The Race for Theory
Katey Mccauley
I agree with Christian’s attitudes towards theory in her essay “The Race for Theory”. Throughout the semester I felt as though most of the theorists were concerned with what other theorists had claimed and argued for; the value of the literature itself was not as important as how other intellectuals received it. In her opening, she claimed that theory had been changed, that it no longer focused on literature and “they have changed literary critical language to suit their own purposes and philosophers and reinvented the meaning of theory”. I thought that this is an accurate description of a lot of the pieces we read throughout the semester. Several of the articles we read, at least to me, came across as philosophy that was all together disinterested in the literature it was “critiquing”. Another line from her essay that illustrated one of the major issues I have had with many of the theorists we encountered throughout the semester was that they have “displaced the writer and conceived him or herself as the center”. This is a huge issue; that the people who are supposed to be offering commentary of literature have done away with authors. She states “philosophers are the ones writing literature; that authors are dead” which to me is one of the biggest issues I have had throughout the course of the semester. For me, value of literature lies in the emotions it instills in me, from what I am able to take away from a book. Like she states, “Literature is not an occasion for discourse among critics”, the value should not lie in what certain scholars deem appropriate. Theory is an important component to literature. I feel, however, that a lot of it is not preoccupied with the pieces it is addressing, but with making a statement which will gain the author of the theory renown.
Daniela Aguilar
I also agree with Barbara Christian’s argument in her essay “The Race for Theory.” I especially agree with her argument that minorities are underrepresented and misrepresented when it comes to the literary criticism canon. The literary criticism that is considered authoritative in the community comes from a western perspective that ignores the “worlds they had … controlled” thus people of color and other minorities interested in literary criticism are left with a plethora of philosophies and theories that allows them to know them (westerners), instead of learning how to get to know themselves (P.O.Cs and/or other minorities).
Attempts like the Black Arts Movements instead of creating its own philosophy that properly included the diversity within the community; it became as oppressive as its predecessor because it tried to imitate it. The problem laid in the fact that in their attempt to become liberated from the oppressors, they became prescriptive thus dictating the “right way to be black.” Christian calls this a tendency towards the “monolithic.” This means that there is a wish to make “the world less complex by organizing it according to one principle, to fix it through an idea which is really an ideal,” meaning that it ignores the multifaceted diversity of race groups such as the African-American community. Same thing applies to the feminist theory that is considered authoritative (namely French Theory) which often fails to be intersectionalist.
However, just because these movements failed at considering diversity, there is still a need for examination and creation of texts by people of color. As Christian says, close study of these texts allows for the discovery of complexity and allows people of color to pursue themselves as subjects no less than the dominant group. There of course is still the danger of oversimplification when attempting to create a sole “black feminist theory.”
nicole...@gmail.com
I think Barbara Christian makes an interesting point that I have considered throughout the entire duration of this course. Many of the critiques we have read so far have came off as forced, as if these theorists were working almost too hard to make their idea or theory makes sense and sound esteemed in the literary world. In reality, they weren’t always able to make this work, such as Jonathon Culler’s “Structuralism and Literature.” Christian suggests that instead of having a definite theory for every field of literature possible to dictate the way we read, such as how one should read black feminist literary works, that there should various ways in which someone can approach a certain genre or category of literature. It is true for most aspects of life that there is not one correct way to do something and I think that especially holds true in literature. I think it would be nearly impossible to have everyone in the world read a piece of literature in the same exact way, using an particular template or guideline to regulate what one should think about while reading. Instead, critics should feed off of the different and various ways in which a piece of literature can be looked at and work to understand the similarities or differences hidden between all of these interpretations. Christian makes the claim that, “…our work is a collective endeavor” (69) and I think the study of literature should be practiced with that mentality. In the same manner that people all have different religions, ethnicities, and beliefs while co-existing in a workplace, classroom, etc., I think critics with different opinions and theories can still work together and share their ideas to make even stronger and more detailed theories about different areas of literature. For one person to come up with a theory and regard it as correct, logical, and authoritative on that subject is unreasonable and even foolish; there needs to be feedback and additional criticisms from other minds to create an understandable and workable theory.
Andrew Reynolds
Post #5 from Christina Behan (who got locked out of her acct)
Barbara Christian points out in her piece “The Race for Theory” an argument I have thought of since taking a class in theory. She states that multiple theories are written about that same thing, but simply named something different. Christian goes on to further say that the most influential theorist get the title of creating the theory that in essence was already in existence. She also brings the point up that I agree with strongly. That is that theory takes away from the reading and in many cases seems pushed onto the work. Christian says she was appalled to hear that authors are dead and that it is the philosophers that write literature. “As a student of literature, I am appalled by the sheer ugliness of the language, its lack of clarity, its unnecessarily complicated sentence construction, its lack of pleasureableness, its alienating quality”. This sentence is exactly what I think when I read theory. It takes the enjoyment out of literature and makes it a math problem rather than a piece of art. My experience with theory has helped me to write more logical papers but doesn’t allow for any creativity or personal insight into the work of literature. Literature is subjective and interoperated based on the reader’s experience when reading the work. Theory takes the personal experience our and complicated the language into something frustrating and ugly. I fully agree with Christian with that part of her essay and believe she would agree with the piece we read in the beginning of the semester by Mark Twain entitled “Two Views of the River”. The uneducated observer takes the beauty of the river for what it is, a special part of nature. The educated breaks it apart until it become unpleasureable to watch the water flow. This is much the same as Christian’s sentence about theory making literature complicated and not enjoyable.
