To this point in the class, we have quickly surveyed many schools of literary theory. I have no doubt that we could spend one semester talking about each style of thinking. But this class is a quick look at theory, so that's what you get.
For me, in me, this run and gun is good and bad. Good because I am now aware that Formalism and Post Structuralism exist as schools of theory. If I choose I can further study the nuances of Derrida and Foucault. The bad is this type of class creates, at least in myself, a schizophrenic mind set when using theory on literature. I know just enough to be dangerous. There are many competing theories running around in my brain. Sometimes I mix this one with that one. I have a friend who took her Ph.D. only on one aspect of Freud. She wrote a 450 page document about dependence and codependence. Who am I to use Freud in analyzing literature?
Take that mindset and apply it to a group effort of seven schizophrenic literary theory dilettantes and you have a party or a fight. Maybe a little of both. No matter. The value of quick immersion and potential long term study of theory out weighs the immediate frustration.
A runaway lover, text problems, and dinner duties
-
Dear Mr. Blue,
I’m a single 51-year-old who’s been enjoying the outdoorsy life in Denver
for the past fifteen years. I have a nice condo, good friends, a...
5 years ago
Ramsey,
ReplyDeleteI can relate to your frustration; however, I do think a class like this is somewhat liberating. Aside from the fear of "getting things wrong," there is a joy in finding new perspectives that one can use in literature (and beyond, I reckon). It's just a matter of knowing how to balance the literature and the theory. I know that some favor one over the other.