Post 5

[Cory Stewart]

Post 5

            For my final post, I want to briefly discuss Graff’s and Christian’s ideas. In most of the readings required in this class I was able to apply the concepts, with a basic understanding, to things that I have read; and things I am reading for the literature classes in which I am currently enrolled. Structuralist theory even came up in one of the classes for my minor, though not specifically by name. Graff’s idea of “field-coverage” was accomplished by a single professor, and it has affected even things I do not necessarily read from a literary perspective. While it would be great if the English Department taught a little more theory (or perhaps designed specialized courses which focused on a specific group or category of theory, applicable to assigned materials in an expansion of the methods involved with this class), I feel that a terse, clear, and simplified understanding and review is adequate for undergraduate studies. Ideally, a theory course must be mandatory for all within the English department to achieve a level of consistency following the required composition classes. However, my purpose is not to criticize Florida State.

            As an English major I find Christian’s theory to be a little disheartening in consideration of my possible career paths. In a field dominated by infinitely replaceable responses to literature, it seems that it would be difficult to become and remain relevant without doing something innovative. Even with talent one’s success is always a matter of politics and arbitrary chance. On page 72, Christian begins talking about how “philosophers are the ones who write literature,” and speeds through a half-semester of material (in terms of this class) in one paragraph. It was not possible for me to avoid doing something similar as I read the theories she references and effectually condemns.

Word Count: 302