[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by evollove

A bad teacher might. Otherwise, a total lie.

the problem is that in any kind of literature "program" there will be

a) more bad teachers than good teachers

b) an aberrant emphasis on "critical theory" (or whatever fashionable name it goes by these days) over source materials.

c) more forced mandatory readings than voluntary readings. think compulsory sex with random persons. think having to listen to the complete creed discography, over and over, because it is of interest to some regional or historical culture or (worse even) some "critical" perspective.

i've had great teachers both at the BA and MA level and even on my PhD studies, but i ended up dropping out due to the market pressures from the MLA and the conference circuit which have nothing to do with "literature".

performance in that market (and its attending falsities) is the main determinant in an academic career of the literary variety. sort of like being a musician who only gets to be judged by their pitchfork score-- no, worse-- think NME or rolling stone.

in fact, most of the creatures who make a living in that market operate under the influence of the wanker frederic jameson when he claimed that "literature doesn't exist." the judges and arbiters of those markets demand that you write sociological papers & other wankery topics on wank.

so i quit the farce. after that, i stopped reading for 2 years and immersed myself in movies. quite therapeutic.

i'm enjoying books again, but my claim that formal courses of study at a university level are loaded with the potential to fuck you up still stand. sure, my statement made an absolute claim, but it was a quick one-liner, not a meditation on the subject. still, the kernel of my argument is valid to a great extent--from my perspective anyway. could i have a different one?

the problem with the formal study of literature as it is carried out today is that it requires that you practice a form of pseudo-sientific, pseudo-philosophical thinking that has very little or nothing to do with "art", and which has also very little to do with the random fortune or misfortune of running into individual "good" or "bad" teachers.

the fundamental problem of literary academia is the dysfunctional social system in which the study and teaching of literature occur. it is a profession that most blatantly rejects its own subject matter and immolates it in the satanic altar of career advancement, with the sacrificial dagger of whatever fashionable "theory" is in vogue at the moment.

sure, great critics always increase your love of art, but have you counted how many great critics are out there, publishing in the current journals? forewarned is forearmed...

and then there's the whole problem of compulsory readings, which i've listed but not discussed... i'll leave that one for another time.