On Wednesday, we will do our final "mapping" exercise. This version will build on our progression from charting unknown territory, to developing visual representations of the topography, to placing known landmarks in relation to one another, to tracking game within that increasingly familiar landscape. Our final exercise will be a wildlife survey. To help you locate and identify indigenous species, you should bring with you anything by way of a field guide that will be helpful: notes, handouts, laptop computers (you will be permitted to use the English Bldg. wireless connection).
To help you prepare for this exercise, I want you to think back to the list of "survivors" from our first mapping exercise (you can find the list at the bottom of the sidebar). Now that you have a better sense of what the terrain includes, you are in a position to reassess the significance of those "survivors" and to evaluate their relationship to the other writers that you have encountered this semester. Think back to the texts you have found most engrossing, and reflect on the selection process that produced those "survivors." Consider, too, the challenges of natural resource management (so to speak). In an age of dwindling resources for higher education and increasing pressure to make college a sort of preprofessional training, as courses in literary history become increasingly difficult to fill, what are the texts, authors, characters, insights from this period that it remains vital to retain? What, in other words, are the endangered species of the later eighteenth century that ought to be protected and cherished? And which are the cockroaches that can be counted on to survive any future ecological catastrophe? Is the "survivors" list drawn from textbooks an accurate guide to importance and significance or are there other ways to determine what writers of the past we should nurture in the future?
Identify a candidate for the "endangered species list" (or a potential cockroach) here. Give some well-founded reasons for your choice.
Deadline: Wednesday (5/6), 10am.
8 comments:
I think that Wollstonecraft is a cockroach as is Johnson because they are perennially referred to as reflective of certain mindsets during this period. Johnson's Rambler's and his view of what literature should and should not consist of provide an interesting perspective to 18c literature. His guidelines to what literature should consist of also help readers understand other literature in order to see if it does or does not align with Johnson's view. Wollstonecraft's Vindication of the Rights of Women is extremely popular and appears in many anthologies. She writes in an almost blunt manner which makes her works and point of view clear to the reader. You don't have to wonder what Wollstonecraft's opinion is or if she is tailoring her perspective for commercial profit. What you see is what you get and in freshman one hundred level literature classes this is very appealing. Therefore, with cutbacks and what not these two authors provide concise opinions that offer a clear reflection of how a certain aspect of the 18c population thought. In contrast Boswell would be an endangered species because so much of his work focuses on Johnson. While the romps with prostitutes and theater disruptions are entertaining he doesn't seem to be as integral to understanding the 18c as The Castle of Otranto or Austen for example.
At first glance, the odd man out seems to be Thomas Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson will be taught forever, but whether or not his work continues to be taught in the English department, however, seems to depend on whether or not the New Historicist mindset of foregrounding literature with historical documents continues. This is the case with most of the list; depending on what trend (social/cultural importance vs. aesthetic) is prevalent in literary studies in the future, different works will survive or will be ignored. I agree with Lhender3 that Samuel Johnson seems to be as likely as any to survive in any environment; not only do his writings display the social values of the day, but they also provide a blueprint to the literature of the day. I personally hope that William Blake and Robert Burns survive, despite their lack of historical significance (Burns does have his vernacular style and reputation as Poet of Scotland...), if for no other reason than I enjoy their work. That said, if the present environment in the study of literature continues, with its emphasis away from the aesthetic value of literature, it is difficult to imagine that those two poets will continue to be considered worthy of study.
After reading Lhender's and gljones2's reponses, I tweaked the wording of the original post a bit. I don't want you to feel limited to the "survivors" list in your assessment of endangered species v. cockroaches. After all, our reading has veered far afield of the "survivors"!
I would have to agree with many of the already states choices. Jefferson has such historic importance that his work will be looked at for sometime to come. He is in no danger of dying out. Wollstonecraft us also an author that is going to be around for a long time. I have come across her numerous times before this class, because of the women question and she will be taught and read in the future because of it. The castle of Otranto is another work that will last. It created a genera that is still popular today. Goldsmith is a man who might be in trouble. She stoops, brings has not aged well and has no importance that his spanned the time gap.
I agree with Bozyman that CASTLE OF OTRANTO will survive in the face of a nuclear holocaust. It's that ridiculous.
Thomas Gray will also survive quite some time. Longer, I would say, than John Dyer, which is the most shameful realization I've had in this class.
I stand by Dyer's Ruins of Rome as the greatest text of the entire course, yet I fear its imminent extinction.
It's such a relevant poem. How many nations in the course of history have risen out of the ashes of another, and how many times has Thanatos caused us to repeat the same bloody mistakes of the past? Doesn't this say something about our human condition?
And what about the unsurpassed beauty in it, the steady flowing language: images of antiquated artifacts, hilly landscapes of a bygone era, proud eagles atop a symbolic empire, the charisma of an overreaching dictator...
It's just so damn awkward as a text and that's why it can't survive the arena today. Nobody wants to teach a 30 page poem. Or rather, nobody wants to learn about one.
I think the rambler will survive, as will the rest of the commentary on writing that we have read in this class. The farther we become removed from this time period the more important it will be to have time period reactions to works so that we can understand their relevance.
I think Thomas Gray will survive, but I think it will be because of his influence on the romantic period.
I am not sure about Castle. I think if it survives it will be studied for different reasons than we study it today.
Everyone seems to have touched upon what I wanted to see, but I guess I can reiterate. Johnson will no doubt be a cockroach in English literature. I've come across his Rambler so many times and I have a feeling English students will be seeing a lot of him for a long time. All of his 'how to' writings are both entertaining and insightful and are a necessary part of literary education. Wollstonecraft, as many people have mentioned, is also someone I think can survive for years to come, simply because of the topics she chose to write about (as well as their influence). Other possible survivors: Goldsmith, Cowper, Grey...they all seem to come up a lot in literature classes as well.
Endangered species? I really am not sure specifically, but I think a lot of the readings we came across are endangered, if only because I had never heard of them before this class. One example I can think of was the first reading we did of Holt Waters. As entertaining as it was, I just don't see it surviving.
I have no doubt that Otranto will survive too, if it gets in the hands of conservationists 9scholars) who like stories between the quirky and the grotesque. I want to know what will become of Tristram Shandy. As a biography, someone will probably make sure that it survives the cultural holocaust. As a ridiculously long biography, though, it may be treated like the iridescent micro-frog of Cuba: Beautiful, but too much effort to protect when other species are dying out. All the stories of Omai, by Johnson and Burney, should be preserved, as English writings about ethnic others say a great deal about the racial politics (or lack thereof) of the time. Mary Wollstonecraft will survive, because of her plain style and dry wit, but her popularity will wax and wane as society continues its love/hate relationship with feminism. I'd like to see Phyllis Wheatley's poetry survive, but that is not a given. Scholars and partisans will use her writing to reinforce their arguments about race and literacy in the present. As a result, she may become like Martin Luther King or George Washington, where her memory will be made of more myth than fact. Thomas Gray will survive. English departments fell in love with him a long time ago and will never forget him. He will be fine.
Post a Comment