make it to be. Any compensation for what might be a "lesser quality" education can be achieved, at least to some extent, through self-study and willful correspondence with smart, knowledgeable professors (they exist at every school, some might be harder to find than others).

I see people post shit all the time about the decline of canonical, classical literature, but as a state school "pleb", I have yet to experience any of that shit. It solely depends on what your professor wants to do. Isn't Yale up in flames right now about some bullshit involving Halloween costumes? That effect of everyone being offended and people wanting to "tone down" and remodel the canon is spreading everywhere. If we're going to start complaining about the death of literature and humanities and whatnot in the university, the best thing you can do in any case, if you decide to pursue such studies, is expand your interests and read outside of what is assigned to you in class, based on what you've learned. You should do that no matter what school you go to. Also make connections, get close with those professors that are actually good at their job, but that goes without saying.

Like this>>7349264

This sounds awful. But I've not personally experienced it, at a state school no less, because I've chosen professors that aren't shit. If I could have gone to an Ivy league or top private school without paying out the ass (assuming I got in, for which chances would surely be adjacent to none) I definitely would have-no one would waste such an opportunity-but you aren't hopeless if you end up anywhere else for humanities. It just requires more work and effort to stand out from such places. If you're genuinely talented and put in the work, it should show no matter what school you go to. I think the wide variance in the lives many of those canonical authors lead should be evidence of this, but you can also look at the track records of many other famous people.

Now, whether you'll be immediately successful regarding any of this is another question entirely. I'm not trying to entertain that you're guaranteed to "make it" if you just apply yourself and work hard; I'm speaking purely to personal development, which should naturally lend some benefit to how you make it in the "real world", but shit happens; the cards don't fall into place, you get cheated, or you realize, agonizingly, slowly, that you aren't as good as you thought you were, and that's that. It happens.

Statistically speaking you won't make as much money as the average STEM graduate and are more likely to be unemployed, but aggregate statistics only account for so much when we're talking about the individual, that is, you, and whatever the fuck your life has been, and how it has lead to where you are now and the opportunities that may or may not be available to you. Make the best of any situation-it's all you can do.

[Anonymous No.7350310]

>>7349541
>everyone's here to sincerely learn
And what do they learn?

I mean pc is bullshit but outright ignoring social stratification is beneficial to no one.

[Anonymous No.7350314]

>>7349264
This is why you come to the UK where they use a tutorial system. The notion of studying a single subject rather than a multiplicity like in American colleges is questionable, but the tiny classes are amazing. There were points where I had one-on-one 'classes' with professors.

[Anonymous No.7350476]

>>7350310
What do you mean?

[Anonymous No.7351249]

>>7350254
I'm not really much of a Freud fan, but his contributions to literary criticism are fantastic.

[Anonymous No.7351270]

>>7349231
My professors actually lecture. Don't know what bullshit public universities you assholes are going to.