Robert Hand
EDSE 786
Styslinger
September 21st, 2012
Say/Do:
Critical Theories
Say:
In
some ways, Appleman's articles did not mesh well with my own beliefs about
using critical theory in the classroom. Her statement that critical lenses can
provide students with new ways to read the world is true; Marxism and Feminism,
for example, can help students to see the lack of equity in society. However, the
author’s strong emphasis on teaching critical theory is perhaps unwarranted.
Using critical theories should be a component of any high school English
classroom, but doing so should not be the central focus. In "Multiple
Perspectives", she presents the idea of using multiple critical theories
in a classroom setting as an alternative to using mostly reader-response or new
criticism. However, being that the latter two theories are necessary for student
engagement and formal analysis, I would argue that other critical perspectives
should be less emphasized.
Appleman’s
approach to teaching is highly pluralistic, but she places more emphasis on consistently
exploring a range literary criticisms. There is a danger, as Milner &
Milner point out, of straying towards eclecticism, rather than pluralism; if
less time is spent adequately explaining each theory, and the purpose behind
applying each theory is not evident, instruction can become fragmented. For
this reason, I am an advocate of teaching critical theories, but only if two
conditions are met: it must take place after students engage in
reader-response, and only if knowledge of those theories is consistently
reinforced (i.e. theories are not discarded from class discourse after being
used once or twice).
Reviewing Milner & Milner was beneficial
to me. The authors’ suggestion of using “jigsaw groups” to teach how different
literary criticisms apply to individual texts is helpful. I found myself looking
for an appropriate text for such an activity, and I believe the following activity
would be useful.
Do:
For
teaching multiple critical theories, I am a fan of using the jigsaw activity to
interpret a single piece of text through several theories. Assigning different
critical theories to different groups of students, and then sharing
interpretations of a text, provides each student with a glimpse into many new
perspectives.
A
good piece of literature for this activity would be “Bartleby, The Scrivener”
by Herman Melville. The four critical theories I would have students apply to
the work are Feminist Criticism, Marxist Criticism, Biographical Criticism, and
Freudian Criticism. The following link
leads to an informative essay, detailing how rich each interpretation can be:
After briefing the class on the central focus of each
perspective, I would distribute a handout to students, offering some guiding
questions related to their assigned critical theory. I found these questions
at:
Feminist
Criticism Guiding Questions:
How is the relationship between men and women
portrayed?
What are the power relationships between men and
women (or characters assuming male/female roles)?
How are male and female roles defined?
What constitutes masculinity and femininity?
How do characters embody these traits?
Do characters take on traits from opposite genders?
How so? How does this change others’ reactions to them?
What does the work reveal about the operations
(economically, politically, socially, or psychologically) of patriarchy?
What does the work imply about the possibilities of
sisterhood as a mode of resisting patriarchy?
What does the history of the work's reception by the
public and by the critics tell us about the operation of patriarchy?
What role does the work play in terms of women's
literary history and literary tradition?
Marxist
Criticism Guiding Questions:
Whom does it benefit if the work or effort is
accepted/successful/believed, etc.?
What is the social class of the author?
Which class does the work claim to represent?
What values does it reinforce?
What values does it subvert?
What conflict can be seen between the values the
work champions and those it portrays?
What social classes do the characters represent?
How do characters from different classes interact or
conflict?
Freudian
Criticism Guiding Questions:
What connections can we make between elements of the
text and the archetypes?
How do the characters in the text mirror the
archetypal figures?
How does the text mirror the archetypal narrative
patterns?
How symbolic is the imagery in the work?
How does the protagonist reflect the hero of myth?
Does the “hero” embark on a journey in either a
physical or spiritual sense? Is there a journey to an underworld or land of the
dead?
What trials or ordeals does the protagonist face?
What is the reward for overcoming them?
Biographical
Criticism Guiding Questions:
What language/characters/events present in the work
reflect the current events of the author’s day?
Are there words in the text that have changed their
meaning from the time of the writing?
How are such events interpreted and presented?
How are events' interpretation and presentation a
product of the culture of the author?
Does the work's presentation support or condemn the
event?
Can it be seen to do both?
How does this portrayal criticize the leading
political figures or movements of the day?
How does the literary text function as part of a
continuum with other historical/cultural texts from the same period...?
How can we use a literary work to "map"
the interplay of both traditional and subversive discourses circulating in the
culture in which that work emerged and/or the cultures in which the work has
been interpreted?
How does the work consider traditionally
marginalized populations?
I agree that there is a danger in exposing students to myriad critical theories without guidance. The word you use, "fragmented," is appropriate and accurate. In my response to this reading, I advocate for modeling just a few different theories at a time without any given texts - and emphasis on the fact that these different approaches are merely different possible ways to think about texts. As we discussed in class - these critical approaches should be about broadening perspectives, not limiting them. Critical theories are useful to the extent that they help students make meaning from texts.
ReplyDeleteRegarding your "Do" - those questions are, of course, adequate, but I think you can get a lot more mileage out of such an exercise by tailoring the questions to the specific text that you're working with. I think if you don't do this, you run the risk of students misapplying a given theory to the text. Another alternative would be to teach the critical theories and then have students (after appropriate scaffolding/modeling) create questions themselves.
I very much appreciated your strong response--I can hear you thinking into the beliefs that will guide you as a teacher. I agree that reader response should be foundational to any other critical theory, and I appreciate your discussion of pluralism versus eclecticism--bu then there is your "do." Is it eclectic or pluralistic:) Full credit on both.
ReplyDeleteI have tried to bring critical theory into both of my placements this year, and while it has largely been successful, the students definitely struggled at first. For this reason, I really like your suggestion that knowledge about the theories should be built on over time. As students' depth of knowledge increases, their applications of the theories will become more complicated and nuanced. In my own experiences, students struggled the most with feminist criticism, so that might be a place where more scaffolding is warranted.
ReplyDelete