Tag Archives: English

My head to the chopping block….

Posted on by
3

I believe that I better appreciate now the extent and purpose of the 299 class.  We’ve been going through the necessities of the course, and how it will improve our work in other classes in the future 300 level courses.  I see this and acknowledge that this is how these classes go from now on, as in discussion on the viewpoints of literary works, lectures on the time periods and customs therein, analyzing aspects of form and style within works, and writing research papers based upon these factors(among others).  I find it most curious.  The following is probably going to seem critical, but I promise I do not intend for this to be directed so negatively, but more so to explore through writing different visions I have of English Studies.

From that aspect, it seems that the majority of English Studies classes are fairly “cookie cutter” in that approach, and I see the reason and purpose.  A place to have discourse, a place to see and react to different aspects of literature, different conventions, etc.  And, of course, to have the research paper which seems more or less the same no matter where you go in how it is written, its purpose, etc.  I have a question here of, “is this the case?”  I am currently engaged in such a course, and I cannot help but think that these courses engage the material, but almost in a way that screams, “try to find something original that no one has(or at least few people haven’t) already noticed about this work after 100+ years and try to put that out there.”  I understand, with the New Critical approach of appreciating the text for what what it is, and that there will always be a developing “cutting edge” which comes from the new approaches, but eventually, it seems that one could also define a work by what isn’t there…and I initially meant that as a joke out of absurdity until I really JUST thought about it.  Give it fifty years…

This is not a moment of disillusionment regarding this class, as this class is meant to teach us the basics of upper level English courses.  I understand that there are plenty of upper level English courses that are different.  However, the unfortunate thing about basic training in a discipline is that it does tell you about its core and what it wishes to accomplish.  I guess when it comes down to it, the research paper has me question a lot of things when I read my sources.  We just had a few articles presented in the 300 level course I’m in, and thankfully, several students debated the purpose of several articles.  At what point is the hair split too far?  At what point do things need to be left alone?

I ask these questions not to insult, but more so simply to be honest with myself about the commitment that goes into English Studies.  It seems to turn us all into critics instead of focusing on the works themselves.  Sure, they have importance when it comes to history, culture, form, technique, etc.  Yes, you can tell great things about culture, time, customs, and writers by their work.  Yes, you can study a work for the work itself, cutting off all of these things.  But it seems to still be lacking.  I remember a friend remarking that each time she read an article of the sort, she questioned whether or not these pieces would have a platform for publication if it were not assigned for students like us to read–would that circulation continue to exist?  I think her point has some validity.  And I know it is extremely arrogant to say, but it doesn’t seem like anyone is saying it.  And it probably all goes over my head–my world, isn’t that a grand notion?  But ultimately, I just question a lot of it.  Like I remarked about Mark Twain’s note in Huckleberry Finn- “PERSONS attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted; persons attempting to find a moral in it will be banished; persons attempting to find a plot in it will be shot.”  I think, in light of this, there have been too few lawyers, governmental bodies, and firing squads, respectively of course.

I’m REALLY trying, I promise!

Posted on by
3

So, another day another dawn as Sean Puffy Combs would say.  Maybe.  But I digress.

I am actively seeking to make this approach work for me, and I think I am making strides, albeit slow ones.  I don’t think there is much more to get except for learning to practically apply the aspects of formalism, which we began with the Sonnet.  I accept its existence, its backgrounds, and its tenants, I just personally do not think that I am at the degree of proficiency in which I could do a formalist critique myself if left to my own “devices.”  I guess this is just a confidence issue in whether or not I have ingested the ability to act on these points we’ve been discussing.

I am also led to a curious epiphany in that it seems that the structure of this class (from the schedule) is solely around criticism, and it seems that criticism is the majority of English studies (I’m not saying it is, just seems that way at this point).  It seems strange that we take in different lenses with which to analyze scientifically or quantify the material brought to us, and in focusing on this, it seems that something is invariably lost.  I cannot help but think of my own writing, and think that I am not looking for it to be analyzed or compared.  I partially want it to be entertaining, but I really want it to convey a message.  You could take every filter you want to a story or poem I wrote, and you could still fail to see it for what it is.  Almost like (I know, too much use of the Dead Poets Society) in the Dead Poets Society when Robin William’s character instructs the class to remove the page from their texts in which the value of a poem is quantified by a linear graph.  I understand the dichotomy(see, love dichotomy) of this position, and I can see both sides.  Eventually, you have to have something more tangible or empirical to ground your studies.  But this also holds your studies back from their full potential.  It takes the pleasure out of it.  It makes us the people Samuel Clemons would all too happily execute or something(see? wow I can insert hyperlinks and everything.  Woah.  No worries, I’m taking this aside out of my word count for credit…).

I just get the sense that we are removing the key purpose for writing: to inform, to entertain, to open up subject-matter itself.  Sometimes, a tree is just a tree.  Sometimes it isn’t.  But this seems somewhat forced and contrived if criticism is the end all to English studies.  The human element seems to me inseparable.  And whereas we claim that we are not removing it with multiple criticisms, or we second guess people making blatant statements (like maybe Mark Twain was trying to make a hint in telling us not to look for hints), it seems that appreciation and study of a subject is more about riding a wave than it is controlling a river’s flow.  Sorry if that’s out-there/sounds-like-hippie-bullshit.  I think I should have shut up around paragraph 2.  I am going to review what I have written and continue (because I think this gives me the ability and opportunity to argue with myself.  someone hide the gun.)

Having re-read the above paragraphs, I only wish to contribute that I am not saying that we just sit around in English studies and talk about how texts and authors make us “feel.”  But more so, discuss the impacts and implications of works themselves, as to original intent.  In this way, as history is cyclical, so all of a sudden, Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” works multi-generationally for fighting poverty and oppression.  Stuff like that.  Yeah.  Didn’t really give myself an exit strategy here, did I?

Sum up in one sentence or less? Criticism is part of English studies but is not the end all.  It just has appeared this way for the majority of my “Literately aware” life.  For the record, I hope my premises and assumptions are wrong.

The Importance of “Doing English”

Posted on by
Reply

Robert Eaglestone presents enlightening topics regarding the history of English as an academic discipline. Who would’ve thought that “studying English literature was seen as a way of ‘civilising’ the native population”? (11) But, perhaps we should look more closely at this notion. Often times, people will say that having a background in English elevates an individual. You don’t need to “demand respect, but can command” it with the wealth of knowledge that English brings. Literature allows one to delve into times not lived, and bring about ideas never thought. It is presumptuous for the English to inundate the Indian population with literature, yet I’m personally grateful for such a path to have occurred. I do not support the coerciveness that must have taken place, but rather the simple introduction of valuing English literature. As a result, “the British formed the ideas of a school and academic discipline called English, which involved reading and writing about novels, plays and poems written in English.” They concocted what we, English majors, love so much. Had the British not propelled English as an academic discipline then…where would English have taken off? Would it be as valued as today or not?

Eaglestone: Affects of English on Other Cultures (Namely India)

Posted on by
3

In the beginning of the week, we discussed a text from Robert Eaglestone about the origins of English as its own topic and about the canon.  I found the reading extremely interesting, especially the use of the English language and literature as a ‘tool of empire’.  When attempting to keep control in colonized India, the British government decided to stray away from the tactic of imposing religion on a people to enforce their other ideas and superiority.  Instead, they began to teach English to anyone who wanted to learn it.  From the Indian perspective, the British were far more superior to them intellectually, and this was the source of their power.  It was only natural, then, for the Indians to strive to learn English and study literature in English in the hopes of becoming intellectual equals—or perhaps even surpassing the British—and then forming a resistance to colonization.  This idea that ‘knowledge was power’ led to a great deal of growth and acceptance of English, beginning in India.  Whereas Eaglestone continues to discuss the canon and the other various steps taken to produce English as an actual concrete subject to be studied alongside philosophy, I am more interested in the results that this initial introduction of English had on the native Indians.

From other classes and sources read, I have found that the impact of English on India was profound.  There is a current debate over what’s considered “Indian literature”—literature that has sprouted from the initial seed of English literature and language.  Most of the literature produced in India or by Indians is written in English—a very interesting effect of British colonization tactics.  Moreover, literature by Salman Rushdie—a native-born Indian now basically banished for writing The Satanic Verses—has been denounced by some critics as not true “Indian” literature.  The rift which the division of English and the various languages of India (most commonly Hindi) is quite intriguing and shows that English does hold extraordinary power and worth in today’s society.