Gendering
the Narrative of the Downfall of the University
by
Patricia Sharon Neill
When
I took my Bachelor’s in English many years ago, I earned my degree
by studying English literature and history. And what a rich literature
and history it is! One course I took in Irish Literature had a reading
list a mile long. Most of James Joyce (Portrait
of the Artist, Ulysses,
parts of Finnegan’s
Wake, even, though we weren’t required to understand it,
thank goodness), many plays by George Bernard Shaw and John Millintong
Synge, Frank O’Connor’s lovely stories, and nearly the entire body
of work of the marvelous WB Yeats. And that was just one course,
one semester. I don’t think I’ve ever worked so hard in my life,
reading and writing, and we even put on one of Yeats’s Noh-style
Plays, in masks, no less. It was a delicious, lively time and I
had a ball.
I’ve
worked in an English department now for many years, and have sorrowfully
watched as all the good, rich wonderful courses on Shakespeare,
Milton, Chaucer, the Enlightenment, the Romantic poets were retired
in favor of politically correct nonsense or abstract theory deconstruction
finally seems to have deconstructed itself and died out, but for
a while there it was enthroned. Marxist and/or sexuality-based courses
became the rage. There may still be a token Shakespeare or Chaucer
course, but the syllabus will invariably describe that the students
will be looking at the work of these two masters in terms of discrimination
against women or how racism "informs" their work.
Gendering
the Narrative was the actual name of a course taught here. Who knows
what it was about? I recall hearing a description of the course,
but like all that PC blather it goes in one ear and quickly out
the other. It sounded dreadfully boring. I mean, would you pay $1200
for sexual/gender indoctrination? I hope not!
And
more and more, neither will the students. And their parents sure
don’t want to fork over that kind of dough for such rot, and so,
slowly but more certainly than ever, less and less students are
becoming English majors. After all, if all the trendy professors
want to do is talk about TV (Star Trek and Twin Peaks were hits
of a recent course) and pop culture, why should students want to
study what they can just watch on, well, TV?
Other
humanities disciplines are the same way, too many intellectually
vapid PC courses, and not enough of the strong, resilient, traditional
canon. Anthropology is really sterile ground; its course listing
shows more PC courses than ever before.
Here’s
a really choice example:
"ANTHROPOLOGY
202 Modern Social Theory: Key Texts and Issues Description:
This
course involves close reading of selected texts by three authors
who established the framework of modern social theory. Karl Marx,
Emile Durkheim, and Max Weber. Readings will focus on each author’s
attempt to comprehend the possibilities and pathologies of industrial
capitalism. The course addresses both the future of the US in a
global capitalist economy and the search for community in contemporary
American society. In addition to classic works, readings will include
contemporary books such as The
Work of Nations by Robert Reich and Discipline
and Punish by Michel Foucault."
Classic
socialist political correctness, in other words. And boring as hell.
Can you imagine paying to read a book by the intellectual (and otherwise)
pipsqueak Robert Reich?
Students
are not enrolling in these courses or at least enrollment is down.
Hmmmm. Maybe some of these students even have brains beneath their
pink hair and nose rings. It is a possibility, albeit remote.
The
upshot is, we’re losing students, and the humanities in general
are losing our share of the University pie. And frankly, that’s
a good thing.
It
just might teach everyone a real lesson.
October
7, 2000
Patricia
Sharon Neill is managing editor of a scholarly journal on the life
and work of William Blake, the 18th-century artist and
poet.
© 2000 by Patricia
Sharon Neill
Patricia
Neill Archives
|