Clica una miniatura per anar a Google Books.
S'està carregant… Literature Lost: Social Agendas and the Corruption of the Humanitiesde John Matin Ellis
Cap S'està carregant…
Apunta't a LibraryThing per saber si aquest llibre et pot agradar. No hi ha cap discussió a Converses sobre aquesta obra. Although Ellis does make some very good points about how gender/race/class scholars are negatively affecting literature and history, his argument strays into essentially saying that all gender/race/class scholars are destroying the university system as a whole. That basically denounces all of social science (sociology, anthropology, psychology, economics, political science), not a wise move. Perhaps he didn't intend to come off that way, but he should have narrowed his focus more on the specific discipline of literature, since that's where his main concern lies, and it's a legitimate concern. Why should Shakespeare classes revolve entirely around Shakespeare's portrayal of women or the lack of representation of lower classes? Of course his writing is a product of his time, but literature classes should go beyond an author's biography and social context. Such instances have only occurred because pure gender/race/class scholarship is currently in vogue in literature departments. However, Ellis, in the end, lays blame at gender/race/class scholars in general, and those who are in culture-specific departments, like African American Studies or Chinese Studies, and he seeks to discredit them as a whole. That's too far, in my opinion. Yes, we shouldn't necessarily judge literature from the Western canon by today's gender/race/class scholarship, but we should conduct research on the gender/race/class situation of modern times, and we should encourage students to study canons other than the Western canon. Ellis' arguments are clearly written and insightful at times, but he shouldn't condemn the entire enterprise of gender/race/class scholarship, which can be conducted quite legitimately and for useful purposes. Sense ressenyes | afegeix-hi una ressenya
In the span of less than a generation, university humanities departments have experienced an almost unbelievable reversal of attitudes, now attacking and undermining what had previously been considered best and most worthy in the Western tradition. John M. Ellis here scrutinizes the new regime in humanistic studies. He offers a careful, intelligent analysis that exposes the weaknesses of notions that are fashionable in humanities today. In a clear voice, with forceful logic, he speaks out against the orthodoxy that has installed race, gender, and class perspectives at the center of college humanities curricula.Ellis begins by showing that political correctness is a recurring impulse of Western society and one that has a discouraging history. He reveals the contradictions and misconceptions that surround the new orthodoxy and demonstrates how it is most deficient just where it imagines itself to be superior. Ellis contends that humanistic education today, far from being historically aware, relies on anachronistic thinking; far from being skeptical of Western values, represents a ruthless and unskeptical Western extremism; far from being valuable in bringing political perspectives to bear, presents politics that are crude and unreal; far from being sophisticated in matters of "theory," is largely ignorant of the range and history of critical theory; far from valuing diversity, is unable to respond to the great sweep of literature. In a concluding chapter, Ellis surveys the damage that has been done to higher education and examines the prospects for change. No s'han trobat descripcions de biblioteca. |
Debats actualsCap
Google Books — S'està carregant… GèneresClassificació Decimal de Dewey (DDC)001.3Information Computing and Information Knowledge HumanitiesLCC (Clas. Bibl. Congrés EUA)ValoracióMitjana:
Ets tu?Fes-te Autor del LibraryThing. |
I felt enlightened by this book. I felt enlightened in particular by the historical threads Ellis weaves together to argue that contemporary literary criticism, with its self-reflective, deeply critical take on works of literature, is merely the latest manifestation of a culture of self-criticism that the West has embraced, and passed through, from Tacitus to Rousseau to Marx to Derrida.
I was persuaded. This is a nuanced argument, unlike other books (The Closing of the American Mind comes to mind) that seem fueled primarily by reactionary backlash. ( )