Depressing Literature

[PyrosNine]

Now, I'm sure as you're all aware, that True art is Angsty. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TrueArtIsAngsty) As someone carrying the proverbial pen as a lit/writer in college, one thing I am expected to do is understand and appreciate art, my only problem is that this usually ends up with me having to read about a little girl tripping and falling into a river, bashing her head open on a rock after drowning- FROM HER PERSPECTIVE. Or a story about a rapist who rapes a little girl after hiding under her bed, narrowly gets caught but lies his way out of it, goes home where we find he has his own little girl, whom he then rapes. Or story about divorced man who gets a drunken call from a girl who likely wasn't serious about it calling him over at the 3:00 am, and so he pulls his son out of bed and puts him in the car, and decides to drive across state in search of some poon. The kicker is that once he thinks his son is asleep, he starts falling asleep himself, and decides that not only is rest and giving up on his quest not an option, but the only thing to do is to masturbate to keep himself awake. The very last line of the poem makes it explicitly clear that his son was very much awake.

And at the end of the day, my teacher will ask us how we feel about what we just read. He has caught on to their somewhat morbid, soul crushing nature at this point so he is very careful not to invite a question whose only answer is "How do you think I feel after reading that? I'm depressed/scared/shattered as hell, you fat *expletive known only to English majors*!?!!?"

I mean, I can take the usual levels of atrocity in what I read, I know of the good catharsis inherent in tragedy that will realign me with 'real' world, I know that there are real stories in life that are more tragic than this shit being dished out to me for a grade, but also that these authors were depressed as hell when they wrote most of this stuff.

The fact that many of these stories go explicitly to say: "Life is pointless, there is no reason to put forth any hope or dream at all in anything, you deluded fool! Everything you know is wrong, everyone you love will die, and at the end of things, you will die in the worst, possible way but that's the only positive outlook because life is like broken needles in your eyes full of the aids and sulfuric acid."

And I have to wonder then, why did you have to write this anyway? If it's all so pointless, then there was no point in you even writing this! There was a point maybe, if this was to grapple with your own dark looming thoughts, those unsavory weights dragging your feet down, riding your legs like children, but then you had to go and write a sequel with different subject matter, but same purpose and ultimate theme: Go shoot yourself!

And it's not that the lack of angst does not mean art has no merit. There is nothing tragic about the Mona Lisa, is there? The student written story about the vengeful ex-magician with the innuendo laced parlor tricks was just as well written as My Last Duchess, detail, character, setting! It seems that people will use the angst, the depressing, the tragic as just something to give their story an extra edge. It is fitting that while on his quest, he should be shot, dragged, burned, cursed, but fashionable for him to arrive at the end of the quest with everyone he's loved forever removed from him and his shaggy dog shot (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShootTheShaggyDog) in the face!

My main complaint is that us English majors have it rough enough already. Stuck in the back corner of an engineering school, we got the least of the scholarships, and the good idea that our diploma will be worth less than the paper it was printed on. Or that part of the reason we're writers is that we're alienated as hell already, and write to put down transient thoughts to permanence, or maybe it's just that I've got a nephew in the wings my sister can't afford, I think my dog's sick, and I've had like two deaths in the family, and I spend my watching silly movies and playing stupid webgames rather than deal with the fact I have school in the morning and that it will likely meet me like a fist, a claw, or a dull mace that I have worn down slowly with face.

And then I have to go to class and read someone else's manifesto on why they have no faith in the human race! It's too much! If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face— forever, and it's the boot of an acclaimed author.

Questions? Comments?

[Satan's Onion]

Are you allowed to reveal that "expletive known only to English majors" to us mortals, or do we have to guess what it is?

On the bright side, when you're a writer, maybe you can have your pointlessly soul-crushing nihilistic stories and poems placed on college curricula. See, if you can't solve the problem, you can at least pass it on to the next generation of hapless students.

[Amake]

I'll tell you a secret only few people know: Great art doesn't have to be angsty. You'll see a lot more strong tragedies than memorable comedies, in any genre, but that's not because tragedies are inherently more powerful stories. It's because it's easier to make a deep, impacting story if you have bad things happening in it. It's easier to make an interesting drawing with dark colors. Metallica made their career on songs with negative subject matter because, I'm quoting an interview here, it's much harder to write meaningfully on uplifting topics.

So I suggest you do that. Write something that cuts to the heart of the reader without using any sharp edges. Show them how it's done.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

On the question of "If life is pointless why do you write" I've always fond of the treatise that Camus last work addressed the profound truth he found in tobacco induced release and how it answered the inherent contradictions in his own work but then he thought "Fuck it" and smoked it. Then he murdered some people and said the tobacco did it. Cause that how he rolled.
But you know, there are plenty of great bits of literature that aren't inherentely depressing/alienating- that's really the domain of the modernists. Surely you could just do different papers and avoid those authors. They are immensely important to literature but nothing says arts degree like specialising in something ridiculously unimportant. My flatmate is an English pHD and his field is 18th century epistolary novels- nothing depressing about lots of them.

[BloodyMage]

Are you allowed to reveal that "expletive known only to English majors" to us mortals, or do we have to guess what it is?

What about those of us who do English Majors? Can you tell us because I can't think of one that the plebs wouldn't know?

My flatmate is an English pHD and his field is 18th century epistolary novels- nothing depressing about lots of them.

1748. Clarissa, or, the History of a Young Woman published by Samuel Richardson. A young virtuous woman is drugged, raped and kept prisoner by a man attempting to trick her into marrying him. While yes, some of them aren't depressing, the likely hood is that you'll have to have to study the darker ones to get to the more pleasant ones.

Part of an English Major though is really the exploration of literature and trying to figure out why the author wrote what he wrote and what exactly he was trying to say. This is why you'll see so many different fields of literary criticism ranging from historic critics to psychoanalytical criticism. I mean, I'm not familiar with what books you're talking about but if you look at some of the authors and what was happening in their lives, such as (for lack of a better example) Jack Kerouac's On The Road. It's so closely autobiographical that you can pretty much place the whole book into his life but the names are changed. The whole book isn't that dark, certainly not as much as the books you've mentioned, but it's depressing because the character mentions that he's just lost his father, he's split from his wife and he's recovering from an illness and by the end of the book, nothing has really changed. He's traversed America but nothing really changed, he's not much of a better person because of it, and if you look into the context of the author you see that he's writing this after his father has died, and his separated from his wife and he's recovered from an illness and travelled back and forth across America, so you can see why he's written this novel. Nothing changes in the novel because the writer feels that nothing has changed. And that's how it happens sometimes. You've got a writer who feels pretty depressed and down, but he's a writer and he wants to write, so he writes, but what he's feeling comes out in his writing and you even up with depressed literature.

I mean, Smarty does have a point though. Some genre's are less prone to it, so you could do 18th C epistolary novels and you might have to study some depressing stories like the one mentioned about but it's going to be less prominent in that than it might be in Gothic literature or post-war literature. Do you have the option of choosing your modules each year?

[Shyria Dracnoir]

There's a quote floating around out in the net attributed to any number of actors/writers/creative types that goes "Dying is easy; comedy is hard". It goes back to what Invisible Queen was talking about. Any wannabe English major or vanity press hack can play the angst card, because I think there's a lot more things out there in the world that can evoke a universally negative reaction rather than a positive one.
However, this only serves as a further testament to the skill of the authors who manage to be able to work without it. Look at Terry Pratchett's Discworld series for one; sure, there's some cynical bits and characters here and there, but if you look at the actual plots, more often than not good wins out, and people get their happy endings. TvTropes describes it as "An idealistic world populated by cynics." And it still manages to be one of the most popular fantasy literature series in the world. Look at the Three Stooges for that matter; 60 years later most of their stuff is still attracting fans. Now that is an achievement.

[Funka Genocide]

Much of what you're describing just sounds like lazy, let me get my name out there writing. I agree with what most everyone else has said, that overt tragedy is just easier to get a reaction out of. Its kind of like the Jackass of literature.

If you don't like it, then don't write it. I never understood the purpose of a degree in literature anyways, all you need to be able to write is a working knowledge of the language in which you wish to create. I guess if you've got nothing better to do.

Although if I had to write a reaction to that dad jerking off in the car thing, I'd probably say something like "Revulsed, by both the subject matter and the hamfisted writing tactic the author has used to garner an artificial emotional response."

[Professor Smarmiarty]

1748. Clarissa, or, the History of a Young Woman published by Samuel Richardson. A young virtuous woman is drugged, raped and kept prisoner by a man attempting to trick her into marrying him. While yes, some of them aren't depressing, the likely hood is that you'll have to have to study the darker ones to get to the more pleasant ones.
Yes but there is a difference between outlining terrible events and incorporating them into a encompassing literary theory- it's the difference between "Here is a rape" and "WE ARE ALL RAPISTS".

Part of an English Major though is really the exploration of literature and trying to figure out why the author wrote what he wrote and what exactly he was trying to say. This is why you'll see so many different fields of literary criticism ranging from historic critics to psychoanalytical criticism. I mean, I'm not familiar with what books you're talking about but if you look at some of the authors and what was happening in their lives, such as (for lack of a better example) Jack Kerouac's On The Road. It's so closely autobiographical that you can pretty much place the whole book into his life but the names are changed. The whole book isn't that dark, certainly not as much as the books you've mentioned, but it's depressing because the character mentions that he's just lost his father, he's split from his wife and he's recovering from an illness and by the end of the book, nothing has really changed. He's traversed America but nothing really changed, he's not much of a better person because of it, and if you look into the context of the author you see that he's writing this after his father has died, and his separated from his wife and he's recovered from an illness and travelled back and forth across America, so you can see why he's written this novel. Nothing changes in the novel because the writer feels that nothing has changed. And that's how it happens sometimes. You've got a writer who feels pretty depressed and down, but he's a writer and he wants to write, so he writes, but what he's feeling comes out in his writing and you even up with depressed literature.
This is all irrelevant if you are a new critic *titter titter*
Man I hate new criticism. It is especially great because I only encounter literary theory as it crossects with historical analysis of sources so we get new critic historians. Most self-defeating field ever.

[Funka Genocide]

I like how you mentioned "for lack of a better example." You are such a Kerouac hater Barrelpants.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I didn't even write that!
My hate is so strong it infects others!

[Funka Genocide]

Strangely enough this thread has put the bug in my head to maybe have a go at horrible tragic fiction and maybe see if it gets published.

I'm sure I can boil something suitably offensive up.

[BloodyMage]

Yes but there is a difference between outlining terrible events and incorporating them into a encompassing literary theory- it's the difference between "Here is a rape" and "WE ARE ALL RAPISTS".

Maybe we are all rapists. Our desire to invade and colonise foreign lands is part of our desire to penetrate that which does not belong to us. Illegal downloading and piracy is our inherent need to steal pleasure that has been forbidden to us. In some sense, aren't we all raping something?*

This is all irrelevant if you are a new critic *titter titter*
Man I hate new criticism. It is especially great because I only encounter literary theory as it crossects with historical analysis of sources so we get new critic historians. Most self-defeating field ever.

I'd like to see a New Critic actually try and analyse On the Road though because there's two versions. The published one and the scroll version, the latter of which doesn't use the pseudonyms but the real names, including Kerouac's own, so ignoring what the author says means practically disregarding the entire text itself.

*Just to be clear, I am not being serious.

[Funka Genocide]

The title of my next novel shall be We Are All Rapists.

No, you will not receive any credit for the idea.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Maybe we are all rapists. Our desire to invade and colonise foreign lands is part of our desire to penetrate that which does not belong to us. Illegal downloading and piracy is our inherent need to steal pleasure that has been forbidden to us. In some sense, aren't we all raping something?*

I'm not arguing that it's not the case- but you don't always have to read about it. Also I saw you raping like 6 chicks last night


I'd like to see a New Critic actually try and analyse On the Road though because there's two versions. The published one and the scroll version, the latter of which doesn't use the pseudonyms but the real names, including Kerouac's own, so ignoring what the author says means practically disregarding the entire text itself.

*Just to be clear, I am not being serious.
That is merely an attempt by the authour to regain control of his lost work- it is an artefact of a creative process completely removed from the original creative process and thus fundamentally cannot be considered relevant. I could take say Dorian Grey and change all the names to me and my friends but that wouldn't mean I was a flaming homosexual.

[Funka Genocide]

I could take say Dorian Grey and change all the names to me and my friends but that wouldn't mean I was a flaming homosexual.

All that mansex you had in college would though.

ZING!

(sorry, best I could come up with on such short notice.)

[BloodyMage]

I'm not arguing that it's not the case- but you don't always have to read about it. Also I saw you raping like 6 chicks last night

You don't always have to watch it either, but apparently you did last night. Perhaps your voyeuristic pursuits are just your fear of social exile overriding your latent desires to take part in rape?

The same might actually be said for why there is such a large market of depressing works and such little backlash against it.

That is merely an attempt by the authour to regain control of his lost work- it is an artefact of a creative process completely removed from the original creative process and thus fundamentally cannot be considered relevant. I could take say Dorian Grey and change all the names to me and my friends but that wouldn't mean I was a flaming homosexual.

It wouldn't, no, but a New Critic would have no way of knowing. They might see your name in place of the characters and would have to assume that you at least had some underlying homoerotic tendencies, whereas a historian critic would look across the patterns of your life and take note any effects that might have inspired a homoerotic novel. It's part of the reason that On the Road is described as a fictional biography. To go against the experiences of the author is to go against what the novel is about.

[Meister]

Are you allowed to reveal that "expletive known only to English majors" to us mortals, or do we have to guess what it is?
The spirits of Shakespeare and Chaucer will smite anyone who reveals one of the secrets of the trade.

[Funka Genocide]

The spirits of Shakespeare and Chaucer will smite anyone who reveals one of the secrets of the trade.

It's "poppycock".

[Green Spanner]

The title of my next novel shall be We Are All Rapists.

No, you will not receive any credit for the idea.

Except if I write it as a children's book first!

All I need is an artist with an exceptionally open mind...

[Ecks]

Maybe we are all rapists. Our desire to invade and colonise foreign lands is part of our desire to penetrate that which does not belong to us. Illegal downloading and piracy is our inherent need to steal pleasure that has been forbidden to us. In some sense, aren't we all raping something?*

*Just to be clear, I am not being serious.

Why the hell not? You raise a good point.

[phil_]

All I need is an artist with an exceptionally open mind...Are you ok with crayon drawings and characters just barely removed from stickfigures? 'Cause, if you get me a manuscript, I'm just saying...

[BloodyMage]

Just a precautionary in the case that anyone decided to take action based upon my good point. Figurative rape is fine and dandy, but I'd rather not be the driving force behind anyone's descent into physical rape.

[PyrosNine]

Good point all, but I'm mostly talking about why I have to study that stuff more than say, Terry Pratchett.

As for the expletive, Meister has explained why I can never tell you. Just like I can't tell you what REALLY happened to TS Eliot.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Good point all, but I'm mostly talking about why I have to study that stuff more than say, Terry Pratchett.

As for the expletive, Meister has explained why I can never tell you. Just like I can't tell you what REALLY happened to TS Eliot.

You mean he WASN'T called back to his home planet by his compatriots to serve against the galatic invaders?

[synkr0nized]

As for the expletive, Meister has explained why I can never tell you.


Don't be silly. It's just <expletive deleted>.

[Lyaer]

I do love me some senselessly depressing sensationalist literature, but I couldn't say why they're making you read it. None of the writing/Englishy type classes I've taken really went off the dark end, but they were all pretty introductory, so maybe they thought we couldn't comprehend the literary depth of all that raping, yet.

Is it all like that? Or is it more of a mixed bag of stories, where you're just noticing the angsty ones because they stick out like a sore thumb + now you're looking for them, 'cause sometimes that happens, too.

One of my writing teachers suggested that short stories might lend themselves to more abrupt, tragic conclusions, just because of their length. Less time for denouement + less time to become fully invested in the characters, expect things to work out okay.

Regarding the trope, I think a big part of it is backlash against the opposite dynamic, where you have an inordinate number of whitewashed, sentimental, good guys win with the power of friendship type stories that often times really aren't all that honest. These types of stories are inoffensive and pander to wish fulfillment of the "average person," so they are safe to publish/produce. Plus they are unlikely to traumatize children, so most of us grow up on them. In some cases you even have people that will outright dismiss a story that deviates from the expected happy-ending formula.

So then the first instinct of anyone who develops a shred of disillusionment over anything, ever is going to be that this stuff is tripe and real writers should have the testicles to tell the real truth about how everyone's really a secret rapist, or what have you. Though I would personally expect a more nuanced view from the academic sector.

I think it shows integrity when a writer is willing to say things that other people don't want to hear. And there are plenty of horrific things about human character and societies that fall under that category. But some of the things people want to hear are just as true, and if you neglect them, you're still presenting a skewed view of reality. It's easy to take this reasoning and go "oh, then stories should be bittersweet." No. They should be honest.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

You don't always have to watch it either, but apparently you did last night. Perhaps your voyeuristic pursuits are just your fear of social exile overriding your latent desires to take part in rape?
We all know where my tastes lie. You don't need to beat around the book.


It wouldn't, no, but a New Critic would have no way of knowing. They might see your name in place of the characters and would have to assume that you at least had some underlying homoerotic tendencies, whereas a historian critic would look across the patterns of your life and take note any effects that might have inspired a homoerotic novel. It's part of the reason that On the Road is described as a fictional biography.

The New critic wouldn't say it had anythign to do with me or my own tendencies- the text is indepedent of that and any interpretations that draw on such things are biased by attempts to reconstruct a foreign viewpoint which is not the viewpoint considering the text.
The historian critic would look at the biography, alongside other texts also produced at the same point as well as the fact that we are interpreting the text differentely than when it was written- basically some of the new criticism without all the shit.

[QUOTE]
To go against the experiences of the author is to go against what the novel is about.
The new critic would argue that the text doesn't exist like that- as readers we are inexplicably seperated from the authors original thought- indeed even the author was, he cannot accurately translate his feelings into felicitous text that holds up to examination from anyone, even himself.
But yeah there is a reason New Criticism didn't live beyond the 50s.

Good point all, but I'm mostly talking about why I have to study that stuff more than say, Terry Pratchett.

That's probably because there is not a lot (any?) critical theory examining Pratchett. And the fantasy genre is usually regarded among academia as poor gothicism.



As for depressing literature I recommend Chekov who while depressing is also funny as the blazes- he mixes the two in a way very reminisicient of real life.

[katiuska]

Man, new criticism/death of the author is one of things that turned me off ever being an English major. One of my HS teachers thought that way, and I disagreed entirely; I think the best way to understand and critique a work is to consider what the creator was trying to do. In fairness, I think his position was less that all the elements influencing the author aren't important as much as we aren't in a position to say what s/he was thinking at the time (even if s/he so much as tells us, because such statements may not be reliable), so we have to take the work as is. That's slightly more reasonable, but I still think it's possible to look at a work in context and get a sense of where the creator is coming from. I can't imagine him reading some of the stuff I turned in without thinking it might say something about me, and he would have been right.

(Preaching to the choir, I guess, but I needed to get that out.)

[Professor Smarmiarty]

There quite a large difference between New Criticism and Death of Authour. New criticism stresses that there is a "correct" reading of a text whereas death of the authour says that there is not- reading the text is subjectively depedent on the readers own dialogue.
While New Criticism is fairly ridiculous, death of the authour- while extreme- asks many very important questions which need to be considered in the analysis of a text. To ignore the context of the reader is as ridiculous as to ignore the context of the authour.

[katiuska]

Yeah, personally I wouldn't say there's a "correct" reading; there's plenty of things that the author may not realize or didn't consider, but I do think that their interpretation carries some weight, since they wrote the damn thing.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

The problem with this- though- is that authours are very much limited to the thought processes of their time even if they don't conciously understand it to be so. Which is the same with readers. Death of the authour is not about depowering the author, it is about the subjectivity of the reader- there may be a true reading of the text and it may be the authour's intention- the reader can never read it though.
This is the central problem of historical linguistics in that we're trying to recreate/relive the past but how do we do that from sources when we are infinetely removed from the mindset of the text authours.

[katiuska]

Right, and when that's the argument being made, I don't have much of a problem. All I'm saying is if I want to interpret A Dream Deferred as being about my desire to open a pizza parlour, I can do that, but I'd be remiss to ignore the input of everyone else, including Langston Hughes.

I think we're more or less on the same page here. You just seem to like counterarguing people who are essentially making the same points. :p

[BloodyMage]

I think he's just clarifying.

My only real problem with the Death of the Author is that it allows someone to ignore word of god so to speak in favour of their own opinion. For instance, Toiken's Lord of the Rings which has the well known interpretation of being a Second World War allegory despite the author repeatedly denying the idea. Yet some people stick to that interpretation and ignore the authors opinion, which just seems really stupid.

[Mondt]

My english curriculum:

One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich - About the shitty daily life of a prisoner in a russian gulag
Langston Hughes Peotry - Often about the struggle of normal life, struggle of being black, struggle of etc. etc.
Antigone - Guy dies, sister wants to mourn, Creon says go fuck yourself, everyone dies in the end. Sophoclean (?) tragedy
Their Eyes Were Watching God - A book about a black woman in... the 20s? finding herself, going through one shitty marriage to another until she realizes she is actually in love with a nice but trashy farm worker.
Othello - Shakespearean tragedy.
The Great Gatsby - Cheating, pathetically unrequited love, death
Ake: The Years of Childhood - A light-hearted and funny approach to the awkward and sometimes shitty experiences the author had growing up
The Sound of Waves - Book about awkward japanese teenagers' sexual awakening. It was a nice break from the depressing. The author was a badass. Sepukku after holding a military general hostage in the military base, had his own little mini-following cult army thing, etc. etc.
The Metamorphosis - Gregor turns into a bug. Everyone hates him now. He dies from a rotting apple in his back that his dad threw at him.

That was junior year.

100 Years of Solitude - A bunch of family members repeat the same strange mistakes, it rained for 5 years straight, incest resulted in pig tails, etc. etc. weird as shit book but really good i would recommend it.
Hamlet - Shakespearean tragedy.
Heart of Darkness - If you haven't read it, look at the title. This is not a feelgood book. This is the most cutyourwrists book we have read easily. It's stupid as shit to read (especially the edition i used), fairly boring, and just generally bleeeeegh. I mean, thank you IB, I know racism is bad. I know atrocities occurred in africa. Why are you doing this to me?
John Donne Poetry - metaphysical movement, heavy emphasis on death and what happens after death.
Huck Finn - Kind of a fun one but still kinda bleak whenever you think about Jim's perspective.

Two books to go.

Half the shit we read has a major emphasis on racism.

Hooray IB. Hooray worldliness. Go fuck yourself, world.

[Geminex]

Hooray IB.

I didn't mind the literature that much. The essays and assessments (particularly the extremely extended one) were what drove me into a BLINDING RAGE.

Nah, IB was good. Teachers were competent, classes were fun more often than not. And assessments went well, though I lost a night's worth of sleep every time one was due.

Also, I didn't mind One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. Wrote my World Lit essay about it. And the purpose of Antigone was actually to cheer people up through Catharsis.

[PyrosNine]

Too much catharsis is too much catharsis!

[Mondt]

I didn't mind the literature that much. The essays and assessments (particularly the extremely extended one) were what drove me into a BLINDING RAGE.

Nah, IB was good. Teachers were competent, classes were fun more often than not. And assessments went well, though I lost a night's worth of sleep every time one was due.

Also, I didn't mind One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. Wrote my World Lit essay about it. And the purpose of Antigone was actually to cheer people up through Catharsis.I'm not a diploma candidate so I don't have an extended essay to write but I just finished up my World Lit 2 and my Individual Oral Commentary.

Wrote my WL1 on One Day and Metamorphosis.

And I agree, too much catharsis is too much. I definitely left Antigone in some accidental attempt to empathize with Creon after he realized he just killed everyone in some way or another.

There's no cheering up in that. <.<

Edit: My thing with IB english is all the of retarded assessments (The IOC actually tests.... nothing except your ability to analyze under pressure because that situation comes up a lot), the emphasis on works in translation just to have works in translation... a few other things its too late for me to remember.

I just really dont like how IB does things. They sacrifice actual productivity in education to standardize the curriculum as much as possible, in my experience. It's all just another test to study for, instead of actually learning.

Edit2: AND THEY MAKE US READ DEPRESSING BOOKS

WHERES THE SHAKESPEAREAN COMEDIES

[01d55]

I think he's just clarifying.

My only real problem with the Death of the Author is that it allows someone to ignore word of god so to speak in favour of their own opinion. For instance, Toiken's Lord of the Rings which has the well known interpretation of being a Second World War allegory despite the author repeatedly denying the idea. Yet some people stick to that interpretation and ignore the authors opinion, which just seems really stupid.

Well yeah, everyone knows it's a World War I allegory.

That's the war Tolkein actually fought in, after all. Specifically, the way Orcs tear up the landscape comes from No Man's Land, the long belt of Europe that was torn up into a swathe of mud and corpses.

More to the general point, a bullshit reading of a work is bullshit independent of any reference to the author's mind.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I think he's just clarifying.

My only real problem with the Death of the Author is that it allows someone to ignore word of god so to speak in favour of their own opinion. For instance, Toiken's Lord of the Rings which has the well known interpretation of being a Second World War allegory despite the author repeatedly denying the idea. Yet some people stick to that interpretation and ignore the authors opinion, which just seems really stupid.

Dumbeldore is gay.

[katiuska]

100 Years of Solitude

In retrospect, we really shouldn't have read that book without any sort of guidance. In my HS class, it was independent reading, and those of us reading it did so because it was the most challenging book offered... but when you're 17 and have no context for the themes being presented, it's all dudes being tied to trees, dudes wanting to marry 8-year-olds, and girls eating dirt when they're distressed, and all we could ever discuss was, "So, does anyone else understand what the fuck is going on?"

[Azisien]

Dumbeldore is gay.

Ah yes, the well-known Random Ass Trivia literary device.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I always saw it as the Cause a Media Storm Sell More Books device, as patented by Salman Rushdie and Martin Amis.

[Eltargrim]

WHERES THE SHAKESPEAREAN COMEDIES

My year had The Tempest and A Midsummer's Night Dream. It does have something to do with your teacer's choices, iirc.

Also, the EE wasn't too bad. Did mine on chemistry, and got to design my own experiment. That was pretty fun :D