Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 10:09:25 +0200
From: Isaac Benabu <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Fwd: José Antonio Madrigal to Frank
 Domínguez : Re: Literatura y los
 programas académicos
To: "A. Robert Lauer" <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]

Tony: I agree with the flow of your thoughts about the changes that have taken place in our chosen field of study , yet when you express relief at the idea of retirement from the aridness (my word) which has come to characterize the teaching of literature, I wish to disagree with you, and say that the responsibility for what has happened during our term of academic service is ours and, consequently, it is up to us to pass on our understanding of what happened to the next generation. Whatever it was that turned the study of literature into something "other" is still within our memorial reach: for those entering the profession today it is a past to be recovered.

Two values (however unfashionable!) which the creation of great literature and the teaching of the humanities  have in common are clarity of thought and precision in written expression: they both strive to communicate. Together with the "author", these values have gone out of the window. Instead, they have been replaced by jargon (which undoubtedly conceals thought), and by approximation rather than precision when it comes to meaning. It is our generation that saw a non-sense article (so described by its imaginative author) submitted to a pretigious literary review, passed by two readers and published. And we may have even enjoyed that author's subsequent confession in Time magazine that what he had submitted was "macaronic" non-sense.Â

If we, who stimulated the growth of that jargon,  proved incapable of explaining in major conferences such as the MLA why we had to resort to jargon rather than clear, scientific prose, what can we expect from the students we educated? Those very Ph.d.'s applying for jobs today to whom you refer and whom, you say, display an ignorance of the very texts which make up the subject they purportedly have applied to teach, grew up in classrooms where thinking was abandoned in favour of ideological posturing, and where repetition was more important than the formulation of original thinking. The fashionable industry of the study of literaure took over from the more modest explication of literature. A lack of self-confidence in what we were doing, don't you think?Â

Late it may be, but never too late! That is why in our retirement, we may address these issues for the next generation rather than having them discover them for themselves.

Finally, I apologize if I have repeated ideas already expressed by others before me, without attribution, but I have just keyed into this discussion this morning.Â

An inflamatory afterthought on re-reading your piece: Your "Golden Age" breaks down into the study of literature (i.e. prose, and includes written poetry), oral literature and theatre. Theatre is distinguishable from literature , as Aristotle cared to point out early on, yet for the most part, we continue to approach it as literature, with tools devised for the analysis of literature. And even when we show willingness to refer to "performance", it may be because the word has been given a new coinage in contemporary scholarly jargon: traditionally (primarily, perhaps) the word was applied to theatre and theatrical representations, when it was not used in the more general sense of "to do, carry out".

But that is a matter for another discussion...Â

Isaac  Â

Professor I. Benabu,
Dept. of Theatre Studies,
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem,
Mt. Scopus,
Jerusalem
Tel.:(+972-2)5883940
------
WebMail: [log in to unmask]

On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 20:17:00 -0500, A. Robert Lauer wrote
>
>

Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 23:36:18 -0500
> From: "J. A. Madrigal" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Fwd: Frank Domínguez: Re: Literatura
>   y los programas  académicos
> To: "A. Robert Lauer" <[log in to unmask]>
>
> My two cents...Frank is right (hi Frank) except when he blames the
> administration. It is our fault, and only our fault, because we forgot
> that we went into this profession to study literature, not philosophy,
> political theory and other disciplines that should complement what we do
> and not become our core.
> When we interview the future scholars of our profession, and specially
> from the better PHD programs, it is embarrassing how little literature they
> know. In most occasion, I find myself talking to them about works they
> don't know in their own field. Incredible that someone in Golden Age
> sometimes is better read than they are in their own fields. But Frank,
> you are right, only three fields exist today: Spanish American Prose,
> Contemporary Peninsular literature and Linguistics. The rest is old and
> boring.
> Also, the only individual in my Department who teaches Theory beginning
> with Plato is me...Anything before the Contemporary period is as
> dead...
> Retirement from this profession is a welcome change!!!
> Tony
>
> ***********************************************
>  J. A. Madrigal
> Castanoli Professor
> Dpt. of Foreign Languages
> and Literatures
> Auburn University, AL 36849-5204
> Fax: 334-844-6378
> Phone: 334-844-5183
> ***********************************************

Prof. A. Robert Lauer
The University of Oklahoma
Dept. of Modern Langs.,  Lits., & Ling.
780 Van Vleet Oval, Kaufman Hall, Room 206
Norman, Oklahoma 73019-2032, USA
Tel.: 405-325-5845 (office); 405/325-6181 (OU dept.); Fax: 1-866-602-2679 (private)
Vision: Harmonious collaboration in an international world.
Mission: "Visualize clearly and communicate promptly"
VITA / IBÉRICA / AITENSO / BCom / AHCT / MLA / Coloquio Cervantes / Coloquio Teatro de los Siglos de Oro