/lit/ - Literature

No
Discernable
Talent

>/lit/ can read in 14th ce Tuscan
lmao

>>21801986
>In the universities, the most surprising and reprehensible development came some twenty years ago, around 1968, and has had a very long-range effect, one that is still percolating. Suddenly all sorts of people, faculty members at the universities, graduate and undergraduate students, began to blame the universities not just for their own palpable ills and malfeasances, but for all the ills of history and society.
>Literature is not an instrument of social change or an instrument of social reform.
Literary criticism in the United States increasingly is split between very low level literary journalism and what I increasingly regard as a disaster, which is literary criticism in the academies, particularly in the younger generations. Increasingly scores and scores of graduate students have read the absurd Lacan but have never read Edmund Spenser; or have read a great deal of Foucault or Derrida but scarcely read Shakespeare or Milton. That’s obviously an absurd defeat for literary study.
>The true test is to find work, whether in the past or present, by women writers that we had undervalued, and thus bring it to our attention and teach us to study it more closely or more usefully. By that test they have failed, because they have added not one to the canon. The women writers who mattered—Jane Austen, George Eliot, Emily Dickinson, Edith Wharton, Willa Cather, and others who have always mattered on aesthetic grounds—still matter. I do not appreciate Elizabeth Bishop or May Swenson any more or less than I would have appreciated them if we had no feminist literary criticism at all. And I stare at what is presented to me as feminist literary criticism and I shake my head. I regard it at best as being well-intentioned. I do not regard it as being literary criticism.
>Whose fault is this, exactly?
burger ivy leagues and the state unis who copied them

>>18887208
OH MY GOD I'M BLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMIN

How could this dude read 1000 high quality pages every hour while other readers struggle for years to read a single fantasy novel?

>>17511412
yes

>>16922655
So-called campus "lesbians" are really just women who have never been satisfied by a real man. What you need to understand is that 9 times out of 10, female professors who are really into deconstructing literature and School of Resentment style theory are BEGGING to get fucked by Big Canonical Cock. I am being serious. I am not being ironic. For my survey course of English lit from Beowulf to 1800, my professor fit this trope exactly; she was about 28, fairly cute (not an art hoe, but with shorter brown hair), and very into “fighting back” against traditional views of medieval literature. Queering Langland, "there were black people in the Middle Ages," all of that. On the first day, we discussed the concept of a literary canon, which she argued inherently favored those works produced by people in power. Needless to say, I disagreed. Because I happened to have a class in the next room right before her course, I was always the first to arrive, usually about 5 minutes before anyone else. We would have brief conversations, first about whatever material we were going to cover that day and then about random topics- other books and poems, little details of our lives, etc.

Slowly I began to realize she was dropping small hints of her sexual availability. Nothing too risqué. She would say things like "Old English poetry (she never said Anglo-Saxon because that was a 'white supremacist dogwhistle') is so elegiac, it always makes me lonely" or "anon, you might like this article on the York mystery plays, I found it very stimulating," etc. What's more, these hints always came after I said something to defend the canon or canonical authors and traditional interpretations. For example, one day I happened to namedrop Harold Bloom during a conversation about Shakespeare's use of the carnivalesque. She made a face, and I said "Love him or hate him, you have to admit Bloom presents a useful analysis of poetic influence across the history of English literature (or words to that effect)." She bit her lip, and for a second I wasn't sure if she was going to criticize our guy or what, but instead she mentioned that the Taming of the Shrew was playing at a local theater, subtly indicating she wished to go with me. We did end up going, and it was particularly fun to watch her watch Petruchio tame Katherine. She clearly loved it; I didn't bring it up, of course, but only a few days before she had said the play was irredeemably misogynistic. Needless to say, we had an enjoyable night.

>>16785920
It’s really not a very interesting story. What you need to understand is that 9 times out of 10, female professors who are really into deconstructing literature and School of Resentment style theory are BEGGING to get fucked by Big Canonical Cock. I am being serious. I am not being ironic. For my survey course of English lit from Beowulf to 1800, my professor fit this trope exactly; she was about 28, fairly cute (not an art hoe, but with shorter brown hair), and very into “fighting back” against traditional views of medieval literature. Queering Langland, "there were black people in the Middle Ages," all of that. On the first day, we discussed the concept of a literary canon, which she argued inherently favored those works produced by people in power. Needless to say, I disagreed. Because I happened to have a class in the next room right before her course, I was always the first to arrive, usually about 5 minutes before anyone else. We would have brief conversations, first about whatever material we were going to cover that day and then about random topics- other books and poems, little details of our lives, etc.

Slowly I began to realize she was dropping small hints of her sexual availability. Nothing too risqué. She would say things like "Old English poetry (she never said Anglo-Saxon because that was a 'white supremacist dogwhistle') is so elegiac, it always makes me lonely" or "anon, you might like this article on the York mystery plays, I found it very stimulating," etc. What's more, these hints always came after I said something to defend the canon or canonical authors and traditional interpretations. For example, one day I happened to namedrop Harold Bloom during a conversation about Shakespeare's use of the carnivalesque. She made a face, and I said "Love him or hate him, you have to admit Bloom presents a useful analysis of poetic influence across the history of English literature (or words to that effect)." She bit her lip, and for a second I wasn't sure if she was going to criticize our guy or what, but instead she mentioned that the Taming of the Shrew was playing at a local theater, subtly indicating she wished to go with me. We did end up going, and it was particularly fun to watch her watch Petruchio tame Katherine. She clearly loved it; I didn't bring it up, of course, but only a few days before she had said the play was irredeemably misogynistic. Needless to say, we had an enjoyable night.