ClumsyMonkey.net

What are you reading?

Serious discussion area.
You realize that sometimes you're not okay, you level off, you level off, you level off...

Postby myownsatellite » 11/4/2007, 4:01 pm

Lando wrote:literary critics know as much about books as movie critics know about movies... so essentially nothing... it's all just opinions, some valid, most not so valid...

but hey, some of the dead guys are pretty damn good too! they use fancy language!


Lando, if you're going to say that, I'd like to know how much literary criticism you've actually read. If you're just talking about People Magazine's Picks and Pans, then yes, you're right. But if you're talking about actual scholarly material, I'm going to have to wholeheartedly disagree with you.

By the way - any literature class is a form of literary criticism. Are you therefore saying that literature teachers don't know anything about the literature they teach? Considering you pretty much need a PhD to do anything meaningful in the field anymore, I'm pretty sure they know what they're talking about.
~*Megan*~

"Wow, nice to meet you. Nine years huh? That's a really long time. Are you going to stab me or something? Because if you are, can we get it over with?" ~Jer
Image

You are never stronger than when you land on the other side of despair. ~Zadie Smith, White Teeth
User avatar
myownsatellite
Oskar Winner: 2009
Oskar Winner: 2009
 
Posts: 5045
Joined: 10/20/2005, 9:20 pm
Location: MA, USA

Postby Lando » 11/4/2007, 6:06 pm

myownsatellite wrote:
Lando wrote:literary critics know as much about books as movie critics know about movies... so essentially nothing... it's all just opinions, some valid, most not so valid...

but hey, some of the dead guys are pretty damn good too! they use fancy language!


Lando, if you're going to say that, I'd like to know how much literary criticism you've actually read. If you're just talking about People Magazine's Picks and Pans, then yes, you're right. But if you're talking about actual scholarly material, I'm going to have to wholeheartedly disagree with you.

By the way - any literature class is a form of literary criticism. Are you therefore saying that literature teachers don't know anything about the literature they teach? Considering you pretty much need a PhD to do anything meaningful in the field anymore, I'm pretty sure they know what they're talking about.


actually I'm talking literary critics in general. in fact, different scholars around the world will preach the opposite opinions on the same author all the time. it's like how one person who's supposed to be an expert or a professor on a subject will because they supposedly have advanced knowledge on the subject make what they would claim to be a legitimate or factual review of whatever their subject is. However, somewhere else in the world someone with the same knowledge of the subject can easily defend or disparage, the exact opposite opinion of the first literary critic and it's just as legitimate of an opinion.

It's like how Pierre Pachet Professor of Physiology at Toulouse in 1872 would say that Louis Pasteur's theories on germs is "ridiculous fiction" or how Irving Fischer the professor of economics at Yale in 1929 was quoted to say "Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau." Now, his opinion proved false much sooner since the stock market crash causing the great depression happened on October 29, 1929, but all I'm really saying is that in 100 years from now, yes, they'll be teaching and preaching the greatness of many of the same legendary literary works, but more will be added to that list, a lot of which are looked down upon now due to their time period being present day. Once it's something of the past, current day opinions won't really hold a whole lot of legitimacy. It's just person vs. person and their opinions. The majority vote wins. When you have thousands of professors agreeing on say the importance of the literary works of someone like William Shakespeare, of course it's going to be implemented into curriculums worldwide of all sorts of levels of education. That's not to say that someone who's regarded as average or not widely studied because their current or contemporary works are criticized much more subjective rather than looking at it in a much broader spectrum, which would then lead to a much closer examination of the works. Things like that have repeated in all areas of human opinion, century after century. Basically just wait a hundred years, opinions and subjects studied in all different areas of education will have changed. Maybe not a lot in a hundred years, but as time goes on, this will keep evolving and changing. Like I mentioned. It's majority vote on who's important... and with human error... majority vote doesn't hold a whole lot of validity.

Just look at the last U.S. election...
Last edited by Lando on 11/4/2007, 6:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Lando
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2005
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2005
 
Posts: 13395
Joined: 3/13/2002, 12:16 am
Location: Canada

Postby Lando » 11/4/2007, 6:11 pm

myownsatellite wrote:
Are you therefore saying that literature teachers don't know anything about the literature they teach? Considering you pretty much need a PhD to do anything meaningful in the field anymore, I'm pretty sure they know what they're talking about.


Yeah, well how about when someone with the exact same PhD completely disagrees with them. Then who's PhD is more important?
Image
User avatar
Lando
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2005
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2005
 
Posts: 13395
Joined: 3/13/2002, 12:16 am
Location: Canada

Postby laurel » 11/4/2007, 6:20 pm

Scholars generally don't review Stephen King, so obviously he's not talking about that kind of reviewer. As King is a popular fiction novelist, it would make the most sense that Landon would be talking about fiction reviewers, not literary scholars. Hell, as his post above states beautifully, maybe one day King will be studied in a scholarly way.

King himself has talked about the reviews and critics that give him horrible reviews - they're the ones looking for deep, meaningful books, with philosophical issues that give you a "smart" read. These are also the critics that don't realize that a "smart" read is one thing, but a hellishly good and entertaining read is another. King, being a horror writer, is immediately looked down upon by these types of reviewers because of the genre he writes in. Maybe, just maybe, once these reviewers get the sticks out of their asses and look a bit further than their own nose, can they realize the genius that is Stephen King. The pathetic thing about the literary world....scholarly or not...is that too many people hold themselves above popular fiction, and look down at writers such as King. It won't kill a scholar to admit that King can write one hell of a book.

Just a minor tangent there. And you know what? You don't need a PhD to read a book and to form an opinion on it. Sure, literary teachers know stuff about the literature they teach, but that doesn't make their opinions, or any scholar or reviewers opinion, any more right than the average person's. They're opinions. That's it. Their title doesn't make them right. And to look down on writers simply because they don't write the 'right' way, in the 'right' genre? That's just sad. That's how you limit your scope of knowledge. Sure, I'll never be a literary scholar, but I'm open to any kind of book out there, no matter who it's written by. I'm not going to dismiss someone because I think their writing isn't up to my level.

...just a minor rant. It was fun.
User avatar
laurel
Oskar Winner: 2009
Oskar Winner: 2009
 
Posts: 2310
Joined: 4/7/2003, 12:09 am

Postby Random Name » 11/4/2007, 8:59 pm

There is a difference between a literary opinion and scholarly criticism. Gaining the knowledge of all the schools of theories is a huge task in itself. High school biology does not mean you can diagnose like a Doctor... So no. It's not just opinion. If you think that you're opinion is enough to create a valid argument then you've been pretty mislead. It just takes one other guy to come around and say "..so what?" and your whole platform falls through. Literature is not a science, it's not meant to have one correct final opinion.
-Sarah

Goodbye you liar,
Well you sipped from the cup but you don't own up to anything
Then you think you will inspire
Take apart your head
(and I wish I could inspire)
Take apart your demons, then you add it to the list.

Random Name
Oskar Winner: 2007
Oskar Winner: 2007
 
Posts: 10134
Joined: 8/16/2003, 2:57 pm
Location: New Finland

Postby myownsatellite » 11/4/2007, 10:19 pm

Like Sarah said - you need to study all sorts of criticisms and then form your own argument out of it. An opinion and a criticism are two different things. I'm studying to be a literature professor, and I'm going to school right now for an MA. Soon I'll be working on a PhD. If someone has a PhD, it means that person has spent years and years studying just about everything out there on a certain subject. Mine is science fiction and fantasy, two of the most "unscholarly" genres out there. At least to the critics. Not once did I put down King or say that he's not worth reading. In fact, I'm attempting to open up the "canon" of literature that is taught in schools. Just because the literature isn't 100 years old doesn't make it bad. I agree with you guys. What I think you might have misread is that I love the old work too, and spend a lot of time on literary criticism of the older work since that's what's out there for me to read. Hopefully I'll be able to contribute to more modern criticism in the future.

So because I've read a ton of criticism and formed my own argument, everyone else's arguments are out the window? I don't think so. Interpretation, Representation and the Author are three loaded terms that, if you're going to study literature and the criticism of literature, you really need to familiarize yourself with. I'm not trying to come off as a smarty pants here because even I don't understand all the implications these terms have on the study of literature yet. But you can't just say that one person is right and everyone else is wrong - when you are interpreting a work of literature you are doing it through specific formulas and philosophies. I have a professor who is a huge Chaucer scholar. It seems like he knows everything there is to know about the man. But he knows the criticisms - he read it, he studied it, he internalized it, and he formed his own opinion. He leaves it open-ended for the class, just like the author did. We can never truly know authorial intentions, and therefore what else are we to do but analyze according to our own structures?

I feel like we're arguing about two totally different things here. I said I'm not a fan of Stephen King, but that doesn't mean I don't think he should be read. He may not be scholarly, but he is a good writer. I can't read him because I'm not a horror person and he freaks me out. That's the sign of a good writer, isn't it? If you want change, you have to make it yourself. That's what I'm trying to do. Why does it feel like you're both saying that literary criticism is a bad thing? How else are we supposed to talk about literature? "Oh, that book was awesome, I loved the characters!" Or "This is a book worth studying because its character development is very reminiscent of the time period." Personally, I prefer the latter. Getting in-depth with a piece of literature and analyzing all the possibilities is much more interesting than just reading it and saying "Wow, that was a good read." That is what criticism strives to do. It's not a bad thing. A lot of people prefer the "It's a good book" type of reading and that's fine. But that's not what literary critics are doing. And no Lando, when two PhD holders have differing opinions, it does not mean that one is right and the other is wrong. It means that both have studied the work and the criticisms surrounding the work, and have formed differing readings of the work. It's not normally a matter of right and wrong when you are doing a close analysis of something - it's all a matter of interpretation.
~*Megan*~

"Wow, nice to meet you. Nine years huh? That's a really long time. Are you going to stab me or something? Because if you are, can we get it over with?" ~Jer
Image

You are never stronger than when you land on the other side of despair. ~Zadie Smith, White Teeth
User avatar
myownsatellite
Oskar Winner: 2009
Oskar Winner: 2009
 
Posts: 5045
Joined: 10/20/2005, 9:20 pm
Location: MA, USA

Postby Axtech » 11/4/2007, 10:44 pm

laurel wrote:he also manages to link characters and references together from book to book, even when seemingly unrelated, (such as the small referrals to the phrase rooty-toot) or even when obviously related (using the same town with the same characters, albeit in smaller parts depending on the story) and then linking them allllll together in a massive story (the dark tower series).

seriously, read every single one of his books in the right order, and the amount of references to other books are insane. even short stories tie into the books. but they can all be read on their own. the man's a genius for being able to keep track of everything...it makes the books seem like parts of a whole, instead of just random novels he churned out...

the literary critics absolutely destroy him...but god, that man has one of the greatest minds of our time...and his writing, although nothing special to the literary snobs, is something you can actually connect to. he can create a scene like no one else...in Gerald's Game, he describes a woman slicing the skin on her wrist with a piece of glass so that she can escape a handcuff, and she ends up essentially skinning her hand. he described it in such perfect detail that i damn near passed out. i've never been that affected by an actual real visual, but he described it so that it made me nauseous and dizzy. that's talent.

so. in other words.
some people may read big books with fancy language written by dead guys. i read big books with boring language written by stephen king, and they're one hell of a good time.


Well put! As King himself has said (through a character in the Dark Tower series), he's got a tin ear for language, but he tells a good story!
- -
Image
Every now and then I fall out into open air just to feel the wind, rain and everything.
And though the hum and sway gets me down
, I'll find the way to peace and openness.

Image
"Robbo" - © Alex (happeningfish)...^5 ^5 v v
User avatar
Axtech
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2004
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2004
 
Posts: 19796
Joined: 3/17/2002, 5:36 pm
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

Postby Lando » 11/5/2007, 1:20 am

Random Name wrote:Literature is not a science, it's not meant to have one correct final opinion.


Actually it is a science. Pretty much anything can be considered to have a science.

While there are different forms of the definition of science, when referring to literature, the definition of science that can easily apply to it is: A systematically organized body of knowledge on a particular subject.
Image
User avatar
Lando
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2005
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2005
 
Posts: 13395
Joined: 3/13/2002, 12:16 am
Location: Canada

Postby Lando » 11/5/2007, 1:28 am

myownsatellite wrote:An opinion and a criticism are two different things.


While they are different, a criticism in all forms of it's definition that we're discussing is still based solely on the opinions of what a person would consider to be faults or mistakes in the literature. So since they are completely dependent of each other, it really doesn't matter how it's perceived. It's still based in a world of human error and opinion.

Also, I was never disagreeing with anything you said in any of your posts, just stating that human opinion even at the most educated levels will always be filled with error and will always be evolving and changing as time goes on. It will always be able to be disputed with accuracy of another's opinion too.
Image
User avatar
Lando
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2005
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2005
 
Posts: 13395
Joined: 3/13/2002, 12:16 am
Location: Canada

Postby laurel » 11/5/2007, 1:41 am

Sadly, what i get out of both Megan and Sarah's posts are that because I haven't studied all these theories, my opinion on literature is moot. And this is where my argument lies...just because I'm not schooled in literature, does not mean my opinion isn't worthwhile. If you are to read back over my post, the main idea I was trying to express was that just because you hold some degree, does not make your opinion more or less valid. It may mean you're more capable of discussing the literature in question, but does not give you the ability to consider your opinion more important or valuable than mine.

And why does it seem like we're saying literary criticism is a bad thing? For me, as I've said, it seems that all too often it creates those literary snobs. Read back into my last post to see what I have to say about that.
User avatar
laurel
Oskar Winner: 2009
Oskar Winner: 2009
 
Posts: 2310
Joined: 4/7/2003, 12:09 am

Postby Lando » 11/5/2007, 1:45 am

Yeah, actually I didn't know how to say it, but that's one thing I was trying to explain too. Basically I meant to say that one person's opinion is no more valid than another's. Being well educated in the area of argument is definitely going to give a person an advantage in expression of the subject, but it does not make that person's opinion a fact and thus it cannot be more important than another person's opinion.

I'm just kind of stupid so it was tough for me to come up with the way to say the whole capability of expression thingy.
Image
User avatar
Lando
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2005
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2005
 
Posts: 13395
Joined: 3/13/2002, 12:16 am
Location: Canada

Postby xjsb125 » 11/5/2007, 2:06 am

I think this all falls back to the many discussions we've had on music and opinion to it. It's all subjective to the person who is consuming whatever art form. Nobody has a more valid opinion than anyone else, regardless of education. Megan will probably be able to break down and evaluate mechanics of literature better than a lot of us, the same way Lando can evaluate the technicalities of a movie. The difference is, their evaluations would and should mean nothing to anybody else's opinion, the same with anyone else reviewing an artwork. The opinion that should matter the most to you, is your own.
<nam_kablam> I'll be naked holding a ":O" sign while pumping their door
Image
User avatar
xjsb125
Oskar Winner: 2010
Oskar Winner: 2010
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: 5/8/2003, 11:28 pm
Location: Bristol, VA

Postby Lando » 11/5/2007, 5:14 am

And Mr. T's!

Image
Image
User avatar
Lando
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2005
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2005
 
Posts: 13395
Joined: 3/13/2002, 12:16 am
Location: Canada

Postby myownsatellite » 11/5/2007, 7:10 am

laurel wrote:Sadly, what i get out of both Megan and Sarah's posts are that because I haven't studied all these theories, my opinion on literature is moot.

If that's what you're getting out of my posts, then either you're misreading me or we're not making a connection. I even went so far as to say I'm not trying to sound like a snob, but if you're going to be entitled to your own opinion about the study of literature then so am I, and my opinion is that it is more enjoyable to me to study criticism than it is to just say "That was a good book."

And Lando, literary criticism is not based around pointing out flaws in a work. It is based around the interpretation of a work.
~*Megan*~

"Wow, nice to meet you. Nine years huh? That's a really long time. Are you going to stab me or something? Because if you are, can we get it over with?" ~Jer
Image

You are never stronger than when you land on the other side of despair. ~Zadie Smith, White Teeth
User avatar
myownsatellite
Oskar Winner: 2009
Oskar Winner: 2009
 
Posts: 5045
Joined: 10/20/2005, 9:20 pm
Location: MA, USA

Postby myownsatellite » 11/5/2007, 7:21 am

laurel wrote:And why does it seem like we're saying literary criticism is a bad thing? For me, as I've said, it seems that all too often it creates those literary snobs. Read back into my last post to see what I have to say about that.


I did read your post, several times, because I DIDN'T want to sound like a snob when I answered you. Literary snobs are not what the critical genre is all about. Most literary scholars are trying to interpret works so as to provide a better understanding of the text. That's not a bad thing. It may seem like the majority of scholars are snobs, but it's just not true. Maybe it's your experience with the study - I don't know what you studied in school, so I don't know how much criticism you've read. For me, the majority of what I've read is not snobbery, but an attempt to examine in a critical manner the background, context and so-called "meaning" of a text. People discredit science fiction all the time. That doesn't mean that the entire critical genre is full of sci-fi haters who think it's just a waste of time. These people are in the minority but because of their bad conduct give everyone else a bad name. You have that in any medium, even in film and music. I know a lot of people who would call Raine a snob because he's so high-minded. I find him to be an intellectual. It's two different readings of something. That's where interpretation comes into play. And it seems like we're each interpreting what the other is saying in different ways. It shows the differences in the way we think. Your opinion is not invalid, and neither is mine, and neither are the scholars. They're just different. But thinking about things in a different way, in a critical way as opposed to an opinionated way, is a completely different concept. Where someone might read a book and enjoy it for its characters and plot, someone else might find a metaphorical meaning. It's all dependent on the way you think, and I think that if you are going to get a degree in something, you're going to have a more critically valid interpretation because you spent years studying the other criticisms out there, as opposed to an opinion that comes strictly from surface pleasure. It's a difference, not a defamation.
~*Megan*~

"Wow, nice to meet you. Nine years huh? That's a really long time. Are you going to stab me or something? Because if you are, can we get it over with?" ~Jer
Image

You are never stronger than when you land on the other side of despair. ~Zadie Smith, White Teeth
User avatar
myownsatellite
Oskar Winner: 2009
Oskar Winner: 2009
 
Posts: 5045
Joined: 10/20/2005, 9:20 pm
Location: MA, USA

Postby myownsatellite » 11/5/2007, 7:33 am

Anyway, I don't think we're going to agree on any of this. So I'm going to bow out of the argument. I have a paper to finish that is based on literary criticism and I'd actually like to focus my energy on something I like doing, which is discussing literature, instead of arguing the merits of my chosen profession.
~*Megan*~

"Wow, nice to meet you. Nine years huh? That's a really long time. Are you going to stab me or something? Because if you are, can we get it over with?" ~Jer
Image

You are never stronger than when you land on the other side of despair. ~Zadie Smith, White Teeth
User avatar
myownsatellite
Oskar Winner: 2009
Oskar Winner: 2009
 
Posts: 5045
Joined: 10/20/2005, 9:20 pm
Location: MA, USA

Postby Johnny » 11/5/2007, 11:52 am

Keep cool my babies, keep cool!
Professional Canadian.
User avatar
Johnny
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2007
Oskar Lifetime Achievement Award: 2007
 
Posts: 31096
Joined: 8/21/2002, 5:35 pm
Location: Edmonton

Postby Random Name » 11/5/2007, 12:07 pm

Thats sort of the point Lando, literary criticism has nothing to do with finding flaws in a work at all. Book reviews do that, criticism is an analyisis of work. Actually, for that reason, I find King would be a great author.

Yeah, and I really wasn't trying to imply anything about Laurel. Heh. Actually for that reason, I think King would be great to analyze critically. For every person I have heard belittle King, I've heard like 8 people that defend him. For my Lit theory class next semester, the class is going to revolve around Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. (which is AWESOME) So really, the general idea of books getting bad reviews making them bad books in lit, doesn't need to be pandered to.

I think the argument is that any schmo's opinion who reads the book is just as valid as a scholars opinion. And its really not the case most of the time because the standards and basis of opinions are going to be completly different. That's all I'm saying. :P
-Sarah

Goodbye you liar,
Well you sipped from the cup but you don't own up to anything
Then you think you will inspire
Take apart your head
(and I wish I could inspire)
Take apart your demons, then you add it to the list.

Random Name
Oskar Winner: 2007
Oskar Winner: 2007
 
Posts: 10134
Joined: 8/16/2003, 2:57 pm
Location: New Finland

Postby myownsatellite » 11/5/2007, 2:14 pm

I'm fine, I just get tired of having to defend my field all the time against the misconception that literary critics are all snobs.
~*Megan*~

"Wow, nice to meet you. Nine years huh? That's a really long time. Are you going to stab me or something? Because if you are, can we get it over with?" ~Jer
Image

You are never stronger than when you land on the other side of despair. ~Zadie Smith, White Teeth
User avatar
myownsatellite
Oskar Winner: 2009
Oskar Winner: 2009
 
Posts: 5045
Joined: 10/20/2005, 9:20 pm
Location: MA, USA

Postby Random Name » 11/6/2007, 9:46 am

Man. I don't know what you are talking about. The entire point of doing Lit is to be pretentious and grandiloquent in cocktail parties.
-Sarah

Goodbye you liar,
Well you sipped from the cup but you don't own up to anything
Then you think you will inspire
Take apart your head
(and I wish I could inspire)
Take apart your demons, then you add it to the list.

Random Name
Oskar Winner: 2007
Oskar Winner: 2007
 
Posts: 10134
Joined: 8/16/2003, 2:57 pm
Location: New Finland

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 10 guests

Delete all board cookies • All times are UTC - 6 hours • PHPBB Powered

Serving Our Lady Peace fans since 2002. Oskar Twitch thanks you for tasting the monkey brains.