... one of the course objectives is to "undermine and subvert" the traditional narratives of "American hegemony and mythology." In both the objectives and the description of the required research paper, it is made clear that we are to use post-structuralist approaches to the readings.
I was fearful; I would have to quickly read up on all this post-structuralism and fake it, and I had no idea what the class discussions would be like. (Okay, so I had studied post-structuralism in history, but literature is a whole other animal. They do some crazy stuff there.)
Well, I'm done, and in the end, my fears were much ado about little. The professor hardly brought any of that up in the discussions, focusing mostly on the literature itself. There were some biased questions we were expected to write about, but not many, to be honest. I employed the tactic of using the authors' words to undermine American hegemony, reporting that author X criticized America for this, and author Y felt disenfranchised for that, and never talked about my opinions on it. And I got an A, so, there we are.
Granted, I could have produced much more creative work if I had not felt constrained by the BS in the syllabus, but on the other hand, the professor did me a favor by declaring his political allegiances up front, so I knew what to avoid.
I'd like to thank everyone who weighed in with advice in the comments to that earlier post: Eric Hines, Eric Blair, Ymar, Grim, AVI, ColoComment, Raven, and douglas. (I hope I haven't forgotten anyone! If so, my apologies, and my thanks!)
It was helpful, and it's good to know I'm not alone. Thanks!
Glad it worked out for you.
ReplyDeleteSounds like a better time than when I took a "Victorian" poetry in college and expected to read some Kipling. The professor looked horrified. Swineburne, Browning, Tennyson and Rossetti it was.
Crossed that bar.
I like Tennyson.
ReplyDeleteCongratulations on your stamina.
ReplyDelete"Post structural"- is that code for "everything falling apart"? Like after an earthquake, or maybe a rod going through the block?
I employed the tactic of using the authors' words to undermine American hegemony, reporting that author X criticized America for this, and author Y felt disenfranchised for that, and never talked about my opinions on it. And I got an A, so, there we are.
ReplyDeleteI didn't give any particular advice, useful or not, at the time. So I'll provide one there.
In practical matters, how that is is useful is when the politburo wants to create a profile of a political operative, either to destroy them or rehabilitate them. Thus they speak of the operative's loyalty to the revolution (or transgender thought), in order to rehabilitate their lesser sins (such as burning Christians or persecuting minorities for cash like Chicago). On the other hand, in order for them to character assassinate an operative in preparation for "disposing" of them in the popular venue, they first must make their virtues into vices and evils. Thus Palin is written as being "not a real woman" and her successes due to her personal advance rather than her family/husband's help (like the Clintons) are turned into horror stories about what women/feminists should not do.
Being able to form the thought that some dead person who can't defend themselves, Author A, thought this as they wrote that, is a preliminary step in allowing people to impose rehabilitation or assassination unto public figures. Writing creates strong neural connections than merely listening or reading. Thus a student that reads a properly manipulated linguistic profile, will feel as they themselves wrote it, if said student has experience deconstructing X.
As for poets, I wrote mostly about William Blake back in the day.
It did take some stamina.
ReplyDeletePost-structuralism is code for a text meaning whatever you want it to mean, as long as you don't sound like you believe in "Truth" or "objective reality," and as long as you criticize the accepted "dominant" part of society.
Of course, I only learned enough about post-structuralism to fake it, so take anything I say about it with a shaker of salt.
Eric, I love Kipling. Did you find much you liked in the course?
ReplyDeleteGrim, what's your favorite Tennyson poem?
Ymar, same question about Blake. What's your favorite?
Tyger, although what I wrote was about his Songs of Innocence, which seemed to be about Jesus Christ being the Lamb vs human nature or fallen natures. Songs of Innocence vs Songs of Experience. The mortal life in experience, vs the divine calling of his religion or his culture's religion.
ReplyDeleteTHE TYGER (from Songs Of Experience)
By William Blake
Tyger! Tyger! burning bright
In the forests of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?
In what distant deeps or skies
Burnt the fire of thine eyes?
On what wings dare he aspire?
What the hand dare sieze the fire?
And what shoulder, & what art.
Could twist the sinews of thy heart?
And when thy heart began to beat,
What dread hand? & what dread feet?
What the hammer? what the chain?
In what furnace was thy brain?
What the anvil? what dread grasp
Dare its deadly terrors clasp?
When the stars threw down their spears,
And watered heaven with their tears,
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the Lamb make thee?
Tyger! Tyger! burning bright
In the forests of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Dare frame thy fearful symmetry?
Idylls of the King, of course.
ReplyDelete"...Of course, I only learned enough about post-structuralism to fake it..."
ReplyDeleteIs there any other way to do post structuralism? If there is no true or beautiful, then there is nothing but the 'fake'.
Of course, it could have been fun (though perhaps problematic) to treat the "dominant part of society" as meaning the leftist thought that dominates our academies and government today. Seems to me it would be a fair stab at it.
I also wish it had occurred to me to suggest that you check some of the websites that allow students to rate professors. Yes, I know those are problematic, but they might have been useful in determining if he was one to grade down for opposing views or not. If there had been evidence that he had not, then perhaps it would have been worthwhile to contest the dominant narrative in the class (as Post structuralism would suggest!).
I got a kick out of Browning's "My last Duchess" and my reading of it was very different than all the females in the class--heh. But I probably should go back and read some of them again. (I still have the text book). I'd probably get more out of it now that I'm older.
ReplyDeleteOf course, it could have been fun (though perhaps problematic) to treat the "dominant part of society" as meaning the leftist thought that dominates our academies and government today.
ReplyDeleteOh, yes. That is definitely in the long term plan; probably only put out once I've graduated. I've started working on some ideas for it already, though. It's kind of my shadow thesis.
Post-structuralism is code for a text meaning whatever you want it to mean....
ReplyDeleteGee, I must have invented it independently all those years ago. In my high school English lit class, I used to pick a position at random and argue for it just to see if I could get away with it. And to pimp the English teacher who was a nice lady, but incredibly naive.
Eric Hines
Yes, it is interesting how so much of what falls into leftism and post-modernism is like things teenagers do in high school.
ReplyDelete"...Of course, I only learned enough about post-structuralism to fake it..."
ReplyDeleteIs there any other way to do post structuralism?
Ha!
Tom- it's like they never learned the lesson of the Who singing while in their twenties "...hope I die before I get old...", or youngsters saying "Never trust anyone over thirty".
ReplyDelete