Lit. Theory Blogs

Favorite Theory (week 14)

scwlittheory08 — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 00:51:39 +0000

For week 8 iguess i di my blog on something else other than my favorite theory at the time. I think that i remember psychoanalysis as being my favorite theory at first because i ahve always likes studying Freud and his theories. That one is still one of my favorites, but i kind of took a liking to postcolonial theory after being in Dr. Mathisons class. Postcolonial theory just went right along with what we were talking about in African lit and the novels that we were studying. Aspects of postcolonial theory also tied into my sociolgy too with made it even more interesting. Marxist theory was also another fun one because there were aspects of Marxism also studied in my sociology class. I would have to say that formalism is still probably my least favorite. It’s not my least favorite because it’s hard, because the truth is once you understand its principles it is a really easy theory to use. To me the problem with formalism is that it is so tedious and it requires more digging and close reading than the other theories call for. At the beginning deconstruction was one of my least favorites, but with more understanding came ease of use with that theory and moved a little higher on my list. One thing that i did like about these theories in general is how a lot of them overlapped, and if you use your wording just right, it’s easy to tie a lot of them to one another.

Trauma Theory (week 13)

scwlittheory08 — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 05:16:31 +0000

This week had an excerpt and discussion on trauma theory. A lot of us had trouble with this theory, and it’s weird because it seems like the theory should make sense but it just seems so unfinished. Maybe i just really wnat to understand it because it seems kind of interesting. Ok so i see the trauma theories tie to psychoanalysis, because although trauma is usasually something that occurs externally the reprecussions are usally felt internally as well. The fact that trauma can effect us mentally and emotionally and in some cases turn us into a completely different person. When Belau describes trauma as an exceptional experiance, it’s a little confusing because when i think of the word exceptional it has a positive connotation. But i guess something could be exceptionally good or exceptionally bad. Another thing is that traumatic experiances are usually embarassing which would cause one to keep it to themselves, that too could mentally affect a person keeping something traumatic bottled up. So anyone that writes about something traumatic can be called a traumatic theorist? This theory is way too vague, it also seems that this signifier leads to no signified. Well i still tie trauma to Lacans view of the real, but if the signified is the real then i guess there really is no signified.

Postmodernism (Week 12)

scwlittheory08 — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 05:23:08 +0000

Hmmmmm I’m not sure that this postmodern theory was well thought out, or maybe there’s just more theorizing to do with it. Postmodernism just seems so broad and can includes so many things. So we know that postmodernism was in response and opposition to modernism, and I think that modernism upheld many western traditions and values. So is postmodernism against western ideas, or does it contain some western ideas? I know that postmodernism is all about uncertainty, and the unreal, or hyperreality. I thought that i would like this theory but it just provides more confusion, not to mention it seems to speak against psychoanalytic theory which was one of my favorites. I say that it speaks anainst psychoanalysis because in psychoanalysis we talk about the real and how it is the last stage of psychic development. Psychoanalysis also speaks of the identity and how the unconcious is the center of one’s being(Lacan), well then postmodernism says that there is no unconcious, and there is no real. Is this to say that we cannot reach the final stage of psychic development, and that the center of our being does not exist. Is this theory telling us that hey yeah that model of the perfect whatever you want to be(mom, dad, citizen, child, employee, etc) just give it up because that thing that you are trying to model yourself after doesn’t exist? Hmmm….seems a bit harsh.

American Multiculturalism (Week 11)

scwlittheory08 — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 02:58:31 +0000

On Monday we asked the question in class if Multiculturalism is just Postcolonialism, American-style? To answer that question i would say No because Postcolonialism is described as the time after the colonizers left the native lands. When the colonizers left, the natives were left in a state of confusion being hybrids with a mix of the native culture and the culture of the colonizer. I see Multiculturalism as the point where cultures that were once ignored and thought of as objects, were now accepted and sharing their culture with the cultures of others and accepting those cultures while still having pride in their own. Also while people were sharing there cultures with other cultures, they were also reaching out to those of their same culture as sort of a coming together, or reunion. Along with multiculturalism came the acceptance of African American literature, and with acceptance also came criticism. African American literature i think reached out more to African Americans to sort of bring us together as a people, but at the same time educate others on the history and struggle of African Americans. This reaching out i believe can be seen as the black aesthetic. As the text book says, ” A black aesthetic would ease their struggle to find an identity in a world that was not theirs”. Another big difference between American Multiculturalism and postcolonialism is that in postcolonialism the subaltern were left in their own land, but in American Multiculturalism the subaltern(Af. Am.) are not in thier native land but in the land of the “oppressor”, so to speak.

Post-colonialism (week 10)

scwlittheory08 — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 09:45:02 +0000

This theory is a little bit easier considering we are studying colonialism and post-colonialism in Dr. Mathison’s African Literature class. One way to view it is to see the colonizer as a parent and the natives as the children. The colonizer wants to raise the native to be just like him and teach him the British ways, as that is what they saw as the correct way of living. They led the natives to believe that power was found in everything British, and the only way to survive was through them. The natives then decided to switch to the colonizers culture because they believed that that was where the priviledge was, a term called collaboration i think. What this boils down to is when the colonizers do leave the native lands, they leave the best trained natives in charge. To me it would seem that in their eyes the best trained natives would be those that are the most British. The problem with this post-colonialism is that when the colonizers leaves the natives can’t just go back to their old ways, their new ways of life definately have a lot of British influence. The irony of colonialism today is that a lot of authors from natives lands accused the colonizers of killing their culture yet they still wrote in the colonizers language (English).

New Historicism (week 9)

scwlittheory08 — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 03:16:22 +0000

I’m glad that i’m writing this after already doing the discussion because although that excerpt was a tad confusing, it did help out a little bit. I like the part where he talks about ideology being a priority over history, because as we talked in class, there is no solid truth to what happened in history, but i do feel that there is truth in ideology. I also believe that first looking at ideology will help us to allow history to help with a better understanding of the text and time period. New Historisism lets us figure out why the text was written and what was going on at the time that caused this text to be written, and also what people thought about the content of the text. New Historicism also allows us to look at the authors biography rather that just the text as in formalism. Whoa, so i just opened my book and saw that New Historicism is also called cultural studies which is where the ideology comes into play! I think this whole theory just clicked to me! I also the fact that it incorporates ideas from other interesting theories that we studied. Does New Historicism incorporate any psychoanalytic ideas, that would be the cherry on top for me.

Formalism (Week 2)

scwlittheory08 — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 23:52:15 +0000

I think that i skipped this blog because i didn”t understand this theory at the time. After preparing for and finishing essay 1, i think that i have a perfect understanding of it now. This doesn’t mean that i like it. I took a class similar to this one when i studied at North Texas. In this course we did lots of close-reading and analyzing text, and wrinting papers on them. I remember this because i just recall reading texts over and over again to figure what the text meant. I really don’t remember if we called it formalism or not, i just know that all of the principles are the same. This is one of those classes that i just talked about in another blog, where my teacher told us not to use the words “I” or “me” when writing about a text because we didn’t want our papers to show how the text made us feel emotionally. I thought that this was because all of us would have the same reaction to text in that class BORING!! As i learned that wasn’t the reason. Formalism is all about finding a unified whole, making all the pieces fit together. The thing that I don’t like about formalism is the fact that you can’t use any outside help, only the text.

Reader Response (Week 8)

scwlittheory08 — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 23:31:29 +0000

Oh reader response, the thing that all teachers say is bad when writing about a text. I was always told don’t use “I” or “me” when writing papers about a text. They always wanted to know what the text was about and not how it made us feel, or what we thought about it. This was a bummer for me because i have a real problem reading things that are not interesting to me. To help me with this problem i always had to try to relate the text to something familiar, whether it be relaing characters to myself or others that i know. This was my method for trying to find something about the text to keep me interested(this got kinda hard when it came to texts like The Iliad, and Canterbury Tales). Anyway so when i started college and my first english professor told me not to show the emotion that the text had on me when wrote about it, i was completely lost. Though this was a struggle, it became a huge help when i learned how to do it. A better understanding that i got of reader response is letting the reader into your head about a certain text that you are reading. WooHoo, i get to use reader response and not get in trouble for it!!!

Feminist Criticism-week 6

scwlittheory08 — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 23:07:35 +0000

This past week in class we discussed feminist criticism. I’m just going to do what i always to and try to figure out if i understand the theory. So a feminist is a woman that is an advocate for womens rights, and the equal treatment of women to men. In this case i’m guessing feminist critics wanted the same rights as men when it came to writing? This theory in confusing because it seems to have several different parts to it. There is American,, French, and British feminism. I know that French feminism takes on the psychoanalytic approach, which is my favorite so far. I know that British feminism takes on the Marxist approach, which get a bit more difficult. American feminist focused more on academia, and as we talked about they worked to get women writers added to the canon. A lot of the feminist literature that i have read has basically been women telling other women how to be a women. Showalter broke down feminism into three different phases. Int the first women tried to write just like men but i guess a little bit softer, but before that male writing is all they had to go off of. In the second phase women spoke up about the way they have been depicted in writings of males. The third phase i guess is when it really became female literature because they started picking their own subject matter.

Gender and Queer Theory (Week 7)

scwlittheory08 — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 01:12:27 +0000

This week we kind of expanded on the feminist theory, and added gender and queer theory. Somehow adding these other theories actually helped me to understand feminist theory more than i did last week. The first thing that we did was to define sex, gender, and sexuality, and how the three both contradict and coincide. Sex=male or female, gender= masculine or feminine, and sexuality=homosexual or heterosexual. These days many people try to label a persons sexuality depending on their gender. The minute someone sees a feminine male or a masculine female, they automatically assume the person to be homosexual. While this may sometimes be the case, it is not always true. I like Judith Butler’s theory that gender is peformative. The best example that i can give would be the world of competitive cheerleading. In competitive cheerleading, there is actually a category on the scoresheet for peformance throughout the entire routine. When there are males on a team they can either add to or subtract from that score depending on how well they’re energy and crowd appeal meshes with the girls’ on that team. What this means is that it actually helps when the guys get a little sassy and feminine in their dance portion of the routine, because it can them apart score wise from other teams. While all guys involved in competitive cheerleading are not homosexual, they are thought to be because of the way that they perform at certain times. This would really only make sense to someone that acually follows competitive because to outsiders all male cheerleaders are probably thought to be homosexual.