 |
 |
On Thu, 16 Jul 1998, Will Garrett-Petts wrote: > I'm struck by the tendency to substitute discussion of > literary theory for methodology; and I'm disturbed how > easily some of my 3rd & 4th-year students adopt a deconstructive > stance for one essay, a feminist stance for the next...--as > if the theories & their attendant methodologies were > eminently interchangeable. A recent _College English_ > essay on literary theory (a well-written essay) showed > off 5 or 6 critical "takes" on a work--as if critical > response were some kind exercise in role playing. > I remember reading an interview with C. Bazerman where he suggests that literary method is equivalent to someone climbing a ladder to the top of a cathedral, ringing the bells, then kicking out the ladder so no one will see how he/she got up there. I've had much success with students analyzing literary criticism along side other forms of professional correspondence both academic and non-academic. Viewing professional essays as "transactions" has helped us to de-mystify much of this particularly misty genre. Yet, as Russ and Will have noted, learning professional genres still doesn't really prepare students for the kinds of writing they will be doing as students. Especially those students in scientific or technical programs. It seems to be an odd contradiction. best wishes, Brent ------------------------------------------------------- Brenton Faber [log in to unmask] Assistant Professor Technical Communication Clarkson University Potsdam NY 13699