Literature Class

[Anstasia]

Hi folks,

I would be very grateful if you could share with me your expectations of the goals you wanted to achieve when you took (or are planning to take) literature classes at the university level.

Are you/ were you hoping to have the teacher explain a text? or to learn particular skills? What skills were/are you hoping to acquire after taking a literature class?

Many thanks for your comments!

[Charles Darnay]

I have taken several literature classes at the university level and have had different experiences depending on teachers.

Bad experience 1 - you read a text, and then the professor spends a class paraphrasing the text, pointing out metaphors/allusions/other devices - and occasionally asking questions.

Bad experience 2 - one of my literature classes turned into a book club in which the teacher bowed out and we (students) spent the time roaming from one discussion point to another. Discussion is great, and don't get me wrong, I enjoy book clubs, but I didn't learn anything.

Good experience - the best literary classes I had are ones where the teacher doesn't paraphrase the text, but clears up any confusion and spend the time going into depth about really interesting points of the text (whether it's how an author uses a literary device for a specific purpose - or some historic background on the text - or some points that are easily missed unless you have read the text several times. There is an invitation for discussion, but it is focused on critical thinking and opinions meant to enhance our understanding on the text - not waxing poetic about our favourite or least favourite parts.

Skills I hopes, and often did, learn to acquire in a literature class surrounded how to "read" a text - what to look for when reading Shakespeare, how to understand the complex philosophy behind 18th century texts, how American poets are constantly building off one another.....things that you cannot learn by reading a book yourself - or just looking at SparkNotes.

Of course, a good literature class should also involve some writing. I felt in some of my classes, I was taught and really developed skills to make my essay writing far more engaging and unique.

And finally, not to be overlooked, is passion. I have had some professors who are so passionate about the literature we are covering that it just rubs off on you and you see a book you may not have enjoyed while reading on your own, but suddenly you see it from a new angle and see how much more there is to it than you imagined.

[Stewed]

I'd second that, though I preferred a mix of the book club and the brilliant prof. I think too, that in English Lit you're sort of exercising a muscle. You have to concentrate harder and more carefully than you ordinarily would, and this strengthens your sensitivity to what you read. (And check your profs on Rate My Professor. I always regretted ignoring a low rating.)

[Charles Darnay]

I was always skeptical about Rate My Prof's ratings. Sometimes, students can be so vindictive just a minor dispute of opinions. According to some, if a prof refuses to give you high marks, he/she ultimately a terrible professor who doesn't know his/her stuff and doesn't care about his/her students. I don't buy it.

[Stewed]

It never steered me wrong.

[Mr Endon]

Charles Darnay said it very well, Stewed summed it up better:


I preferred a mix of the book club and the brilliant prof.

My best Literature classes (those I had in London) were exactly that.

Skills I hoped to develop:
textual analysis
the ability to do thought-provoking interdisciplinary cross-references
the writing of essays in a scientific manner
Skills I unexpectedly found myself developing:
how to really deal with a scholarly exchange of ideas with other peers; how to see things from other peers' perspectives and eventually change my own accordingly.
the reading of texts in a disciplined manner. I had certain reading quotas to meet every day, and wrote notes on every single book/article that I read.

[Stewed]

Well, I always had a problem coming up with my own framework for an idea, so I feel sort of bad being compared.

[TheChilly]

When I first started taking literature classes at my university in San Bernardino, I was expecting something almost like how my AP English class was in terms of the amount of work I had to put in and the amount of books/authors I was exposed to that were actually worth reading compared to the usual material.

Though college so far has exceeded my expectations as it grew on me, one thing I never expected to learn that I ended up falling in love with my recent Spring quarter was getting to learn how to analyze, critique, and deconstructing and drawing parallels and connections to a literary work as well as its relations to either a respective time period or a respective perspective/viewpoint of the human condition... without the use of any outside sources except the text in front of me, and my own raw knowledge.

Another factor on what definitely makes a successful Literature class is that both parties (the pupil and the teacher/professor) are just as passionate as one another about what you are learning and what you are willing to dissect.

All in all, Literature classes under the instruction of passionate professors and surrounded by passionate peers is forever a match made in academic paradise.

[YW1990]

When i undertook literature in my first years of uni, i wasn't really expecting much. I decided to take it simply because i had an interest for Literature and wanted to be amongst other like minded people. The fact that i also enjoyed reading and applying my own interpretations onto the book was also another factor which contributed to my decision in taking the unit.

My goals in regards to taking literature weren't many. The main goal that all literature students should aim for is to unpack the contents of a book and explain how each component joins meaningfully to denote or stage some kind of statement about the world ( or the world within the book ).

The main skill besides the one i just mentioned above that i wanted to acquire was to polarize emotion from intellect. Instead of letting others know that i really loved a particular text, i wanted to learn how to back up my feelings with reason and evidence from the text. I find this particularly hard to do. Once i love a book, i can't find any reason for it besides reasons stemming from a subjective stance.

[osho]

I had been in several literature classes and I came out with a lot of frustrations. Academically it was good but my interest and passion was deeper and that did not cope with or satisfy my deep urges. I wanted to delve deeper and deeper and they were rather superficial and I lost interest.

I of course may find the class of literature if the lecturer is a man of letters who does not want to be a prisoner of some formal academically formulaic systems and want to discuss off topics as well.

You want to be mediocre you can find a university education profiteering and if you want to go beyond the usual, academic and want to do something creative or if you want to be a genius you have to do on your own or if you have a circle of like-minded individuals it will work. I once had a circle of such people and I enjoyed it a lot and the kind of knowledge I had from that was matchless

[JBI]

It's a waste of time if your dream is to land a good job or go into academia. If you want to be in academia, English departments won't help you, I guarantee it.

The general feeling is hit and miss. Anything to do with novels I would call miss, unless the professor is particularly talented, which is rare. Poetics and older texts seem to be more interesting, simply because most people who landed jobs in the 90s on anything about novels are amongst the worst sort of people. Especially anybody who deals with anything Victorian, or French realist - awful people, and they seem to always wear tacky jewelery.

As for practical things you learn - nothing more than in another discipline. I would find that an history major, or something more niched would serve better.

If your dream is to continue, I would urge one of two things: namely, study literature in a category still regarded as "Area Studies," so, for instance, Arabic or Persian - less people writing on it, you will learn languages while studying, and be worth more later. Or, if you mind is set on studying English, focus on much older texts, as the market for anything pertaining to novels is virtually zero.

As for going into the workforce; job experience is worth more than a straight A average. English is no advantage anywhere, unless you think it is. The assumption that one is better at textual knowledge for some reason because they have read a bunch of introductory literary theory, and some novels is a dumb idea, especially compared to the fact that most high end education departments require a form of critical research anyway; sciences more and more are inclined to teach proper analytical scientific writing and review, history, political science, all stress critical reading.

To think that paying to have some quirky obnoxious British woman dissipate arbitrary marks is somehow getting an education can be quite fallacious. Generally, the best thing to hope to get from literary courses is a good discussion on great works; the general goal then is to find classes on things you do not know anything about, so you get more exposure.

Generally, I hope never to read novels again. I never liked novels much to begin with, and studying them for 4+ years put me off of them even more, even though I read far more. As for writing skills - a TA who is doing the marking is reading your paper in a matter of 5 minutes. The paper is 8-10 pages, so half a minute a page - if you think you will improve from that, well, maybe, you get 2 a course, with different amounts of feedback usually, and marks which are more often than not arbitrary. Some may improve just because they are forced to write, others will not, it depends.

Generally, I would not have taken English, though I do not think I was impoverished by it. However, if one has a general love of literature, and scholarly pursuits, I would recommend they structure like this someone:

2 languages:
Two literatures:
background in a discipline.
So, for instance, me choosing again; you get 20 credits,
15 in East Asian studies, which amounts to 4 courses in Chinese language, then I would have added 4 courses in Japanese, then I would have had 7 courses in literature and societal focus, which is pretty good.

then for the other 5, I would have added 2 more extra courses and grabbed another major in something like history, philosophy, economics, political science, or something more apt like gender studies, sexual diversity studies, literary studies, or sociology, anthropology, or some other social science.

Generally that would have set me up better, and I would have learned far more, and looked far better on paper.

If one is studying to be generally interested, they are far better off just not bothering and reading on their own; English studies, and literary studies in general seem to suck, just my opinion and I didn't go to some backwater university either, I went to one with a well established English program of some reputation.

[ChicagoReader]

I'm in school now and most of my literature courses generally involve some larger theme that all the texts which we read share, such as economics, gender roles, etc. The classes I most enjoy involve an enthusiastic professor, interesting reading material, and the ability to connect the texts to broader themes or current events. JBI must have had a bad experience because the majority of my English professors have been very intelligent and instrumental in the growth of my education/knowledge.

[cafolini]

It's been a long time but I always felt that most teachers have a personality you have to pay attention to. Most are good teachers, but each will give you what they have to offer. More important than anything else is your motivation for taking a literature class. Do not march in there with lots of expectations. Give a chance to circunstances. You are not there to get any theory. You are there to learn based on circumstances. It's all circumstantial. But there is a lot to learn from each class if you are open to what you happen to come across.

[Stewed]

I think Osho has a good point. I've got a lit BA, and one my best lit classes was taught by a highly cultured philosophy instructor. This was in college, before I specialized. I remember reading an essay by Saul Bellow where he talked about a poet he'd been friends with, who'd felt that his English department colleagues were much more the philistines than were the truck drivers and waitresses he attended group therapy with. I think a lot of profs now are careerist nerds whose professional skill-sets happen to involve literature.

The trouble is finding anything outside of that world. I haven't been able to.