I wanted to organize my thoughts on Menand and During's essays before we are asked to compare their points of view and arguments. This is what I came up with...
Simon During and Louis Menand seem to agree on one particular idea: The literary studies discipline is a dying breed. During argues that the discipline of English is becoming part of the all-encompassing discipline known as "cultural studies,"and Menand argues that literary studies is becoming less and less of it's own discipline for two reasons. One of these reasons is, in fact, that the humanities disciplines are beginning to merge, but he also points out that specialization and the rise of professionalism has sparked English's demise. Too many professors come from one specific background of literary theory. Everything is subsidized. During would even go on to say that their is no longer enough intellectual conflict to keep literary studies alive and breathing.
Do you think literary studies is become a completely different discipline? Is English dying? Are the humanities dying altogether (not just at Colby-Sawyer!)? What is causing less and less college-bound students to choose English as a course of study?
-Megan R.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
...So do you want the long answer or the short answer? The humanities as a set of disciplines, actually, have been at risk forever, almost. And the commodification of knowledge thanks to capitalism nips at the heels of reading for the construction of a moral imagination. I'm actually not worried about the humanities at CSC; they are at the core of our enterprise. And $ is not the way to measure their influence. But the world certainly "pays" more than clarity and professions that are commercially glitzy the life-enhancing ambiguities of the disciplines of the humanities. And look what the free market economy of the Bush administration accomplished.
ReplyDelete