One of the largest flaws I see in the undergraduate program at CPP is the set of classes the department has deemed the "core classes." All English Literature majors are required to take Shakespeare After 1600, Literary Theory, Advanced Expository Writing, and Grammar of Modern English - the rest of the units are up to the student.
I, by no means, am one for imposing an entire curriculum on a student; however, I think there are a couple of fundamental things an English major needs to have under their belt before they complete their Bachelor's Degree. The four core classes, while useful in their own regard, are not enough to build a foundation for even a decent English major - of course, this is just my opinion. The core we currently adhere to needs to be revised, and the department needs to consider re-establishing a core that actually means something.
The first section of the core should be a two-part class based in Literary Theory. Literary Theory should be taught early on in the undergraduate career, as it is the first real tool a fledgling English major needs in order to be successful. Lit Theory, as it currently is set up at CPP, briefly looks at four to six theories over the span of ten weeks, creating merely a synopsis for students to work off of. The first section of Literary theory should, therefore, be a broader, deeper examination of the theories rather than a quick glossing over of Derrida or Aristotle - especially because entire classes could be focused around either of said theorists. The second portion of Lit Theory should be dedicated solely to the application of the theories learned over the course of the previous installment of ten weeks. Theory class, as it currently stands, can only touch upon meaning, and - in my experience - the application of theory seems to follow auto-didactically after the class is over. If a secondary "application" class were to be followed directly after the "theory" based class, students would more likely to understand and use theory correctly and efficiently.
-side note - I'm a huge theory guy, so I apologize if the previous paragraph came off as a rant
The other classes all sort of go hand-in-hand. The other parts of the core should be Bible as Literature, Myth as Literature, and Dante's Divine Comedy. If this seems like a weird triad for what the core of literature should be, then you might want to quit reading this post now and go apply to be a business major or something of that banal nature.
Bible as Literature needs to be taught. It's in everything. Seriously. I'm not even going to waste my time creating a catalog of everything that's been influenced by the Bible. If an English major isn't at least familiar with the Bible, everything else is kind of a muddled mess.
The same goes for myth. I seriously can't believe Ovid isn't a mandatory text for all English majors. In fact, more Ovid references come immediately to my mind than Bible references. I admit, I started reading Ovid late in my academic career, but I really wish The Metamorphoses had been introduced to me earlier; it would have made things a lot easier.
Finally, we need to read The Divine Comedy. I still have only read parts - and even then I've only read translations. We need to read TDC for so many reasons; many of which are the same reasons why we need to read Chaucer. Translation of text is something all English majors - who, I assume, are language lovers - need to do for a multitude of reasons. Furthermore, Inferno alone is referenced throughout literature as much as the Bible or Ovid are. These three texts are the basis by which many texts were crafted, and a fundamental understanding of each of them is crucial to the success of any would-be scholar.
For the sake of space on the blog, I'll stop here. I'll be sure to continue this article next week.
No comments:
Post a Comment