On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 11:55:03 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 11:37:13 -0400, H the K
wrote:

On 10/9/09 11:28 AM, Gene wrote:
On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 07:33:33 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

And we discussed many other things in English Lit than just English Lit

Well, then, what you had was some sort of Socratic Dialog or Seminar,
not an organized class. A proper class has an approved syllabus and
the instructor sticks with that syllabus to make sure the course
objectives are met. A class entitled one thing in which all things are
taught is just a free-for-all.... usually driven by the personal
whims and interests of the teacher. This is the equivalent of
education by ADD........


Uh, I disagree. In the 7th and 8th grade, when we were discussing
Dickens in English class, we also discussed the society in which the
novels were set, and some of the reasons why Dickens chose the subjects
he did. I'm sure we stuck with the teaching plan by doing so.

Uh.... no, we don't disagree and the teaching plan likely included the
social conditions of the novel. As I posted earlier:

"The study of Literature should or could encompass the following
points:

1. The body of written works of a language, period, or culture.
2. ........"

thus, "the society" is fair game. Reading NON-English Literature in
English Lit is NOT fair game and, certainly, "And we discussed many
other things in English Lit than just English Lit" is just hosed.

Put another way.....

in FRENCH Lit.....

it would be perfectly reasonable to study Les Miserables, which
"examines the nature of law and grace, and expounds upon the history
of France, architecture of Paris, politics, moral philosophy,
antimonarchism, justice, religion, and the types and nature of
romantic and familial love." It would be fair to, then, discuss any of
those other topics, including religion in the context of Les
Miserables.

It would NOT be reasonable to study Beowulf, The Bible, or the Zuo
Zhuan as French Literature..... because they just aren't.

One would have to wonder if Dryden's translations would not merit
study in an English Lit class. Literary translation cannot be weighed
as having literary value for the recipient language?

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 11:55:03 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 11:37:13 -0400, H the K
wrote:

On 10/9/09 11:28 AM, Gene wrote:
On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 07:33:33 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

And we discussed many other things in English Lit than just English Lit

Well, then, what you had was some sort of Socratic Dialog or Seminar,
not an organized class. A proper class has an approved syllabus and
the instructor sticks with that syllabus to make sure the course
objectives are met. A class entitled one thing in which all things are
taught is just a free-for-all.... usually driven by the personal
whims and interests of the teacher. This is the equivalent of
education by ADD........


Uh, I disagree. In the 7th and 8th grade, when we were discussing
Dickens in English class, we also discussed the society in which the
novels were set, and some of the reasons why Dickens chose the subjects
he did. I'm sure we stuck with the teaching plan by doing so.

Uh.... no, we don't disagree and the teaching plan likely included the
social conditions of the novel. As I posted earlier:

"The study of Literature should or could encompass the following
points:

1. The body of written works of a language, period, or culture.
2. ........"

thus, "the society" is fair game. Reading NON-English Literature in
English Lit is NOT fair game and, certainly, "And we discussed many
other things in English Lit than just English Lit" is just hosed.


Profs build many frameworks around lit interpretation, including
psychological. Comparisons to current culture always rightfully
intrude for context, even if the prof doesn't want it to.
Human nature.
As you said though, a syllabus prevents a free-for-all.
When you get to Practical Criticism at the college level it all
becomes a bit metaphysical, with definitions and constraints blurring.
At least it did to me.
The Intentional Fallacy demands erasure of the proscribed limits of
interpretation. Anything goes.
Always struck me that the concept should be called "The Fallacy of
Intent" for clarity, but I didn't devise the term.
Ever consider that the physical appearance of words on the page impact
the brain? IOW, the shape of the word "brook," and its letters, not
its sound rolling from the lips. Poetry is always touted as a voiced
medium, but it is actually most often read by the eyes rather than
heard by the ears.
I could never sell a prof this concept, but I didn't try too hard.
Going sideways here.
I'm on your side with the KJ bible not belonging in Eng Lit, beautiful
English much of it is.
I did have it in World Lit.

--Vic

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 11:55:03 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 11:37:13 -0400, H the K
wrote:

On 10/9/09 11:28 AM, Gene wrote:
On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 07:33:33 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

And we discussed many other things in English Lit than just English
Lit

Well, then, what you had was some sort of Socratic Dialog or Seminar,
not an organized class. A proper class has an approved syllabus and
the instructor sticks with that syllabus to make sure the course
objectives are met. A class entitled one thing in which all things are
taught is just a free-for-all.... usually driven by the personal
whims and interests of the teacher. This is the equivalent of
education by ADD........


Uh, I disagree. In the 7th and 8th grade, when we were discussing
Dickens in English class, we also discussed the society in which the
novels were set, and some of the reasons why Dickens chose the subjects
he did. I'm sure we stuck with the teaching plan by doing so.

Uh.... no, we don't disagree and the teaching plan likely included the
social conditions of the novel. As I posted earlier:

"The study of Literature should or could encompass the following
points:

1. The body of written works of a language, period, or culture.
2. ........"

thus, "the society" is fair game. Reading NON-English Literature in
English Lit is NOT fair game and, certainly, "And we discussed many
other things in English Lit than just English Lit" is just hosed.


Profs build many frameworks around lit interpretation, including
psychological. Comparisons to current culture always rightfully
intrude for context, even if the prof doesn't want it to.
Human nature.
As you said though, a syllabus prevents a free-for-all.
When you get to Practical Criticism at the college level it all
becomes a bit metaphysical, with definitions and constraints blurring.
At least it did to me.
The Intentional Fallacy demands erasure of the proscribed limits of
interpretation. Anything goes.
Always struck me that the concept should be called "The Fallacy of
Intent" for clarity, but I didn't devise the term.
Ever consider that the physical appearance of words on the page impact
the brain? IOW, the shape of the word "brook," and its letters, not
its sound rolling from the lips. Poetry is always touted as a voiced
medium, but it is actually most often read by the eyes rather than
heard by the ears.
I could never sell a prof this concept, but I didn't try too hard.
Going sideways here.
I'm on your side with the KJ bible not belonging in Eng Lit, beautiful
English much of it is.
I did have it in World Lit.

--Vic


I think it would, technically fall under English lit, but it would probably
be more appropriate to discuss it and its implications in a theology class.

Perhaps a comparative lit class vs. an English lit class?

--
Nom=de=Plume

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 11:28:09 -0400, Gene
wrote:

This is the equivalent of
education by ADD........

ADD is not a laughing matter. It is a serious neurological disorder
that can be devastating for the victim and ...
Hey look, a squirrel !

I got a good laugh from that one...

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 05:24:40 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

If an English lit teacher was passing out assignments assignments for
students to give a book report. Various books are chosen, some long ,
some short.

OK, the list has several *options* None are specifically required.
Here's a sample list:

"To Kill a Mockingbird"
"All Quiet one the Western Front"
"Gulliver's Travels"
"Moby Dick"
"The book of Matthew"
"Oliver Twist"
"The Trial"

As long as the teacher understands the report might not be positive
and that the reporter may point out incongruities in the story line
and historic inaccuracies, where is the problem?

The problem is that I am sure that "the teacher" wouldn't allow such
criticism of the other works... But I know, it's Christianity so it's ok
to just trash it and forget the content.... pffffttt...

On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:28:50 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 21:25:11 -0400, Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 05:24:40 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

If an English lit teacher was passing out assignments assignments for
students to give a book report. Various books are chosen, some long ,
some short.

OK, the list has several *options* None are specifically required.
Here's a sample list:

"To Kill a Mockingbird"
"All Quiet one the Western Front"
"Gulliver's Travels"
"Moby Dick"
"The book of Matthew"
"Oliver Twist"
"The Trial"

As long as the teacher understands the report might not be positive
and that the reporter may point out incongruities in the story line
and historic inaccuracies, where is the problem?

The problem is that I am sure that "the teacher" wouldn't allow such
criticism of the other works... But I know, it's Christianity so it's ok
to just trash it and forget the content.... pffffttt...

I wrote a lot of cynical book reports. At least they knew I read the
book and perhaps even tried to understand what they were trying to
tell me in a real world context.

My problem with English Lit is that I never saw what others saw -
meaning that I never "grokked" it in the same way. I will admit I was
confused by that until I figured out why.

Everybody else was using Cliff Notes. :)

My favorite story about Eng. Lit. was when we had to read some Maya
Angelou - couple of pieces over the weekend for Monday morning
discussion.

I had been at odds with the professor more than once, but we had a
relatively cordial relationship. That Monday morning, the first thing
he asked was "Mr. Francis - care to tell us what you thought?"

To which I replied "if she's a poet, I'm the King of Siam."

You could have heard a pin drop in that room. :)

Oddly, I got out of that class with an A - apparently the professor
liked contrarian opinions. :)

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:28:50 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 21:25:11 -0400, Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 05:24:40 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

If an English lit teacher was passing out assignments assignments for
students to give a book report. Various books are chosen, some long ,
some short.

OK, the list has several *options* None are specifically required.
Here's a sample list:

"To Kill a Mockingbird"
"All Quiet one the Western Front"
"Gulliver's Travels"
"Moby Dick"
"The book of Matthew"
"Oliver Twist"
"The Trial"

As long as the teacher understands the report might not be positive
and that the reporter may point out incongruities in the story line
and historic inaccuracies, where is the problem?

The problem is that I am sure that "the teacher" wouldn't allow such
criticism of the other works... But I know, it's Christianity so it's ok
to just trash it and forget the content.... pffffttt...

I wrote a lot of cynical book reports. At least they knew I read the
book and perhaps even tried to understand what they were trying to
tell me in a real world context.

My problem with English Lit is that I never saw what others saw -
meaning that I never "grokked" it in the same way. I will admit I was
confused by that until I figured out why.

Everybody else was using Cliff Notes. :)

My favorite story about Eng. Lit. was when we had to read some Maya
Angelou - couple of pieces over the weekend for Monday morning
discussion.

I had been at odds with the professor more than once, but we had a
relatively cordial relationship. That Monday morning, the first thing
he asked was "Mr. Francis - care to tell us what you thought?"

To which I replied "if she's a poet, I'm the King of Siam."

You could have heard a pin drop in that room. :)

Oddly, I got out of that class with an A - apparently the professor
liked contrarian opinions. :)


I did much the same thing in the Third World Lit class. I complained that
the writing was really not very good. The prof was a black woman. I was the
only white person in the class. One of the black students accused me of
(inadvertent) racial prejudice, but the prof defended me, saying I was
right. We went on to have a great discussion about why the writing was so
poor... was it the translation (it was African as I recall), was it lack of
education, lack of literary background. At the end, the black guy
apologized. We still keep in touch on and off. There were two Latina women
who followed me outside after class to tell me "right on" they had the same
reaction, but were afraid to say anything.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On 10/8/09 11:40 PM, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:28:50 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 21:25:11 -0400, Tosk
wrote:

In ,
says...

On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 05:24:40 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

If an English lit teacher was passing out assignments assignments for
students to give a book report. Various books are chosen, some long ,
some short.

OK, the list has several *options* None are specifically required.
Here's a sample list:

"To Kill a Mockingbird"
"All Quiet one the Western Front"
"Gulliver's Travels"
"Moby Dick"
"The book of Matthew"
"Oliver Twist"
"The Trial"

As long as the teacher understands the report might not be positive
and that the reporter may point out incongruities in the story line
and historic inaccuracies, where is the problem?

The problem is that I am sure that "the teacher" wouldn't allow such
criticism of the other works... But I know, it's Christianity so it's ok
to just trash it and forget the content.... pffffttt...

I wrote a lot of cynical book reports. At least they knew I read the
book and perhaps even tried to understand what they were trying to
tell me in a real world context.

My problem with English Lit is that I never saw what others saw -
meaning that I never "grokked" it in the same way. I will admit I was
confused by that until I figured out why.

Everybody else was using Cliff Notes. :)

My favorite story about Eng. Lit. was when we had to read some Maya
Angelou - couple of pieces over the weekend for Monday morning
discussion.

I had been at odds with the professor more than once, but we had a
relatively cordial relationship. That Monday morning, the first thing
he asked was "Mr. Francis - care to tell us what you thought?"

To which I replied "if she's a poet, I'm the King of Siam."

You could have heard a pin drop in that room. :)

Oddly, I got out of that class with an A - apparently the professor
liked contrarian opinions. :)


If you are an expert in 90% of what you claim to be here, I'm the son of
Albert Einstein.


--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:36:04 -0400, wrote:



The guy who taught our english lit used to try to trap "cliff notes"
and classic comic book guys by looking for things in your report that
didn't make the cheater. Even if I couldn't actually wade through some
of these door stops I would skim them looking for off the wall stuff I
could dispute, using my European or ancient history books. It always
threw him off so bad he just gave up and gave me a good grade.

Some profs are in idling mode after settling on their lectures.
When somebody challenges their interpretations the good profs learn
something and enjoy it.
Always surprised me how lackluster student participation was in those
lit classes. Sometime I felt the prof and me might as well be alone,
since I was usually the only student talking to him.
It was nice when others piped up so I could get a break and hear other
voices.
Guess many students were just picking up hours and had no real
interest.

--Vic

On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 23:39:07 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

Guess many students were just picking up hours and had no real
interest.

As far as English Lit goes, that was my approach. Common ground and
herd instinct doesn't interest me.