Two Espressos Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 (edited) We have to understand what HE was saying, not what we try and make him say. But thats just how I approach literature, and I know its not the popular way to do so. We don't necessarily need to understand what Shakespeare was saying. There is an army of poststructuralist critics who would disagree with your sentiments. I like to say that there is more than one correct answer in solving these academic problems, but there are many wrong ones. As I see it, a strict adherence to authorial intention (exempli gratia, what did Shakespeare think about Truth, what did he say about Truth, and therefore what did he want us to understand about Truth?) has fallen out of favor for good reason. Edited February 18, 2012 by Two Espressos pinkrobot and the giaour 1 1
DorindaAfterThyrsis Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 We don't necessarily need to understand what Shakespeare was saying. There is an army of poststructuralist critics who would disagree with your sentiments. I like to say that there is more than one correct answer in solving these academic problems, but there are many wrong ones. As I see it, a strict adherence to authorial intention (exempli gratia, what did Shakespeare think about Truth, what did he say about Truth, and therefore what did he want us to understand about Truth?) has fallen out of favor for good reason. Quoted for emphasis (and because I've reached my "+1" quota for the day )
TripWillis Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 So yeah, I can't recommend Bullet Park by John Cheever... I think his short stories are better.
TripWillis Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 BTW, I hate these kinds of arguments... can't we just read and write w/o having to go through this "GRAND STATE OF LITERATURE/HUMANITIES" conversation? It makes my head hurt. truckbasket, WendyMoira and Timshel 3
Timshel Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 BTW, I hate these kinds of arguments... can't we just read and write w/o having to go through this "GRAND STATE OF LITERATURE/HUMANITIES" conversation? It makes my head hurt. This. truckbasket 1
veniente Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 Again, I do not wish to offend - simply discuss literature in the public square in a friendly maker. I mean no offense! Hey hawkeye, me too, I hope I wasn't rude or offensive; I definitely didn't mean to be, however unbridgeable our personal opinions on the importance of authorial intention!
Julianne Pigoon Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 (edited) Oh hey, guys. I just wanted to let you know that I am not advocate for the "canon," nor do I altogether hate YA lit. I fully advocate for the study of any text in any academic/intellectual setting. What bothers me about O. Butler is that her terrible writing is taught alongside amazing authors like Junot Diaz. Man, if someone taught a class on Harry Potter, I would be all about that shit. I took a class on Disney last semester and it was life and career changing. I also happen to love much of what resides in the "canon." I think it's all worthy of study, and those arbitrary boundaries don't worry me. The only arbitrary boundaries that edify what I read and study are my own taste and interest. I also think it's an absolute dick move to hurl petty insults on an opinion thread. Edited February 18, 2012 by Julianne Pigoon
DorindaAfterThyrsis Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 (edited) I also think it's an absolute dick move to hurl petty insults on an opinion thread. I sincerely hope that nothing I've contributed to this thread has read like a "petty insult" or a "dick move". I promise it wasn't intended as such. Edited February 18, 2012 by DorindaAfterThyrsis
Julianne Pigoon Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 What's it like to be illiterate and pursuing an English PhD? Aw no, Dorinda, I was talking about dokkeynot's comment. Part of the reason I like it here is because people tend to be respectful and accommodating. I equate high levels of intelligence with high levels of compassion and consideration, so it pains me to see anyone in this community being nasty. Mistral 1
cafeomuerte Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 L'herbe (The grass) by Claude Simon--didn't know I could yawn so much.
perrykm2 Posted February 18, 2012 Author Posted February 18, 2012 (edited) Man, if someone taught a class on Harry Potter, I would be all about that shit. I took a class on Disney last semester and it was life and career changing. I also happen to love much of what resides in the "canon." I think it's all worthy of study, and those arbitrary boundaries don't worry me. The only arbitrary boundaries that edify what I read and study are my own taste and interest. My university's Lit Department had a cross-listed Harry Potter course with a science department (maybe physics?,) and it was called The Science of Harry Potter. Everyone wanted into it, but it had only 10 spaces open: 5 for English Lit majors, 5 for whatever science majors. It was a 100-level class filled with seniors. I wanted to take it so bad. Edited February 18, 2012 by perrykm2 Grunty DaGnome 1
hawkeye7269 Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 We don't necessarily need to understand what Shakespeare was saying. There is an army of poststructuralist critics who would disagree with your sentiments. I like to say that there is more than one correct answer in solving these academic problems, but there are many wrong ones. As I see it, a strict adherence to authorial intention (exempli gratia, what did Shakespeare think about Truth, what did he say about Truth, and therefore what did he want us to understand about Truth?) has fallen out of favor for good reason. Absolutely there are, Two Espressos. In fact, there's an entire army of theorists out there who would like to take me out back for a "talking to." At least once in my life I've allowed my temper to overcome my virtue and proceeded to drive an ardent feminist theorist to the brink of beating me senseless with a copy of The Faerie Queene. Which, yes, has a delicious irony to it. Obviously, the bottom line of this argument is going to be a fundamental disagreement of method, which is simply as it goes. I appreciate that we can civily (and fear not, no one has been uncivil!) approach the question and hopefully learn something from one another on the matter. I know I've learned a good bit. I'm a practicing Catholic (actually, your inverse Two Espressos: former atheist, now Catholic), and a traditionalist, and so you can see that my larger philosophical beliefs influence how I approach my field. I make no apology for that; I think it's a entirely legitimate way of approaching these texts. So I disagree with you on authorial intent - I think its still quite important, and quite relevant. It cannot be the end all, be all of literature, because we'll never know what the Bard was actually thinking, but we can certainly try and arrive at certain objective truths about a work's content. For instance, it would be terribly difficult to make John Milton an ardent feminist, but we can certainly discuss whether he was an Arian or not (in the sense Arian heresy, not Hitler...). This has been a FUN conversation thus far, I hope we can keep it going. Also, Lewis' Abolition of Man is pretty much free of discussing religion - it's almost entirely a philosophical treatise on value systems which I've found particularly lucid. Is my Donne the same Donne you're reading? And I think you should take a look at "Astrophil and Stella 1" for a nice, compact summation of Sidney's literary theory. Hell, you don't have to read beyond line 1 to get a sense of how willingly (and gleefully!) he toys with and subverts the categories of "truth" and "art". (This has nothing to do with theory, btw. This is pure, unadulterated close reading, which you say is your bag.) Sidney is way more fun than your prof is letting him be, traditionalist or not. I think we'll probably have to agree to disagree in our readings there. I've spent some time with Astrophil and Stella with one of my professors, and we had a fairly different take on good Sir Sidney. And I imagine we could start quoting Donne at one another, too, but arrive at essentially the same problem. So I'll grant you the possibility of your reading, and maintain my own. And yes - the disagreements are what make it interesting!
ekim12 Posted March 2, 2012 Posted March 2, 2012 Not The Secret Agent by Joseph Conrad. (In fact, haven't liked anything by Conrad so far. It's impressive that this guy learned English late, but I feel like you can tell. His prose is just so dense.) I swear that novel affected my mental state. Often felt I was walking through a hazy, seedy London alley, and nihilism & anarchism reigned over alllll
memberofthe? Posted March 2, 2012 Posted March 2, 2012 Oh, man. Everyone in here needs to calm down! Let's get back to books not to read.....Okay, I'll start. On the Road. There, I've said it. I've read it at LEAST four times and I just don't get the allure. Now, your turn! NOOOOOO. This is one of my FAVORITE books of all-time. I love Kerouac. My dad traveled across the US after her graduated from UC Berkeley to emulate Kerouac's adventures. So, for sentimental reasons I have to kindly disagree. Not The Secret Agent by Joseph Conrad. (In fact, haven't liked anything by Conrad so far. It's impressive that this guy learned English late, but I feel like you can tell. His prose is just so dense.) I swear that novel affected my mental state. Often felt I was walking through a hazy, seedy London alley, and nihilism & anarchism reigned over alllll THIS. I HATE JOSEPH CONRAD. I cannot believe that no one until you--ekim12, who I may be attending school with at some point--has mentioned JOSEPH CONRAD. Heart Of Darkness. Seriously. Is. My. Least. Favorite. Novel. Ever. And for the record, if we are going to talk about YA fiction and mention Harry Potter. Novels NOT to read MUST include Twilight. Worst YA Novel in the History of YA Novels. Don't even get me started on the fact that it is popular enough to have a chinky name for "fans" and its such a loathsome one: Twihards. Need I say More?
pelevinfan Posted March 2, 2012 Posted March 2, 2012 THIS. I HATE JOSEPH CONRAD. I cannot believe that no one until you--ekim12, who I may be attending school with at some point--has mentioned JOSEPH CONRAD. Heart Of Darkness. Seriously. Is. My. Least. Favorite. Novel. Ever. YES. In high school, I literally read every single book we were ever assigned, save one: I could not force myself to get through Nostromo. We were given an entire summer to read it, too. It is THAT bad. I know I really should read Heart of Darkness, but after the monstrosity that was Nostromo, I can't bring myself to do it.
memberofthe? Posted March 2, 2012 Posted March 2, 2012 YES. In high school, I literally read every single book we were ever assigned, save one: I could not force myself to get through Nostromo. We were given an entire summer to read it, too. It is THAT bad. I know I really should read Heart of Darkness, but after the monstrosity that was Nostromo, I can't bring myself to do it. Can't say I blame you.... I wouldn't give him a second try and Heart of Darkness is short. A few friends and I considered having a Heart of Darkness book burning party at the end of reading it in AP English our senior year. It never happened and I still look at the book sometimes and consider throwing it in the fireplace... Another book I definitely DON'T recommend is Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.Reading this nearly killed me. It took 4 monsters (yes the nasty energy drinks) to finish the novel. Those of you that enjoyed the 200 page discussion of how to define "Quality," I am impressed and bow down to you for your intellect. I can't do that novel. I'd rather re-watch Wild Hogs than understand the Zen of Maintaining my Motorcycle.
antecedent Posted March 2, 2012 Posted March 2, 2012 Can't say I blame you.... I wouldn't give him a second try and Heart of Darkness is short. A few friends and I considered having a Heart of Darkness book burning party at the end of reading it in AP English our senior year. It never happened and I still look at the book sometimes and consider throwing it in the fireplace... I believe we had the same consideration in my AP English class. Which is funny because I read it again my first year of undergrad and I really liked it.
Silent_G Posted March 2, 2012 Posted March 2, 2012 You probably shouldn't burn books This. For so many reasons.
Fiona Thunderpaws Posted March 2, 2012 Posted March 2, 2012 (edited) Another book I definitely DON'T recommend is Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.Reading this nearly killed me. It took 4 monsters (yes the nasty energy drinks) to finish the novel. Those of you that enjoyed the 200 page discussion of how to define "Quality," I am impressed and bow down to you for your intellect. I can't do that novel. I'd rather re-watch Wild Hogs than understand the Zen of Maintaining my Motorcycle. My partner lent me his copy of Zen early on when we were dating and told me it was his absolute favourite book ever. I wanted things to work out, so I knew I had to read it and be able to make some sort of comment beyond "it was good, sugar pumpkin!" But that section on quality nearly ruined me. Edited March 2, 2012 by Fiona Thunderpaws
TripWillis Posted March 2, 2012 Posted March 2, 2012 While I don't believe there are truly any books NOT to read, I would not give high priority to reading any Henry Adams, if I were you guys. Incredibly important as historical documents, and mandatory reading for Americanists, but of almost zero relevance to anyone else not interested in amateur metaphysics and the "wonderful unity" in medieval aesthetics. His description sucks the life out of any interesting topic you could think of: politics, art, national difference... all of it. It's also pretty anti-semitic.
cquin Posted March 2, 2012 Posted March 2, 2012 You probably shouldn't burn books Did anyone else LOL when Fahrenheit 451 came out as an ebook? gr8pumpkin 1
memberofthe? Posted March 2, 2012 Posted March 2, 2012 My partner lent me his copy of Zen early on when we were dating and told me it was his absolute favourite book ever. I wanted things to work out, so I knew I had to read it and be able to make some sort of comment beyond "it was good, sugar pumpkin!" But that section on quality nearly ruined me. Me Too. It seems to appeal to male philosophy more so than female philosophy but maybe that is an over generalization. You probably shouldn't burn books To be clear: I never burned the book, I never have burned a book, nor will I ever burn a book. I say "I wanted to burn Heart of Darkness" as an exaggeration, a literary metaphor for the great amount of hatred I have for that particular book. Relax.
TripWillis Posted March 2, 2012 Posted March 2, 2012 You probably shouldn't burn books http://www.amazon.com/Being-George-Washington-Indispensable-Youve/dp/1451659261/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330728399&sr=1-1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now