Harold Bloom's Exasperation - Marxism etc and Shakespeare
I was interested to read that Harold Bloom, he of the canon etc, and the nation's "pre-eminent poet" Les Murray were a bit upset after learning that a "prestigious" girls' school in Sydney are interpreting Othello from Marxist, feminist and racial perspectives.
"It is another indication that literary study has died in Australia," Mr Bloom said according to The Australian. The article can be read here:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,18818644-2702,00.html
Here is some more that wasn't in the internet version of the article. It comes after Mark Howie's quote:
"But Murray said the question showed how the dominant ideology soaking subjects at school was Marxism and a "perverse egalitarianism" to reduce quality to a common denominator.
Murray said the only way to include literature in schools was along the lines of physical education, in which students discover their bodies and what they can do but are not subjected to assessment or examinations.
"If people can be exposed to things of quality like literature and not examined on them, which is essentially punishing them, then it might be nice to have it in schools," he said.
"But it's probably better just to take it out altogether, both for the sake of art and the sake of kids."
Let me know what you think in the comments section.
"It is another indication that literary study has died in Australia," Mr Bloom said according to The Australian. The article can be read here:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,18818644-2702,00.html
Here is some more that wasn't in the internet version of the article. It comes after Mark Howie's quote:
"But Murray said the question showed how the dominant ideology soaking subjects at school was Marxism and a "perverse egalitarianism" to reduce quality to a common denominator.
Murray said the only way to include literature in schools was along the lines of physical education, in which students discover their bodies and what they can do but are not subjected to assessment or examinations.
"If people can be exposed to things of quality like literature and not examined on them, which is essentially punishing them, then it might be nice to have it in schools," he said.
"But it's probably better just to take it out altogether, both for the sake of art and the sake of kids."
Let me know what you think in the comments section.
posted by Lord Beavish at 2:57 PM
6 Comments:
well, clearly literature is 'worse than dead' then. What more can i say...
I guess what I was trying to ask was -- "is teaching like this a bad thing?" Why/not?
The kind of thing the SCEGGS girls were being asked to do is pretty similar to the tasks specified in the Qld Senior English Extension (Literature) syllabus. The point of the exercise is to understand that any such text can generate a range of "readings" (or interpretations), depending on what theories, ideologies, knowledge etc you bring to your reading. In addition, it's useful for students to try out different theoretical positions (very well established as those specified in the article are), to see what kinds of insights can be generated by this theory or that - and what kinds of omission result from such emphases too.
Those who like Bloom or Murray decry such an educational strategy haven't kept up with the theories, and simply want to corral literature off from current knowledge. As if it's possible to read without bringing our theories, views and values, assumptions and knowledge to bear on what we read!
When I first read this blog I thought it was a joke...but then, I read the article...and, just, wow. I was shocked. If Wendy has taught me anything, it's that no text has a single reading. This kind of study of a classic literary text is brilliant in developing the ability in students to see the multiple faces of a text. I wish I'd had something like that in my senior English classroom, maybe I'd be getting 7's in my English discipline subjects. I know I certainly want to be that kind of teacher.
Yeah, well I haven't read or seen Othello, but looking at it from a Marxist, feminist and racial perspectives would be fascinating. I wish I had done that way back when I went to school.
I have always wanted to do an analysis of The Communist Manifesto from a Marxist perspective, but that would take someone with a greater knowledge of Marxism than I.
ideological perspectives are lazy and serve to distance the reader from the text. They also take the onus off the reader to engage with the text with their own awareness and aesthetic consciousness. Take art off the academies, it doesn't belong to them, it belongs to me.
Post a Comment
<< Home