Webb Chap. 7 (Poststructuralism)

'Within this approach, testimonial literature has value for my students far beyond the classroom. It provides a much-needed signal not to give up on themselves or on others. It inspires them to reach out and speak for themselves, to generalize from their own experience' (qtd. in Webb p. 139)

Although several works of fiction are obviously paramount to literature instruction, it is my belief that non-fiction works such as testimonials, autobiographies or even autoethnographies often can have more of an impact on students, considering the simple fact that they are first-hand accounts of entirely true events. I realize that fiction contains themes and characters who are indeed very real, but texts such as primary sources from the Holocaust or I, Rigoberta Menchu have defining characteristics that are very hard to ignore. Couple these works with guest speakers and you have literally brought the issue alive for students, and this is when I feel like the most substantial learning can take place. Students may not remember everything from the Diary of Anne Frank, but surely they will remember what the lady--who experienced the Holocaust first hand--had to say on her visit into the classroom. Moreover, having students seek out various subcultures within their community and then transcribing a autoethnography would be a wonderful activity, not only to have them interact with other cultures but to hear the stories of these often "marginalized" persons.
Moving forward, this chapter also got me thinking, especially since Webb mentions that the New Critics may not consider I, Rigoberta Menchu to be a "literary text," what exactly does constitute a literary text? I have been under the impression that literary texts are primarily works of fiction while non-literary are reserved to non-fictional, informational (academic), but I get the sense that a concrete definition may be hard to pin down. I have also heard that fiction with "irrational" story lines (i.e. some sci-fi) isn't literary either. A text should be considered literary if it can be used to explore the human experience, should it not? Any help here...?

Webb Chap. 4 (Youth Violence / Racism / Multicultural Studies)

Coming from a small town in northern Michigan--Gaylord to be specific--where often times the largest youth crime issue that appears on the local news or the "Police Blotter" section of the newspaper is retail fraud or M.I.P., it is easy for me to forget how many teens are actually involved in violence on a regular basis. Fortunately for me I wasn't personally subjected to much violence, but I definitely saw things via the media which let me know it was out there. I am reminded quickly, however, of the violence crisis right here in Kalamazoo when I recall a fellow peer in my pre-internship classes, who was doing her pre-internship at Loy Norrix, frequently spoke of the gang activity that was present there. She noted that students who were suspected to be in rival gangs, needed to be separated from contact in the classroom. Is this the correct way to handle a situation like this (I'm clueless here)?? I noticed that aside from the testimonial from Teysha (p. 68),Webb didn't mention much about violence that actually took place inside the schools. I guess this could fall more so under bullying, but it is a very intriguing condition nonetheless. I feel as though introducing a unit on teen violence by highlighting in-school violence can draw more students in, especially those students like me who were not subjected to violence on a regular basis. Then it may be easier for the class to transition into more severe issues such as gangs, weapons, or even homicide. Films that directly address this which could be used include Dangerous Minds or Lean on Me...


Youth violence and racism is definitely something that is worth closely examining, and I feel as though I'm obliged to read Native Son. On the other hand, each time I found myself saying Webb was neglecting some important fact, he immediately addressed my concerns. For example, in the beginning portion of the chapter he seemed to be focusing on inner-city violence and African Americans, which could possibly increase apparent "racial tension" among that obviously exists within our schools and the U.S., but surely enough he states "it is also important to recognize that violence is by no means confined to ghettos and that youth gangs are formed by all racial groups in many different parts of the country" (p. 62). These issues obviously hit home for students from all walks of life, and it is imperative that they are brought to the forefront of our literature teaching at some point during a given year. It seems that these issues of gangs, racism, youth violence, assault, etc. are all interrelated and could easily be examined for an entire year, if not longer. Furthermore, I agree that reader-response and multicultural studies are the best mediums for students to explore all of these issues, and can enable them to more easily put on the shoes of others in order to truly make sense of these social inequalities which inherently exist. These ideas seem to be the most powerful issues today's students can examine, in my opinion, and this chapter does a wonderful job at suggesting multiple points of entry (song lyrics, film, literature, etc.) to address them.

Appleman Chap. 8

"Pieces of literature may convey several different meanings. Most works do, but finding the meaning can be very difficult with nowhere to start. Critical lenses give this start" (p. 140).

"Literary theory functioned in my education as a prism, which I could turn to refract different spectral patterns of language use in a text, as one does daylight. Turn the prism this way, and one pattern emerges; turn it that way, and another pattern configures" (p. 141).

This final chapter basically speaks to one fundamental concept: Literary theories should enable students to understand different, multiple perspectives, not only in literary works but in their lives outside of the classroom as well. There isn't really much to discuss in this chapter, seeming how it affirms critical theory's rightful place in literature instruction, something I have consistently mentioned I am in full agreement with (perhaps with the exception of the theory beginning with the letter D!). Other than the final case Appleman makes for literary theory, she mentions two activities that I feel are really worth using in the classroom.

She begins the chapter by describing Martha's fifth-hour class in which the students are rotating about "literary stations." I like the selections of texts; however, if I were to implement this activity, I may put a single work in each of the stations to further reinforce the idea that a work can be subject to multiple interpretations. The learning stations not only get students moving about the room on a day when students are usually anxious anyway (have to love Fridays), but it is a sort of review of the theories they have been learning about throughout the year.

Speaking of review, the second activity mentioned (Activity 16 in the Appendix) asks students to recall what they have been learning about in a informal sort of way, considering it to be a group task. This was especially valuable because students can see how everyday artifacts can be subject to critical theories, extending the texts they have been reading. I am a firm believer that if students can see a direct link between the real-world context and what they are learning, it will be more meaningful and effective; this activity does this quite well. Additionally, the students' responses seem to all say the same, very important thing: Literary theory can be applied to any situation, not just the texts that we read. Finally, as the final student comment suggests, students probably have been using these theories (as perspectives) all along, but now they can lable them.

Appleman Chap. 7

The transformation of Martha as documented by Appleman in this chapter is quite astounding. When I firt read this discription, I immediately thought of my high school English teacher who is responsible for me wanting to become a teacher: "She taught literary terms, interpreted texts for symbol and themes, assigned study guides for novels, tested for vocabulary, and was especially adept at teacher her students to write academic papers...her approach was text centered" (p. 118). This New Critical approach to teaching literature was one I was very good at. I could pick apart texts for symbols and search for indirect characterizations for days, and in doing so I felt good about myself. After being in this class and being introduced to several critical theories, I realize the importance of putting on someone else's shoes to interpret a given situation. If I would have never taken this class or read these books, I may have attempted to teach literature strictly from the New Critical perspective because that is how I learned to interpret the canonical texts. Although I taught basic writing here at WMU last fall, employing a very student-centered model of instruction, I hadn't taught literature, and am I glad that I didn't! Luckily for me I am currently being educated with the latest educational theories. But being aware of Martha's changes, I realize that I may need to do the same ten years from now when today's theories are succeeded by more efficient ones.

There are a few major reasons why I am excited to integrate literary theory into my English language arts instruction. First, it allows students to become their own interpreters of the texts instead of relying on the teacher for a sole, correct interpretation; thus literary theory inherently seeks to "shift the balance of power" from teacher to student. Second, it enables students to connect with texts in ways that may be unattainable in the absencse of critical theory. Third, and probably most importanly, it enables students to consider multiple perspectives in regards to situations outside of the classroom, hence causing them to make better decisions, decisions they may not have otherwise made. In other words, multiple perspectives transcend the classroom, and any device that does so is worth using in the classroom.

I'm pleased to see that Appleman included an excerpt from Martha that describes how some students will naturally latch-on to particular literary theories, while some will totally resist many of them. It is my belief that no matter your content area, some students will be resistant toward learning certain concepts; literary theories are no different. Since I plan to teach math, maybe some kid will hit me with the phrase "when am I ever going to use derivatives in my lifetime?" Students' own personalities are constantly waging war with the material they learn, and this is completely normal. What I am getting at is that even though there may be some resistance toward certain theories or concepts, that should not deter us as teachers from implementing them. If we can somehow get the students to not totally give up on learning a difficult or abstract concept (the hardest part!) and shift these students' views, it can be a very powerful learning experience for those students.

Appleman, Chap. 6

First, let me apologize for the deconstructive treatment of "The Spur." Until Engl. 4800, I have never even heard of this literary theory, and like many of the students in this chapter, I can see how this lens is very difficult to peer through. With no assumed meaning, there seems to be a lack of a foundation for which things can progress. We as humans must find meaning in somethings, especially our language, to garner a sense of accomplishment. For these reasons, and considering how difficult it was for me to "deconstruct" this small poem (I realize that the size, or lack thereof, of the poem may have created some additional difficulties), I am not sure I would even go as far as mentioning this literary theory in my classroom. If it is confusing to me, won't it be even more confusing and demeaning to students?

Beyond a very loose, rough analysis of a poem, let me try and sort out what it is that I actually know about deconstruction. First, it seems very difficult to define. There are obviously many interpretations of what deconstruction looks like in regards to literary theory. As Barnet (1996) states, "deconstructionists 'interrogate a text and they reveal what the authors were unaware of or though they had kept safely out of sight'" (p. 101). Further, it seems that these binary oppositions come into play, no interpretation of a word or a phrase is safe, and contradictions in authors' words are regularly sought out. Other than this, I am clueless as to what deconstruction looks like...

Although presently I don't see any use for this theory, Appleman claims that "it teaches them to examine the very structure of the systems that oppress them..." (p. 106). This may be the only possible benefit I see. But if the goal of literary instruction is to examine a situation from another perspective, I feel like many other literary theories complete this task very well. Appleman also mentioned that the students gained a general sense of what deconstruction was, but that they hated it. Well, then, why teach something they hate? I don't understand why if the text should have no meaning, then why are we studying literature in the first place. Considering 1) that so many theorists are opposed to it and 2) so many students react negatively to it, it seems like the entire thing may hinder instruction. As one student put it, I too think this theory is quite cynical...

Deconstructing William Butler Yeats' "The Spur" (1938)

You think it horrible that lust and rage
Should dance attention upon my old age;
They were not such a plague when I was young;
What else have I to spur me into song?

First, it seems that "lust and rage" (l. 1) are very much components of Yeats' fascination with Ireland's pagan past. What else from this man's past requires him to have such strong feelings? He does not think it is necessarily a bad thing to be consumed with these desires at an "old age." Lust and rage are feelings usually associated with evil, so maybe they are the feelings of good natured people, implying that these feelings are good...He is also aware that these desires became more cumbersome as he aged, but how old is "old age?" "Old age" (l. 2) could quite possibly the same as "young" (l. 3), depending on one's perspective. So, maybe lust and rage were in fact very much a part of what he describes as his youth, implying that he was void of innocence; thus the pagan desires are manifesting themselves once again. When youth is age, Yeats may be contradicting himself since it is quite possible that lust and rage may surface at any time. Surely there are several other desires, both "good" and "bad" that may "spur" (l. 4) him to write poetry, and Yeats may not want to aknowledge this.

Webb Chap. 3

"'Today women can do anything they want,' Jennifer pointed out. 'If women want to go to college or become writers, there is nothing stopping them,' Nathan said" (p. 35). Believe it or not, but before I read this, I was thinking the same thing as these students. It may, in fact, be very difficult for students, both women and men, to connect to women's struggles for equal rights. These students are entirely correct; women today technically do have every opportunity that men are afforded, so issues such as women not being able to college may not seem as important to students. It is clear that the roles of women are perpetually changing. But as I continued to think about it, the real significance lay within the general perceptions of society about women when they are in these positions. Events such as the Miss America Pageant, to the feminist, perpetuate stereotypes that women are strictly concerned with fame or materialism. Similarly, the idea of a woman president has generally evoked negative thoughts that are very much connected to a perception of women (inferiority) that has deep historical roots.

All students should be examining this to understand that how women are perceived or how they "should" act, a.k.a. gender roles, are of real concern to them. That is why I am so impressed with Webb's instruction. He was able to make the seemingly irrelevant relevant by moving away from equal rights to gender roles with the feminist lens. This is not to say that students should not be examining woman's historical struggles for equal rights, but because students may think women are of equal status today, gender roles or norms will make feminist literary theory more applicable to the modern woman. Students are bombarded daily with messages about how they should act, and closely looking at these attempts will hopefully help students become more autonomous.

Additionally, when students examine other controversial issues like homosexuality using gay and lesbian studies, I feel like there will be some apprehensiveness amongst students. To combat this, I think it could be useful to explicitly ask students why they feel awkward discussing their sexuality. Moreover, I really like how Webb suggests scaffolding feminist literary theory with "queer theory" through the examination of identity and gender roles. By connecting gender roles to the identification of someones sexual preference, sexual orientation issues will not seem so taboo or isolated when spoke about in the classroom. I do not think, however, that there are a lot of texts you could use entirely with gay and lesbian studies other than texts primarily concerned with homosexuality. Otherwise it seems you would be fishing for connections to question characters' tendencies...