Re: ever so 'umble

Pierrot65@aol.com
Tue, 09 Mar 1999 00:16:09 -0500 (EST) 

Will --

	For some reason, your post put me in mind of something sort of totally
unrelated; and yet, I'm going to try to relate it, because that's the kind of
guy I am.
	I sincerely hope that before I die English Departments (I am speaking very
specifically about mine, because that's the only one I knew, though I suspect
many are afflicted similarly, and I am speaking mainly of survey classes) take
the initiative to stress great works which are somewhat newer than the old
standbys (again, that total worthless useless phlegm-clogged hack Henry James
is Public Enemy Number One). It seemed to me that the section men were relying
on the history of scholarship available, as opposed to working through new
schools of thought with the students. (I realize that this is a very general
attack, and that there are classes available outside of the surveys to
complete a well-rounded look at lit, but I feel like this needs to be said.) I
would have liked to see the department lead a student phalanx through Thomas
Pynchon (he said, like a broken record).
	But there is a rub here, because, with the extremely notable exception of
"Entropy," how the hell are you going to look at Pynchon in a survey class?
Well, you don't wait until the last week of April, with finals pending, having
absolutely absorbed every single possible nuance of James (goddamn, I can't
stand that guy), Twain, Hawthorne and the rest of them. You get to April 1 and
you're only up to 1865. What about Updike's "A&P" and what it says about the
more modern youth? What about ANY of the 9 Stories? Why is postmodernism left
in the lurch of that slogging wade through mud? See, I know you get to some of
these in high school, and the professors are sort of forced to assume you have
some of that background already, because of time constraints. But I would have
liked to look at those things at the college level in depth, or at least the
depth available in surveys and given to the more traditional works.
	The other thing that post made me think of was Kerouac. For all their
grousing, I don't think the section men are willing and/or able to separate
"On the Road" from the movement it reflected/inspired. I sincerely hope that
one day that "autobiographical novel" gets the respect the writing, rhythm and
energy contained within it richly deserves. (This, of course, is an entirely
different issue as OTR can't be taught in survey.) It sounds like total
heresy, I realize that, but compare Hemingway with Kerouac and ... I don't
know. It seems a clear-cut case to me, in the writing. (And, again, I know
this is not a contest -- I'm just looking for equal time). Kerouac's themes
and such may not stand up to the old man's, and that's obviously a big point,
but the writing itself is just breathtakingly good and deserves some kind of
respect within the "establishment," for the collective benefit of students.
(And really, I guess, they don't need the encouragement as most everybody
seems to get to it at one point or another. But I think a critical look at it
would be beneficial.) I think sometimes the department isn't willing to
separate Salinger's work from the legend/mystery of his self-imposed exile,
either, and the disaffecteds' accretion of tattered copies of Catcher as
badges.

	I realize that this is probably yet another personal problem that most of you
have avoided by going to the right places. But hey, Will made me do it!  :) As
to this post's applicacy to this list ... um ... Salinger hated English
Departments. So there! (Petulance is the greater part of squalor.)

rick