Author Spotlight
Ounce of Pound: Grad School Edition
In the main I don’t see that teaching can do much more than expose counterfeit work, thus gradually leading the student to the valid. The hoax, the sham, the falsification become so habitual that they pass unnoticed; all this is fit matter for education. The student can in this field profit by his instructor’s experience. The natural destructivity of the young can function to advantage: excitement of the chase, the fun of detection could under favorable circumstances enliven the study.
Whereas it is only maturer patience that can sweep aside a writer’s honest error, and overlook unaccomplished clumsiness or outlandishness or old-fashionedness, for the sake of the solid centre.
-ABC of Reading, p. 193
****SPECIAL EZRA POUND COMPARATIVE LIT BONUS FEATURE*****
When was the last time you read “Visits to St. Elizabeth’s” by Elizabeth Bishop, about going to see Pound when he was institutionalized? Probably a long time, right? Let’s refresh our memories:
And poets.org has the actual poem here. Try reading it out loud.
Tags: ABC of Reading, Elizabeth Bishop, ezra pound
“In the main I don’t see that teaching can do much more than expose counterfeit work, thus gradually leading the student to the valid.”
it makes sense in creative writing, other disciplines maybe not. when i finished my degree in written communications, which is all comp theory and rhetoric, those people are so uptight and protective of their scholarship that one word against their beloved comp scholars, will certainly get you shunned quickly.
“In the main I don’t see that teaching can do much more than expose counterfeit work, thus gradually leading the student to the valid.”
it makes sense in creative writing, other disciplines maybe not. when i finished my degree in written communications, which is all comp theory and rhetoric, those people are so uptight and protective of their scholarship that one word against their beloved comp scholars, will certainly get you shunned quickly.
we are very lucky that in creative writing, even in the world of academia, these types of discussions are “allowed” to take place.
we are very lucky that in creative writing, even in the world of academia, these types of discussions are “allowed” to take place.
that sounds terrifying, barry. scholarship…jesus. i guess it’s the natural effect of everyone needing their little plot of land to hoe their tenure on or whatever.
one nice thing about literature is that while it has one foot planted firmly in academe, the other foot is in the actual world. well, maybe not poetry much anymore, but the rest of it.
that sounds terrifying, barry. scholarship…jesus. i guess it’s the natural effect of everyone needing their little plot of land to hoe their tenure on or whatever.
one nice thing about literature is that while it has one foot planted firmly in academe, the other foot is in the actual world. well, maybe not poetry much anymore, but the rest of it.
i dunno. i like aspects of ABC of Reading but i feel it is more of a text to defend Pound’s own agenda.
Like the ‘don’t criticize the writer, criticize the writing’ quote.
Yeah of course he wrote that. He was screaming his fascist head off. The guy thought he was too important.
i dunno. i like aspects of ABC of Reading but i feel it is more of a text to defend Pound’s own agenda.
Like the ‘don’t criticize the writer, criticize the writing’ quote.
Yeah of course he wrote that. He was screaming his fascist head off. The guy thought he was too important.
justin:
yeah you are certainly correct. it is all about protecting their own importance, their own job security. shit, even things like blogs scare those guys.
justin:
yeah you are certainly correct. it is all about protecting their own importance, their own job security. shit, even things like blogs scare those guys.
I think it’s because they’re so hyper-specialized. In order to publish scholarship that gets noticed, you either have to truly be the best there is, or else be the only one there is. since the first one is much harder (and i don’t mean to say they’re lazy or inept–we can all try as hard as we can, and be very good, but somebody will be “the best,” and whether it’s me or you or whoever, there’s only going to be one) the second one is much more appealing. So you get stuff like “oh this is that one Lacanian who writes about homosexual overtones in Hemingway’s use of images relating to sunlight.” Well, whether such a thing exists, and how/why it matters if indeed it does, could be a rowdy topic for discussion and debate, but the problem for Our Scholar is that if you can manage to dis-prove him, well, there goes his whole career, because he staked it all on one thing, basically hoping nobody would ever want to talk to him about it. That’s a problem. With writing–or any other remotely commercial art–there is still the democracy of the market, which is a miserable and imperfect system, but at least it exists. Harold Bloom can seethe all he wants about Stephen King and JK Rowling, but he can’t deny them tenure anywhere.
I think it’s because they’re so hyper-specialized. In order to publish scholarship that gets noticed, you either have to truly be the best there is, or else be the only one there is. since the first one is much harder (and i don’t mean to say they’re lazy or inept–we can all try as hard as we can, and be very good, but somebody will be “the best,” and whether it’s me or you or whoever, there’s only going to be one) the second one is much more appealing. So you get stuff like “oh this is that one Lacanian who writes about homosexual overtones in Hemingway’s use of images relating to sunlight.” Well, whether such a thing exists, and how/why it matters if indeed it does, could be a rowdy topic for discussion and debate, but the problem for Our Scholar is that if you can manage to dis-prove him, well, there goes his whole career, because he staked it all on one thing, basically hoping nobody would ever want to talk to him about it. That’s a problem. With writing–or any other remotely commercial art–there is still the democracy of the market, which is a miserable and imperfect system, but at least it exists. Harold Bloom can seethe all he wants about Stephen King and JK Rowling, but he can’t deny them tenure anywhere.
jereme- I think that’s exactly what I like about Pound. Yes, you’re getting his own unfiltered, highly subjective–and considerably learned–opinions. The conclusions based on his research, etc. I wouldn’t say it’s a text to defend his own agenda, so much as to advance it. the book is majorly on the offensive.
I don’t doubt Pound thought he was important—extremely important. Well who says he wasn’t? I don’t know about you, but I didn’t edit The Waste Land. etc. etc.
Pound is major major ego, but I don’t think the gesture is wholly unconscious, or as easy to write off. This shit is life and death for him–it’s that important, to the health of the culture and the people who live in it. He is challenging you not so much to take *him* seriously for his own sake, but to join him in taking the subject as seriously as it requires, if anything of value is to be accomplished. He has a great line somewhere else that I didn’t quote, about how every poem should be written with the aim of advancing the art of poetry. If people followed that one dictum, they’d work a lot harder on their poems–whatever the style or mode or subject–and they’d publish a lot fewer of them.
jereme- I think that’s exactly what I like about Pound. Yes, you’re getting his own unfiltered, highly subjective–and considerably learned–opinions. The conclusions based on his research, etc. I wouldn’t say it’s a text to defend his own agenda, so much as to advance it. the book is majorly on the offensive.
I don’t doubt Pound thought he was important—extremely important. Well who says he wasn’t? I don’t know about you, but I didn’t edit The Waste Land. etc. etc.
Pound is major major ego, but I don’t think the gesture is wholly unconscious, or as easy to write off. This shit is life and death for him–it’s that important, to the health of the culture and the people who live in it. He is challenging you not so much to take *him* seriously for his own sake, but to join him in taking the subject as seriously as it requires, if anything of value is to be accomplished. He has a great line somewhere else that I didn’t quote, about how every poem should be written with the aim of advancing the art of poetry. If people followed that one dictum, they’d work a lot harder on their poems–whatever the style or mode or subject–and they’d publish a lot fewer of them.
no i concur. i like the book and what he is conveying. it is hard for me to take seriously at times. he feels like a blowhard and i start rolling my eyes.
he was important during a very small moment in time. i imagine him in his room at the mental hospital standing in front of a mirror naked and flailing his arms while screaming “MY BELLY BUTTON IS SO GRAND. LOOK AT HOW AWESOME AND SPECIAL MY BELLY BUTTON IS. THIS BELLY BUTTON WILL FORGE HISTORY!’
he needed to glance out the window at the sky and realize his insignificance. i think i could stomach him more if he did.
‘the waste land’ is kind of like Orson Welles’ “Citizen Kane” to me. i respect it but don’t like it and think it is very over rated.
no i concur. i like the book and what he is conveying. it is hard for me to take seriously at times. he feels like a blowhard and i start rolling my eyes.
he was important during a very small moment in time. i imagine him in his room at the mental hospital standing in front of a mirror naked and flailing his arms while screaming “MY BELLY BUTTON IS SO GRAND. LOOK AT HOW AWESOME AND SPECIAL MY BELLY BUTTON IS. THIS BELLY BUTTON WILL FORGE HISTORY!’
he needed to glance out the window at the sky and realize his insignificance. i think i could stomach him more if he did.
‘the waste land’ is kind of like Orson Welles’ “Citizen Kane” to me. i respect it but don’t like it and think it is very over rated.
I’m going to disagree slightly with the assessment of the scholarly side of academia – if I understand what barry and justin are saying – I think you’re right about some scholars being protective of their scholarship, but my assumptions were the same as yours until I started to interact with critical and theory folks on a more regular basis and found that the stereotype/strawman of the the ‘academic’ just wasn’t true (at least in my phd program) There’s a much greater sense of inquiry and criticism around all the criticism and theory we look at, with an active engagement in criticizing the critics and theorists, including my professors’ own work. When I see scholars present papers, the critical folks love to rip into an argument and the presenters seem to be engaged in defending, revising, discussing. I think that’s really how that world operates – it’s not necessary to be ‘right’ but to open new threads of inquiry. That’s why there’s still room for critical writing about work that’s been around for hundreds of years.
I’ve also been surprised by how interested crit and theory folks are in creative writing and how strongly they support it. I can’t say this is always true because I can only talk about my own experience in an English department, but I don’t think it’s cut and dry. I’ve also noticed that many of the creative writers I admire are also engaged with critical theory at the same level as the non-creative writing scholars.
I’m going to disagree slightly with the assessment of the scholarly side of academia – if I understand what barry and justin are saying – I think you’re right about some scholars being protective of their scholarship, but my assumptions were the same as yours until I started to interact with critical and theory folks on a more regular basis and found that the stereotype/strawman of the the ‘academic’ just wasn’t true (at least in my phd program) There’s a much greater sense of inquiry and criticism around all the criticism and theory we look at, with an active engagement in criticizing the critics and theorists, including my professors’ own work. When I see scholars present papers, the critical folks love to rip into an argument and the presenters seem to be engaged in defending, revising, discussing. I think that’s really how that world operates – it’s not necessary to be ‘right’ but to open new threads of inquiry. That’s why there’s still room for critical writing about work that’s been around for hundreds of years.
I’ve also been surprised by how interested crit and theory folks are in creative writing and how strongly they support it. I can’t say this is always true because I can only talk about my own experience in an English department, but I don’t think it’s cut and dry. I’ve also noticed that many of the creative writers I admire are also engaged with critical theory at the same level as the non-creative writing scholars.
I’ve also been surprised by how interested crit and theory folks are in creative writing and how strongly they support it. I
This is definitly not what i’ve seen/heard in English departments. At least in undergrad departments where they are in direct “competition” for students and when the choice is writing your own work or discussing proto-feminist bird imagery in Caucer or Marxist theory of value as it relates to lolcats…. I can understand why the crit/cultural studies people get worried.
I’ve also been surprised by how interested crit and theory folks are in creative writing and how strongly they support it. I
This is definitly not what i’ve seen/heard in English departments. At least in undergrad departments where they are in direct “competition” for students and when the choice is writing your own work or discussing proto-feminist bird imagery in Caucer or Marxist theory of value as it relates to lolcats…. I can understand why the crit/cultural studies people get worried.
Yeah, I’m sure it varies from place to place, and is probably different as an undergrad. I think there are probably some English departments where this rift is more pronounced. I think part of the problem may be undergrads who are interested in writing and literature but dismissive of what writing and literary scholars actually do. I’d also say not to so quickly dismiss theory – it might be more fun to take a workshop, but theory can be as instructive to a creative writer (maybe more so) than a workshop. As a teacher, I’d love to have a writer in a class who knew this stuff and was engaged in it (even subtly) in their creative work.
Yeah, I’m sure it varies from place to place, and is probably different as an undergrad. I think there are probably some English departments where this rift is more pronounced. I think part of the problem may be undergrads who are interested in writing and literature but dismissive of what writing and literary scholars actually do. I’d also say not to so quickly dismiss theory – it might be more fun to take a workshop, but theory can be as instructive to a creative writer (maybe more so) than a workshop. As a teacher, I’d love to have a writer in a class who knew this stuff and was engaged in it (even subtly) in their creative work.
yeah, what matt k said.
ive found here at houston quite a lot of support for cross-discipline work: comp classes influenced by creative writing and the other way round. 80% of our TAs, i think, are cw people, so a lot of their teaching of comp is directly affected by their own writing practices. its really exciting, i think, for younger instructors, instructors newer to the ‘academic scene’ or whatever.
sure there are some differences, as lincoln points out, but based on what im seeing here, a shift is happening locally.
Matt: I’m not dismissive of theory in theory, just more disappointed with what so much of academic theory has become… at least as I’ve seen it. Too little analysis of actual literature, too much advancing social theories unrelated to the work and/or academic analysis of pop culture junk. Someone recently showed me calls for submission to a peer-reviewed scholarly journal dedicated to steampunk. Man, sometimes I feel like Harlod Bloom. Grumble grumble.
I’m sure there is still great stuff being done out there too though.
yeah, what matt k said.
ive found here at houston quite a lot of support for cross-discipline work: comp classes influenced by creative writing and the other way round. 80% of our TAs, i think, are cw people, so a lot of their teaching of comp is directly affected by their own writing practices. its really exciting, i think, for younger instructors, instructors newer to the ‘academic scene’ or whatever.
sure there are some differences, as lincoln points out, but based on what im seeing here, a shift is happening locally.
Matt: I’m not dismissive of theory in theory, just more disappointed with what so much of academic theory has become… at least as I’ve seen it. Too little analysis of actual literature, too much advancing social theories unrelated to the work and/or academic analysis of pop culture junk. Someone recently showed me calls for submission to a peer-reviewed scholarly journal dedicated to steampunk. Man, sometimes I feel like Harlod Bloom. Grumble grumble.
I’m sure there is still great stuff being done out there too though.
Yeah, I would just keep reading and find what interests you.
Yeah, I would just keep reading and find what interests you.
And I’d also ask you what you mean by ‘advancing social issues’ – like reading Marx? And why steampunk and pop culture aren’t valid areas for critical inquiry? I’m just interested to hear your thoughts. I think there’s a healthy amount of reader-response analysis going on in English departments, which I think is what it sounds like you’re interested in, but maybe not enough about why somebody like Marx is important to literature.
And I’d also ask you what you mean by ‘advancing social issues’ – like reading Marx? And why steampunk and pop culture aren’t valid areas for critical inquiry? I’m just interested to hear your thoughts. I think there’s a healthy amount of reader-response analysis going on in English departments, which I think is what it sounds like you’re interested in, but maybe not enough about why somebody like Marx is important to literature.
MATT:
“until I started to interact with critical and theory folks on a more regular basis and found that the stereotype/strawman of the the ‘academic’ just wasn’t true (at least in my phd program)”
that’s my point. at that point they already assumed you were one of them. if you think you would have gotten that same type of reception from them if you were a first year grad student with iconoclastic ideals and thougt their comp gods were full of shit, then you are fooling yourself and giving them more credit then they deserve.
MATT:
“until I started to interact with critical and theory folks on a more regular basis and found that the stereotype/strawman of the the ‘academic’ just wasn’t true (at least in my phd program)”
that’s my point. at that point they already assumed you were one of them. if you think you would have gotten that same type of reception from them if you were a first year grad student with iconoclastic ideals and thougt their comp gods were full of shit, then you are fooling yourself and giving them more credit then they deserve.
also, i’m glad there are people her ewho talk of healthy relationships between comp and creative writing folks at their respective univeristies. it just didnt happen at mine. comp folks treated creative writing folks like third rate trailer trash. the disrespect was blatant.
also, i’m glad there are people her ewho talk of healthy relationships between comp and creative writing folks at their respective univeristies. it just didnt happen at mine. comp folks treated creative writing folks like third rate trailer trash. the disrespect was blatant.
I liked that Bishop poem. She was good. I don’t know much about Pound but have been enjoying these excerpts very much. That said, I like what Jereme said about his bellybutton gazing and how he’d be better off looking outward. Poor guy, though. Mental hospitals suck.
My very very brief foray into academia was not pleasant. But I’m OK with the fact that bartending is/was for me.I think academics like what they do- they like the obscurity and specialization stuff. They like the small community of people doing flarf or reading everything for it being gay. I wish them all well and I like some of the academic stuff I read online from time to time-from the wackier interpretations by random academics that no one knows to Foucault. i am glad that academia exists and I dip my mind into it from time to time. But fighting for tenure and getting oneself published “enough” and having this or that person pulling for you….and so on and so forth? I’m not tough enough. I’d get crushed like a bug in that atmosphere. Back to pouring drinks for me. I can wield a baseball bat at some lousy drunk, but some sneery smartass making me feel stupid because that makes her/him feel powerful? I can’t take it.
“I’d also say not to so quickly dismiss theory”
one more thing. i for my first ma in comp theory so i respect what they have to offer, but it hink its very difficult for undergrads or first year rad students not to be dismissive, when so many comp professors make it clear that they dont respect your perspective as an “outsider”
again, i imagine this is not the case everywhere, schools that are more prominent for their creative writing programs, i imagine their students and staff get more respect, but this is not true everywhere.
I liked that Bishop poem. She was good. I don’t know much about Pound but have been enjoying these excerpts very much. That said, I like what Jereme said about his bellybutton gazing and how he’d be better off looking outward. Poor guy, though. Mental hospitals suck.
My very very brief foray into academia was not pleasant. But I’m OK with the fact that bartending is/was for me.I think academics like what they do- they like the obscurity and specialization stuff. They like the small community of people doing flarf or reading everything for it being gay. I wish them all well and I like some of the academic stuff I read online from time to time-from the wackier interpretations by random academics that no one knows to Foucault. i am glad that academia exists and I dip my mind into it from time to time. But fighting for tenure and getting oneself published “enough” and having this or that person pulling for you….and so on and so forth? I’m not tough enough. I’d get crushed like a bug in that atmosphere. Back to pouring drinks for me. I can wield a baseball bat at some lousy drunk, but some sneery smartass making me feel stupid because that makes her/him feel powerful? I can’t take it.
“I’d also say not to so quickly dismiss theory”
one more thing. i for my first ma in comp theory so i respect what they have to offer, but it hink its very difficult for undergrads or first year rad students not to be dismissive, when so many comp professors make it clear that they dont respect your perspective as an “outsider”
again, i imagine this is not the case everywhere, schools that are more prominent for their creative writing programs, i imagine their students and staff get more respect, but this is not true everywhere.
Barry, maybe we’re incorrectly trying to equate our individual experiences in English departments. I’m a creative writer in a department that is a mix of creative writers and critical scholars. Yes, we read a lot of things that people disagree with, but that’s part of creating a background for argument. People still read Freud even though lots of people disagree with a lot of what he had to say.
I haven’t seen anybody mandating an agenda around a particular school or set of scholarship. Instead I’ve seen the opposite, that everything is open for criticism. I haven’t seen any ‘iconoclasts’ ostracized or marginalized for being iconoclastic. Yes, people disagree, but in my experience this is viewed as a good thing. The scholars I work with are interested in a really wide range of things, sometimes very strange, conceptual, fringe stuff. I just haven’t seen what you’re describing, but sucks if that was your experience. Were you/are you in a rhet/comp program (assuming from your ‘comp gods’ comment)
Barry, maybe we’re incorrectly trying to equate our individual experiences in English departments. I’m a creative writer in a department that is a mix of creative writers and critical scholars. Yes, we read a lot of things that people disagree with, but that’s part of creating a background for argument. People still read Freud even though lots of people disagree with a lot of what he had to say.
I haven’t seen anybody mandating an agenda around a particular school or set of scholarship. Instead I’ve seen the opposite, that everything is open for criticism. I haven’t seen any ‘iconoclasts’ ostracized or marginalized for being iconoclastic. Yes, people disagree, but in my experience this is viewed as a good thing. The scholars I work with are interested in a really wide range of things, sometimes very strange, conceptual, fringe stuff. I just haven’t seen what you’re describing, but sucks if that was your experience. Were you/are you in a rhet/comp program (assuming from your ‘comp gods’ comment)
matt:
yeah thats what i said in my next comment. its just different experiences at different programs.
matt:
yeah thats what i said in my next comment. its just different experiences at different programs.
Barry, I hear what you’re saying. I think we’ve had very different experiences, and that’s a bummer. What kind of program are you in when you say ‘comp’? Composition?
I cannot remember any professor I’ve ever had (including the bad ones) as an undergrad, MA, or PhD student being so strongly held to an agenda that they dismissed a student’s well thought out, informed argument.
Barry, I hear what you’re saying. I think we’ve had very different experiences, and that’s a bummer. What kind of program are you in when you say ‘comp’? Composition?
I cannot remember any professor I’ve ever had (including the bad ones) as an undergrad, MA, or PhD student being so strongly held to an agenda that they dismissed a student’s well thought out, informed argument.
MATT:
also, about dismissing freud. i think its a huge differnece between making it clear you dont agree with or respect freud then if you said the same thing toward berlin, flower, bartholomae, elbow, or those guys it would be differeent. going into your program denouncing those fellows, saying they are full of shit, saying their ideas are outdated and only exist to perpetuate themselves and their careers. thats different then dissing freud. the take that shit personally and they will not take kindly to you. if your experience has been different than i am glad.
MATT:
also, about dismissing freud. i think its a huge differnece between making it clear you dont agree with or respect freud then if you said the same thing toward berlin, flower, bartholomae, elbow, or those guys it would be differeent. going into your program denouncing those fellows, saying they are full of shit, saying their ideas are outdated and only exist to perpetuate themselves and their careers. thats different then dissing freud. the take that shit personally and they will not take kindly to you. if your experience has been different than i am glad.
i finished a masters program in written communications. it was all comp theory and comp rhetoric.
i finished a masters program in written communications. it was all comp theory and comp rhetoric.
when i hear you guys argue over theory/crit vs creative lit wild images of Westside Story dance fighting materializes in my mind.
OH NO, HERE COMES THE PRANCING KNIFE FIGHT.
when i hear you guys argue over theory/crit vs creative lit wild images of Westside Story dance fighting materializes in my mind.
OH NO, HERE COMES THE PRANCING KNIFE FIGHT.
i love freud.
Matt: Marx is an important and influential thinker. He certainly should be studied and at times understanding Marx is important for certain works of literature. But he isn’t important for all works of literature. I think to take some random work of literature, let’s say Paradise Lost, and read it as if it was a marxist parable (satan represents the proletariat or whatever) doesn’t help you understand Milton. It doesn’t really do anything… except maybe teach you a bit about Marx that could be taught better in a philosophy class.
I’m interested in philosophy and theory, but my experience with academic english theory mostly left me with no greater knowledge of the work at hand. It all seemed very pointless and gave me no insight into literature.
As for scholarly study of steampunk fashion, pog collection and lolcats… I dunno, maybe there is a place for that. I’m skeptical, but I’ll go along. Either way though, is the place for intellectualizing cosplay and cereal boxes literature departments?
I think I have read only a small number of things by some of those folks – they are rhet/comp theory people, right? That’s not my area, so (maybe thankfully) I don’t know them. I’m in a Lit/Creative Writing program, so different set of theorists. We are given a lot of latitude in teaching composition at my univ.
Matt: Marx is an important and influential thinker. He certainly should be studied and at times understanding Marx is important for certain works of literature. But he isn’t important for all works of literature. I think to take some random work of literature, let’s say Paradise Lost, and read it as if it was a marxist parable (satan represents the proletariat or whatever) doesn’t help you understand Milton. It doesn’t really do anything… except maybe teach you a bit about Marx that could be taught better in a philosophy class.
I’m interested in philosophy and theory, but my experience with academic english theory mostly left me with no greater knowledge of the work at hand. It all seemed very pointless and gave me no insight into literature.
As for scholarly study of steampunk fashion, pog collection and lolcats… I dunno, maybe there is a place for that. I’m skeptical, but I’ll go along. Either way though, is the place for intellectualizing cosplay and cereal boxes literature departments?
I think I have read only a small number of things by some of those folks – they are rhet/comp theory people, right? That’s not my area, so (maybe thankfully) I don’t know them. I’m in a Lit/Creative Writing program, so different set of theorists. We are given a lot of latitude in teaching composition at my univ.
im not really arguing theory, that would be redundant (as is everything i say after i say it once). i like freud too, but his stuff on dreams bores me
im not really arguing theory, that would be redundant (as is everything i say after i say it once). i like freud too, but his stuff on dreams bores me
the interesting thing about freud is he wouldn’t allow any one to psychoanalyze him.
and his coke lust.
MATT:
you arent in composition??? i thought your opinion was based on your experience in a composition program. you are talking about the way they treat you as someone coming from creative writing. oh i see. thats waaaaaaaayyyyyyyy different. a totally diffent ball game
the interesting thing about freud is he wouldn’t allow any one to psychoanalyze him.
and his coke lust.
MATT:
you arent in composition??? i thought your opinion was based on your experience in a composition program. you are talking about the way they treat you as someone coming from creative writing. oh i see. thats waaaaaaaayyyyyyyy different. a totally diffent ball game
i read this essay about him fucking joyce carol oates. i dont know if it was real, but it sounded plausible
i read this essay about him fucking joyce carol oates. i dont know if it was real, but it sounded plausible
Lincoln – Yeah, I don’t think a marxist (or whatever theorist) reading of every text is right – that’s why we have different critical modes. Most of the critical people I work with don’t aren’t such rigid adherents to a particular school. In your example, though, I’m not sure there’s only one right way to read a text, and I’m really sure it’s not useful to overlay one theory over a text, which is tempting to do as somebody learning theory, but guessing your example doesn’t really reflect how Marx (or whoever) is being used in a theory or literature class.
As for your examples, I think you might be pushing your example a little far – have you really seen criticism on pog collections? But yeah, media criticism is useful. Looking at advertisements and television, definitely useful. Steampunk literature seems like fair game to me – Jules Verne? Does this stuff belong in an English dept? I’m not sure about that, but I’m seeing a lot of people continuing to rethink the boundaries of what is fair game – why shouldn’t some of what we apply to ‘literary’ texts not also be applicable to film, or television, or video games? I’m not arguing a side here, but I think it’s a fair question to ask.
I think it depends on the department, which was (I think) my original point, that yeah, there are some bad professors out there, but I dont think the rift between creative writing and critical scholars is as pronounced as it is often made out to be.
Lincoln – Yeah, I don’t think a marxist (or whatever theorist) reading of every text is right – that’s why we have different critical modes. Most of the critical people I work with don’t aren’t such rigid adherents to a particular school. In your example, though, I’m not sure there’s only one right way to read a text, and I’m really sure it’s not useful to overlay one theory over a text, which is tempting to do as somebody learning theory, but guessing your example doesn’t really reflect how Marx (or whoever) is being used in a theory or literature class.
As for your examples, I think you might be pushing your example a little far – have you really seen criticism on pog collections? But yeah, media criticism is useful. Looking at advertisements and television, definitely useful. Steampunk literature seems like fair game to me – Jules Verne? Does this stuff belong in an English dept? I’m not sure about that, but I’m seeing a lot of people continuing to rethink the boundaries of what is fair game – why shouldn’t some of what we apply to ‘literary’ texts not also be applicable to film, or television, or video games? I’m not arguing a side here, but I think it’s a fair question to ask.
I think it depends on the department, which was (I think) my original point, that yeah, there are some bad professors out there, but I dont think the rift between creative writing and critical scholars is as pronounced as it is often made out to be.
Yeah, I’m in a Literature/Creative Writing program – comp theory is foreign to me, for the most part. I think there is a perception of the same rift in lit theory/creative writing, though.
Yeah, I’m in a Literature/Creative Writing program – comp theory is foreign to me, for the most part. I think there is a perception of the same rift in lit theory/creative writing, though.
Man, one thing I’m good at is not writing the paper I’m trying to write but not actually writing. Barry, to clarify I’m in a combined literature and creative writing program, so the tension between criticism/theory and creative writing and how the two disciplines interact/are sometimes in opposition is something I like to think about.
Man, one thing I’m good at is not writing the paper I’m trying to write but not actually writing. Barry, to clarify I’m in a combined literature and creative writing program, so the tension between criticism/theory and creative writing and how the two disciplines interact/are sometimes in opposition is something I like to think about.
I don’t think anywhere I’m saying there is only one way to “read” a text.
But I think my examples is fair. Marx is frequently applied to people like Shakespeare and a google search shows 200,000 hits for Marx, Milton and “Paradise Lost.”
I don’t know what “Looking at advertisements and television, definitely useful.” Clearly there are plenty of ways that studying television is useful, plenty of disciplines that should look at it. That doesn’t mean any and all study of it is useful. It doesn’t mean the multitude of buffyverse dissertations is helping to advance much of anything.
Have I seen critcism on pog collecting? No, but I did just read a piece on LOLcats:
http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/11/15/pathos_lolcats/
That is an A+ final paper right there for plenty of departments.
I guess I’m just shooting easy targets here, but while you can say, with a fair degree of truth, that anything is open for scholarly study, I think it is also fair to say that preponderance of this kind of stuff is only speeding up the dumbing down of our culture.
I don’t think anywhere I’m saying there is only one way to “read” a text.
But I think my examples is fair. Marx is frequently applied to people like Shakespeare and a google search shows 200,000 hits for Marx, Milton and “Paradise Lost.”
I don’t know what “Looking at advertisements and television, definitely useful.” Clearly there are plenty of ways that studying television is useful, plenty of disciplines that should look at it. That doesn’t mean any and all study of it is useful. It doesn’t mean the multitude of buffyverse dissertations is helping to advance much of anything.
Have I seen critcism on pog collecting? No, but I did just read a piece on LOLcats:
http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/11/15/pathos_lolcats/
That is an A+ final paper right there for plenty of departments.
I guess I’m just shooting easy targets here, but while you can say, with a fair degree of truth, that anything is open for scholarly study, I think it is also fair to say that preponderance of this kind of stuff is only speeding up the dumbing down of our culture.
matt: there is a perception of hte same rift in litcrit/cw.
im in comp, teaching lower-division courses.
i am in my office right now looking at videos of antlion’s digging burrows and trapping insects.
i really dont want to think about this anymore, so im going to quietly stop reading this thread. id be interesting in talking about it later or something – i like to hear whats going on in other depts. but man, my head is fried from the semester.
cheers
matt: there is a perception of hte same rift in litcrit/cw.
im in comp, teaching lower-division courses.
i am in my office right now looking at videos of antlion’s digging burrows and trapping insects.
i really dont want to think about this anymore, so im going to quietly stop reading this thread. id be interesting in talking about it later or something – i like to hear whats going on in other depts. but man, my head is fried from the semester.
cheers
Ryan – oh yeah, I agree. My head is also fried as well. I just don’t think it’s as pervasive as people think. But, I can only speak to my experience (and maybe yours) in a dept where creative writing is viewed as important alongside critical theory.
Lincoln – RE Marx, right, so why *isn’t* Marx a valid tool for looking at Paradise Lost? I’m not saying that I think it is, but asking you to explain further. It doesn’t have to be the way you like to look at Paradise Lost, but that doesn’t invalidate it. I’m not saying *everything* is valid for critical inquiry, I’m just not prepared to say what *isn’t* valid. A Salon article on LOLcats (I am lame and don’t know what these are) isn’t really what I’m thinking about when I say ‘critical inquiry’. That article is labeled as ‘satire’ and in Salon. Your examples are hyperbolic – I don’t think it’s right to judge something on those terms without reading it. Yeah, I’m not interested in steampunk, but I’m not informed enough to say it’s bullshit, either.
Ryan – oh yeah, I agree. My head is also fried as well. I just don’t think it’s as pervasive as people think. But, I can only speak to my experience (and maybe yours) in a dept where creative writing is viewed as important alongside critical theory.
Lincoln – RE Marx, right, so why *isn’t* Marx a valid tool for looking at Paradise Lost? I’m not saying that I think it is, but asking you to explain further. It doesn’t have to be the way you like to look at Paradise Lost, but that doesn’t invalidate it. I’m not saying *everything* is valid for critical inquiry, I’m just not prepared to say what *isn’t* valid. A Salon article on LOLcats (I am lame and don’t know what these are) isn’t really what I’m thinking about when I say ‘critical inquiry’. That article is labeled as ‘satire’ and in Salon. Your examples are hyperbolic – I don’t think it’s right to judge something on those terms without reading it. Yeah, I’m not interested in steampunk, but I’m not informed enough to say it’s bullshit, either.
there is a lot of belly button talk in this thread.
there is a lot of belly button talk in this thread.
The step back approach doesn’t quite work for me. We will probably just have to agree to disagree.
The step back approach doesn’t quite work for me. We will probably just have to agree to disagree.
yeah sorry to bail out of the conversation, matt.
Jereme – Ha, yes.
Lincoln – Step back approach?
yeah sorry to bail out of the conversation, matt.
Jereme – Ha, yes.
Lincoln – Step back approach?
This is right here, in the present, not the future.
This is right here, in the present, not the future.