030 - Thesis Entry part the first
This is a living document of my thesis work. It isn't really for anyones consumption but my own archival purposes of my own life. If you have stumbled here from the depths of irrelevancy then this will make little sense to you.
Long post commence.......
“Introduction On Value” in /The Value of Virginia Woolf/ by Madelyn Detloff
Ahhhh Virginia Woolf, how you HAUNT my entire graduate career with your impossible words that I need Ben to decode for me. This is a recommendation of Eve’s, an all around lovely lady.
Contained in this article is development of how you define your value systems for literature! Detloff comes from a place where she works with New Criticism which is a slant to note when reading her claims - they will not be author’s intent focused. Author is dead, etc. Reader response theory. All works well with the way I work.
Some notable quotes and ramblings:
“‘On the one hand,’ Smith explains, “there is the discourse of economic theory: money, commerce, technology, industry, production and consumption, workers and consumers; on the other hand there is the discourse of aesthetic axiology: culture, art, genius, creation and appreciation, artists and connoisseurs,’ . . . both participate in the same complex, dynamic system of evaluation - a system that is social and interdependent, rather than precocial or transcendent” (1). Meaning both sides have value and their value is determined by the social discourse surrounding them. So if you apply value to a type of art and the community at large agrees on that value then it has value, but there is nothing intrinsic to a concept that makes it valuable. This idea is further supported by Detloff when she says, “Smith eschew the notion of intrinsic aesthetic value [a value that inheres in things, in works], and claims, rather, that value is conferred through communal processes - that is, through the /work/ of valuing” (1).
“When there is less consensus in a community about particular practices, inclinations, or forms, cultural artifacts that align with those practices, inclinations, or forms will be regarded as matters of personal preference” (1). This is important to recognize as a force at work when bringing alternative voices into the classroom. I do not call for a teaching of queer young adult texts because I prefer to read and consume those (though that is certainly part of it). It comes more from the idea that if you repeatedly expose the upcoming generation to thee texts over and over that you can create consensus in your school community that these voices have value and should be heard because their experiences are an important part of society.
“…aesthetic value operates much more like exchange value than many of us would like to admit, accruing over the years, even millennia, through ‘complex interrelations among human needs, technological production, and cultural practices’ that are recursively reinforced, according to Smith, through a ‘continuous process of mutual modification between our desires and our universe’”(2) My project wants to make that thinking visible and acknowledged, even if I am not fully clear on the ‘how’s’ and ‘whys’ of that yet. Further on the important for me train is, “We could, instead, consider the contingency of aesthetic value as a powerful heuristic for illuminating a culture’s ideals, unspoken preferences (for better of worse) and hierarchies of worth . . .” (2). Again with hope to shift cultures ideas and worth systems to something that is more inclusive.
“First, creative works that incite the process of reflection, contestation, and remaking are immensely valuable for the cultural self-awareness they inspire . . . And third, questions of literary value, like questions of moral value, need not (and ideally should not) be relegated to traditionalists, conservatives, or the elite. Progressives, nontraditionalists, and common people have a stake in how values are shaped and disseminated, and thus should exercise a voice (beyond iconoclasm) in the communal deliberations that go into the work of valuing” (3). I cropped the Woolf specific part here, but this applies to queer literature in that minorities should be given a voice and a seat at the table. The canon established by a previous generation and filled to the brim with dead white men is a dangerous ideal that does not allow the majority of the population to relate and see themselves in the texts they read. There is more to unpack here, but I am not at that stage yet.
“Guillory argues that literature has served as a marker of ‘cultural capital’ disseminated by institutions (schools) that reproduce and perpetuate unequal class relations” (3) this is super important for any unit plan’s justification. If school is to push more equal class relations into society, and really school is considered a major pillar of how society is shaped, then it only follows that if you want a more equal society then you must include more equal representations in the class room. While this seems like an obvious idea, it is an important one to actively work towards at all times and justify.
Pg 4 - Culture is not some “common birthright.” You are not born into culture - society forms culture.
“Woolf maintains a belief in literature’s capacity to humanize us, to make us less power hungry and more capable of rational coexistence and conviviality. / For Woolf, the tension between cynicism and belief sparks a generative paradox that cycles like an ouroboros, a snake perpetually eating its own tail: dominant culture influences literary and artistic culture, which in turn tends to reinforce dominant cultural values - but literary and artistic creations also nurture the capacity to think and create for oneself, a capacity that can be employed by those hailing from non dominant cultures to shift or change the cultural values of the dominant” (7). While this is Woolf specific, this is easily applicable to all kinds of works. If our goal is a well educated society, then students need to be empowered regardless of what group they hail from. We are getting better (though still FAR FAR FAR from where we should be) with including a variety of ethnic and racial minority voices, however queer voices are still noticeable absent and silent across the board which is not ok.
Long post commence.......
“Introduction On Value” in /The Value of Virginia Woolf/ by Madelyn Detloff
Ahhhh Virginia Woolf, how you HAUNT my entire graduate career with your impossible words that I need Ben to decode for me. This is a recommendation of Eve’s, an all around lovely lady.
Contained in this article is development of how you define your value systems for literature! Detloff comes from a place where she works with New Criticism which is a slant to note when reading her claims - they will not be author’s intent focused. Author is dead, etc. Reader response theory. All works well with the way I work.
Some notable quotes and ramblings:
“‘On the one hand,’ Smith explains, “there is the discourse of economic theory: money, commerce, technology, industry, production and consumption, workers and consumers; on the other hand there is the discourse of aesthetic axiology: culture, art, genius, creation and appreciation, artists and connoisseurs,’ . . . both participate in the same complex, dynamic system of evaluation - a system that is social and interdependent, rather than precocial or transcendent” (1). Meaning both sides have value and their value is determined by the social discourse surrounding them. So if you apply value to a type of art and the community at large agrees on that value then it has value, but there is nothing intrinsic to a concept that makes it valuable. This idea is further supported by Detloff when she says, “Smith eschew the notion of intrinsic aesthetic value [a value that inheres in things, in works], and claims, rather, that value is conferred through communal processes - that is, through the /work/ of valuing” (1).
“When there is less consensus in a community about particular practices, inclinations, or forms, cultural artifacts that align with those practices, inclinations, or forms will be regarded as matters of personal preference” (1). This is important to recognize as a force at work when bringing alternative voices into the classroom. I do not call for a teaching of queer young adult texts because I prefer to read and consume those (though that is certainly part of it). It comes more from the idea that if you repeatedly expose the upcoming generation to thee texts over and over that you can create consensus in your school community that these voices have value and should be heard because their experiences are an important part of society.
“…aesthetic value operates much more like exchange value than many of us would like to admit, accruing over the years, even millennia, through ‘complex interrelations among human needs, technological production, and cultural practices’ that are recursively reinforced, according to Smith, through a ‘continuous process of mutual modification between our desires and our universe’”(2) My project wants to make that thinking visible and acknowledged, even if I am not fully clear on the ‘how’s’ and ‘whys’ of that yet. Further on the important for me train is, “We could, instead, consider the contingency of aesthetic value as a powerful heuristic for illuminating a culture’s ideals, unspoken preferences (for better of worse) and hierarchies of worth . . .” (2). Again with hope to shift cultures ideas and worth systems to something that is more inclusive.
“First, creative works that incite the process of reflection, contestation, and remaking are immensely valuable for the cultural self-awareness they inspire . . . And third, questions of literary value, like questions of moral value, need not (and ideally should not) be relegated to traditionalists, conservatives, or the elite. Progressives, nontraditionalists, and common people have a stake in how values are shaped and disseminated, and thus should exercise a voice (beyond iconoclasm) in the communal deliberations that go into the work of valuing” (3). I cropped the Woolf specific part here, but this applies to queer literature in that minorities should be given a voice and a seat at the table. The canon established by a previous generation and filled to the brim with dead white men is a dangerous ideal that does not allow the majority of the population to relate and see themselves in the texts they read. There is more to unpack here, but I am not at that stage yet.
“Guillory argues that literature has served as a marker of ‘cultural capital’ disseminated by institutions (schools) that reproduce and perpetuate unequal class relations” (3) this is super important for any unit plan’s justification. If school is to push more equal class relations into society, and really school is considered a major pillar of how society is shaped, then it only follows that if you want a more equal society then you must include more equal representations in the class room. While this seems like an obvious idea, it is an important one to actively work towards at all times and justify.
Pg 4 - Culture is not some “common birthright.” You are not born into culture - society forms culture.
“Woolf maintains a belief in literature’s capacity to humanize us, to make us less power hungry and more capable of rational coexistence and conviviality. / For Woolf, the tension between cynicism and belief sparks a generative paradox that cycles like an ouroboros, a snake perpetually eating its own tail: dominant culture influences literary and artistic culture, which in turn tends to reinforce dominant cultural values - but literary and artistic creations also nurture the capacity to think and create for oneself, a capacity that can be employed by those hailing from non dominant cultures to shift or change the cultural values of the dominant” (7). While this is Woolf specific, this is easily applicable to all kinds of works. If our goal is a well educated society, then students need to be empowered regardless of what group they hail from. We are getting better (though still FAR FAR FAR from where we should be) with including a variety of ethnic and racial minority voices, however queer voices are still noticeable absent and silent across the board which is not ok.