Graff, Gerald. Taking Cover in Coverage. The Norton Anthology of Theory and

Transcription

1 Fagan 1 Kerrie Fagan Dr. Pennington English 305 9/22/14 Abstract of Graff Graff, Gerald. Taking Cover in Coverage. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. Ed. Vincent Leitch, et. al. New York: Norton, Print. Gerald Graff states that authorities believe Kerrie Fagan Dr. Pennington English 305 9/22/14 Abstract of Graff Graff, Gerald. Taking Cover in Coverage. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. Ed. Vincent Leitch, et. al. New York: Norton, Print. Gerald Graff states that authorities believe they should not be teaching how to theorize because it is too hard for students in high school and college Graff disagrees and thinks that schools should be teaching theory to students. He argues that because students are not learning about theory in class, they have to resort to things such as Cliff notes in order to get by in a literature class. He argues that a way to introduce theory in to curriculum is to first look at the

2 Fagan 2 organization of not only the literature department but of other departments as well. He argues that part of the problem in the organization of literature departments is what he calls the fieldcoverage model. This model only gets a person (teacher) to cover a certain area but nothing else; so, the student s learning is limited. Graff thinks schools need to find meaning in the classifications they give to the courses. At the end of his article, Graff gives suggestions on how to make the situation better with ideas such as making theory courses central to curriculum and integrating real life conflicts into the courses. Iser Keyword Search Iser, Wolfgang. How to do Theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell, Print. Literary Theory; interpretation; aesthetics; art; humanities; sister arts; hard-core theory; soft theory; modes of theory; theory and method; Popper, Karl Summary of Eagleton Terry Eagleton proposes the question of what is literature. What is standard for what the world does or should consider as literature. Eagleton gives us a few definitions of literature that have been thought of in the past, but then he deconstructs them and proves that they are limited. First, Eagleton gives the definition that is based on whether a piece writing is fact or fiction or imaginative. The problem with this definition is that we do not know which category they go into. Eagleton uses a couple of examples of this confusion. He gives the example of

3 Fagan 3 Gibbon, who thought that was he was writing was fact; however, that was not the case. So people argue whether his work is considered fact because that is what he thought he was writing or fiction. Should it be based on the author s intent? He uses another example that is Genesis. Some people see it as fact and others as fiction. Another problem with this definition is that it excludes other works of art such as historical texts, philosophical texts, or scientific text; which then asks the question: are they considered unimaginative? The next definition that Eagleton gives us is based on Russian Formalism. Literature is defined by the usage of peculiar language something that is not the norm. Eagleton gives us the example of having someone approach him and say Thou still unravished bride of quietness. This would be the type of language that a piece of writing would have to use in order to be considered literature by the definition of the Russian Formalists. The problem with this definition is that they overlook the literary content. They only focus on whether a piece of literature is written in a peculiar way, not what the author is actually trying to say. But to them, if it is written in a peculiar way, it is considered literature. They also do not take into consideration the fact that not everyone defines peculiar language as the same thing. What may be considered strange to someone maybe be a norm for another; there is no one definition for peculiar language. It is hard to say what the norm actually is because it can be different for different people; but overall, the norm is decided by society. Also, some people like the simplicity of some writings, so then are those not considered literature? The next definition Eagleton gives us is that literature is non-pragmatic discourse, havingno real practical purpose to us. The problem with this definition is that we have no way of actually defining writings as pragmatic or non-pragmatic. Some works may be important and

4 Fagan 4 practical to one person, whereas to another it may be completely useless. Something also may have been written to be useful and others may not have been. Eagleton uses the words Some texts are born literary, some achieve literariness, and some have literariness thrust upon them. There is no way of knowing what was meant to be practical and what was not. Eagleton then gives the definition that literature is something that we value highly or it is a text that people can relate to. Eagleton proposes us with the problem with this definition is that even if someone does not personally consider a text to be of high value to them does that make something not literature? Eagleton gives the example that he does not highly value Lamb and Macaulay but he does still consider them to be literature. Another problem with this is that maybe values will change. Eagleton uses the example of Shakespeare; maybe in the future, Shakespeare will no longer be of value to society. Eagleton comes to the conclusion that there is no real definite definition of literature. We decide on our own what is important to us and what we consider to be literature. We also decide as a society what we think is of value. The best way to explain this concept is with Eagleton s own words: Nobody will penalize me heavily if I dislike a particular Donne poem, but if I argue that Donne is not literature at all then in certain circumstances I might risk losing my job. Because Donne is valued highly by society, to say that it is not literature is not accurate based on society s view of Donne. This concept is our ideology of literature. Ideology means a set of ideas that are created usually about a theory of a sort. We as a society make our ideology about literature meaning, we as a society give literature its definition. Evaluation of Eagleton

5 Fagan 5 In Literary Theory: An Introduction, Eagleton concludes that there is no real definition of literature. He believes that we as a society decides what holds value to us as a whole. I had never really given much thought to what literature actually meant before I read Eagleton s introduction. I had always just thought that literature was what the teachers told us it was whatever we had to read in class. I thought literature was the different titles that were given to the classes that I needed to take: poetry, plays, or novels. There were always texts that I read that I didn t like but I never thought that it was not considered to be literature and why would I? Everyone else said it was. I never stopped to think if I considered a text book that I read in a history class was literature. After reading Eagleton s article, I thought about what literature meant to me and to society. I concluded that I agree with his argument that we give literature its definition by what we value. I agree with Eagleton s conclusion that there is no real definition of literature. I agree that we give a text the title of literature. I think we highly value books such as the Catcher in the Rye, the Great Gatsby, Huckleberry Finn, or To Kill a Mockingbird and poems by writers like Shakepeare, Poe, and Frost because they are relatable or we can learn something from them. We can use books and poems to help us deal with our own lives. The Catcher in the Rye is read in high schools because it correlates to what is going on in a high school students life. They have to deal with growing up and the loss of ignorance. The Catcher in the Rye s Holden Caulfield is also going through the same life changing realization. For a high school student, seeing that they are not the only one feeling this way can help them to deal with those realizations. Having a story and characters to play out can help a person in their similar real life scenario. These types of books or poems also help people to find their own opinions on morals and of what is right and what is wrong. And as a whole society, these books and poems that hold a high value for us

6 Fagan 6 reflect our values, morals, and beliefs. Of course, not everyone has the same values, morals, and beliefs, but as a whole of society, we have some sort of ideals. But on the other hand, there are books that are popular, but they have no literary merit that is helping you make decisions or discoveries about how to live your life. There are books like the Harry Potter series, or the Twilight series, or the Hunger Games. Of course I am sure some scholar can find some morals or values in these types of books; but for most of the population, we read them for fun for an escape. I always thought it was interesting that almost overnight a book becomes a worldwide best seller and everyone and their mother either has already read it or is in the middle of reading it. For these books we count down the days until the next book comes out or until the movie version comes out. We stand in lines for hours waiting for the midnight viewing to start, dressed in costumes of our favorite character. I always wondered how this happened and why a book can captivate almost an entire nation and sometimes the world. I think it s because it is a way that everyone can escape reality for a little while. This is something that everyone can relate to. Everyone has to have time to relax and not have to worry about all of the things they have to do. Relaxation is something we value as a society; and if we value this relaxation and escape, we value these books as literature as well. Then there is the question of school text books, articles, science studies, and more. Are these highly valued in our society? I would say yes they are valued. But if I were to walk down the street and ask people if they thought their high school biology text book was considered literature, I would guess that less than half would say they would call it literature. So then why do we, as a society, not consider it to be literature? I think it is because the scholars tell us little people what literature is; so that is the way it has stayed. Maybe, like Eagleton discussed in his

7 Fagan 7 introduction, the things we consider today to be literature will no longer be as dear to us as a whole society. All in all, I agree with Eagleton s conclusion that literature cannot be defined as one thing because it is defined by us as a society. We decide what becomes popular and what literature is. We decide what is taught in schools as literature. Yes, maybe the scholars are the ones who originally give it the category of literature but we make it possible. Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota, Print Graff, Gerald. Taking Cover in Coverage. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism edited by Vincent Leitch et. al. New York: Norton, Print. Iser, Wolfgang. How to do Theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell, Print. They should not be teaching how to theorize because it is too hard for students in high school and college Graff disagrees and thinks that schools should be teaching theory to students. He argues that because students are not learning about theory in class, they have to resort to things such as Cliff notes in order to get by in a literature class. He argues that a way to introduce theory in to curriculum is to first look at the organization of not only the literature department but of other departments as well. He argues that part of the problem in the organization of literature departments is what he calls the field-coverage model. This model only gets a person (teacher) to cover a certain area but nothing else; so, the student s learning is limited. Graff thinks schools need to find meaning in the classifications they give to the courses.

8 Fagan 8 At the end of his article, Graff gives suggestions on how to make the situation better with ideas such as making theory courses central to curriculum and integrating real life conflicts into the courses. Iser Keyword Search Iser, Wolfgang. How to do Theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell, Print. Literary Theory; interpretation; aesthetics; art; humanities; sister arts; hard-core theory; soft theory; modes of theory; theory and method; Popper, Karl Summary of Eagleton Terry Eagleton proposes the question of what is literature. What is standard for what the world does or should consider as literature. Eagleton gives us a few definitions of literature that have been thought of in the past, but then he deconstructs them and proves that they are limited. First, Eagleton gives the definition that is based on whether a piece writing is fact or fiction or imaginative. The problem with this definition is that we do not know which category they go into. Eagleton uses a couple of examples of this confusion. He gives the example of Gibbon, who thought that was he was writing was fact; however, that was not the case. So people argue whether his work is considered fact because that is what he thought he was writing or fiction. Should it be based on the author s intent? He uses another example that is Genesis. Some people see it as fact and others as fiction. Another problem with this definition is that it excludes

9 Fagan 9 other works of art such as historical texts, philosophical texts, or scientific text; which then asks the question: are they considered unimaginative? The next definition that Eagleton gives us is based on Russian Formalism. Literature is defined by the usage of peculiar language something that is not the norm. Eagleton gives us the example of having someone approach him and say Thou still unravished bride of quietness. This would be the type of language that a piece of writing would have to use in order to be considered literature by the definition of the Russian Formalists. The problem with this definition is that they overlook the literary content. They only focus on whether a piece of literature is written in a peculiar way, not what the author is actually trying to say. But to them, if it is written in a peculiar way, it is considered literature. They also do not take into consideration the fact that not everyone defines peculiar language as the same thing. What may be considered strange to someone maybe be a norm for another; there is no one definition for peculiar language. It is hard to say what the norm actually is because it can be different for different people; but overall, the norm is decided by society. Also, some people like the simplicity of some writings, so then are those not considered literature? The next definition Eagleton gives us is that literature is non-pragmatic discourse, havingno real practical purpose to us. The problem with this definition is that we have no way of actually defining writings as pragmatic or non-pragmatic. Some works may be important and practical to one person, whereas to another it may be completely useless. Something also may have been written to be useful and others may not have been. Eagleton uses the words Some texts are born literary, some achieve literariness, and some have literariness thrust upon them. There is no way of knowing what was meant to be practical and what was not.

10 Fagan 10 Eagleton then gives the definition that literature is something that we value highly or it is a text that people can relate to. Eagleton proposes us with the problem with this definition is that even if someone does not personally consider a text to be of high value to them does that make something not literature? Eagleton gives the example that he does not highly value Lamb and Macaulay but he does still consider them to be literature. Another problem with this is that maybe values will change. Eagleton uses the example of Shakespeare; maybe in the future, Shakespeare will no longer be of value to society. Eagleton comes to the conclusion that there is no real definite definition of literature. We decide on our own what is important to us and what we consider to be literature. We also decide as a society what we think is of value. The best way to explain this concept is with Eagleton s own words: Nobody will penalize me heavily if I dislike a particular Donne poem, but if I argue that Donne is not literature at all then in certain circumstances I might risk losing my job. Because Donne is valued highly by society, to say that it is not literature is not accurate based on society s view of Donne. This concept is our ideology of literature. Ideology means a set of ideas that are created usually about a theory of a sort. We as a society make our ideology about literature meaning, we as a society give literature its definition. Evaluation of Eagleton In Literary Theory: An Introduction, Eagleton concludes that there is no real definition of literature. He believes that we as a society decides what holds value to us as a whole. I had never really given much thought to what literature actually meant before I read Eagleton s introduction. I had always just thought that literature was what the teachers told us it was whatever we had to read in class. I thought literature was the different titles that were given to

11 Fagan 11 the classes that I needed to take: poetry, plays, or novels. There were always texts that I read that I didn t like but I never thought that it was not considered to be literature and why would I? Everyone else said it was. I never stopped to think if I considered a text book that I read in a history class was literature. After reading Eagleton s article, I thought about what literature meant to me and to society. I concluded that I agree with his argument that we give literature its definition by what we value. I agree with Eagleton s conclusion that there is no real definition of literature. I agree that we give a text the title of literature. I think we highly value books such as the Catcher in the Rye, the Great Gatsby, Huckleberry Finn, or To Kill a Mockingbird and poems by writers like Shakepeare, Poe, and Frost because they are relatable or we can learn something from them. We can use books and poems to help us deal with our own lives. The Catcher in the Rye is read in high schools because it correlates to what is going on in a high school students life. They have to deal with growing up and the loss of ignorance. The Catcher in the Rye s Holden Caulfield is also going through the same life changing realization. For a high school student, seeing that they are not the only one feeling this way can help them to deal with those realizations. Having a story and characters to play out can help a person in their similar real life scenario. These types of books or poems also help people to find their own opinions on morals and of what is right and what is wrong. And as a whole society, these books and poems that hold a high value for us reflect our values, morals, and beliefs. Of course, not everyone has the same values, morals, and beliefs, but as a whole of society, we have some sort of ideals. But on the other hand, there are books that are popular, but they have no literary merit that is helping you make decisions or discoveries about how to live your life. There are books

12 Fagan 12 like the Harry Potter series, or the Twilight series, or the Hunger Games. Of course I am sure some scholar can find some morals or values in these types of books; but for most of the population, we read them for fun for an escape. I always thought it was interesting that almost overnight a book becomes a worldwide best seller and everyone and their mother either has already read it or is in the middle of reading it. For these books we count down the days until the next book comes out or until the movie version comes out. We stand in lines for hours waiting for the midnight viewing to start, dressed in costumes of our favorite character. I always wondered how this happened and why a book can captivate almost an entire nation and sometimes the world. I think it s because it is a way that everyone can escape reality for a little while. This is something that everyone can relate to. Everyone has to have time to relax and not have to worry about all of the things they have to do. Relaxation is something we value as a society; and if we value this relaxation and escape, we value these books as literature as well. Then there is the question of school text books, articles, science studies, and more. Are these highly valued in our society? I would say yes they are valued. But if I were to walk down the street and ask people if they thought their high school biology text book was considered literature, I would guess that less than half would say they would call it literature. So then why do we, as a society, not consider it to be literature? I think it is because the scholars tell us little people what literature is; so that is the way it has stayed. Maybe, like Eagleton discussed in his introduction, the things we consider today to be literature will no longer be as dear to us as a whole society. All in all, I agree with Eagleton s conclusion that literature cannot be defined as one thing because it is defined by us as a society. We decide what becomes popular and what literature is.

13 Fagan 13 We decide what is taught in schools as literature. Yes, maybe the scholars are the ones who originally give it the category of literature but we make it possible. Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota, Print Graff, Gerald. Taking Cover in Coverage. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism edited by Vincent Leitch et. al. New York: Norton, Print. Iser, Wolfgang. How to do Theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell, Print.