Same at another Catholic college 30+ years ago. As a lit major, I remember courses in World Literature By and About Women, literature of modern wars written by diverse authors, but also the usuals: surveys of traditional British, US, Asian, Middle Eastern, and Russian authors, Arthurian legend from the most ancient texts through the most modern interpretations, and so on. An undergrad lit major will read widely. I also remember a course where we studied marxism through a feminist lens. But I don't buy that Literature majors are reading, for example, Dickens through an ideological lens without also reading the original (unless the original was assumed to have been read in high school) -- how else would a student draw anything from the re-take? Can you link to the course catalog of a college that does not cover a breadth of literature for a literature major? |
LOL no. |
This question is framed in sort of a weird way.
I have two friends who are professors. One is a Shakespeare expert and the other teaches Russian lit, both at schools that are often discussed ion this board. Both look at the literature through “different” lenses — eg, looking at class, race, gender in Shakespeare (which are actually huge themes in Shakespeare) and the other looking at post-modern themes I’m too dumb to articulate in Russian lit. You don’t get tenure writing the same stuff about Shakespeare that’s been written for 400 years. Plus, it’s not that interesting for students to only talk about the obvious stuff. If you can look at a work from a few different perspectives, doesn’t that make it more interesting? I think there are lots of schools still teaching “the canon” but if you aren’t looking at it from different perspectives to see how it can speak to our modern lives, that it’s pretty moribund. By the way, the Rest is History podcast did an excellent podcast on the history in Canterbury Tales and why this was a shockingly radical piece for its time, including the feminism inherent in the work. Highly recommend! And those guys are not what I’d call radical deconstructionists. |
Sure we believe you. Queer Feminists of Color Environmental Studies offered at Hamilton College. Candidate for most ridiculous course of the century. |
And written in the English language for a British audience. |
OP here. A lot of people are missing the point. Traditional literary scholarship does not mean "there's only one proper way of reading and that's it." It's just a rejection of faddish ideological interpretations. It's about literary quality not identity politics.
There are many fine authors from outside the US and Europe. For example Borges and Vargas Llosa in Latin America. But you don't see Identity Politics practitioners championing them because they don't have the right politics (or maybe they're dismissed as "white" rather than "POC")? |
+100 I wonder how these people would feel if I decided to teach a class on Mishima. |
Clarification: The rejection of *only* faddish ideological interpretations. It's not the traditional scholars who are insisting on uniformity. It's the woke ideologues who think it's cool and edgy to have 2 hour seminars on why Walt Whitman was a racist. |
Let’s see from an modern identity politics framework we have: Pros: Not white Queer undertones Dislike of American foreign policy Dislike of American materialism Attempted violent overthrow of the government Cons: Male Asian, aka white-adjacent Military veteran Hated by leftists Reactionary politics Fascist |
Yes, Tolstoy counts. Happy? |
No, but reading no one but dead white men is pretty limiting. |
The reactionary responses of some are exactly what’s wrong with today’s faddish approach. Someone asks for programs with critical reading of literature and the knee jerk response is Liberty- a response lacking in critical reasoning, but it fits leftist talking points.
It is fine to seek out different things, and with the cost of college today, many want to endure their degrees will still be relevant in 20 years. |
So to be clear you don’t think it’s worthwhile because it offends your political sensibilities. Has nothing to do with academic inquiry or the idea that the study of literature can evolve over the years. You probably championed the J Evan’s Pritchett method of evaluating poetry. |
Take a look at Holy Cross. A great classics dept, the only Jesuit liberal arts college, and a great track record getting students into law, medicine and PhD programs. |
You mean the Holy Cross English department that offers “ Interdisciplinary courses cross-listed with Africana Studies; Catholic Studies; Gender, Sexuality, and Women's Studies; and Peace and Conflict Studies”? |