Is this plus reading plus writing about what you've read enough to give you a better understanding of literature than an average English graduate?
no because the average english graduate (from a real school, not random state school) read this whole thing and a lot more
>>7660950
Yeah, this is pretty fundamental stuff OP. We went further than this + reading notes back in uni.
But I mean if you're just looking for a reason not to major in lit, take up something else that's more appealing to you. It's not the end of the world
>>7660956
Maybe OP didn't go to Harvard like we did. Can't blame him for passing on an associates in English from his community college.
>>7660942
Read proper theory. Read Ruskin, Burke, Bloom, Frye, Wilde, Pater, Arnold. That book is terrible, with zero mention of subject position, one introduction by Bloom (and nothing else!), but devotes hundreds of pages to the cultural marxist horror. It's mildly bad until page 998 and absolutely disgusting from that on. It contains several misprints, uses incorrect letters (doesn't spell Kierkegaard's name right, for example). It's a scam.
Most Oxford books range from passable to very good, though. Get those instead.
>>7660976
This guy is trolling BTW, all of those names he mentioned (minus Ruskin) are in the book and Bloom had nothing to do with the editing process.
The Norton is (rightfully) considered the gold standard in introductory/groundwork literary criticism.
>>7660983
To add I'm usually all for the cheeky banter on /lit/ but we have pathetically few enough people who are actively interested in theory/real literary criticism as is that I'd rather OP get a real answer.
>>7660983
We used the norton. I kept them after graduation because that shit is SO useful. Plus a great way to introduce yourself to the canon
>>7660990
Norton has never done me no wrong, and I do English good
>>7660984
> we have pathetically few enough people who are actively interested in theory/real literary criticism
im also really disappointed about that desu
>>7661036
I mean it's to be expected. The breakdown of most 4chan boards is a lot of hobbyists/dilettantes/memers/novices and a handful of autists who are deep into the rabbithole. Theory is definitely not something that most people with a passing interest in literature considers important.
This is further exacerbated by the combination of anti-intellectualism (>falling for the college meme, etc.), disregard of theory (anyone can read/why do you need to listen to someone else tell you how to read/etc.), and strawmanning (cultural marxists dominating all of academia, english literature is a SJW spook, etc.).
>>7660983
I was referring to the people OP might prioritise in his pursuit. I did not say they weren't in the Anthology.
Schopenhauer isn't though, and I won't search 3000 pages but recall others missign as well. In the Poetry brother of this book, Norton too, there are no Oscar Wilde poems and about 3 Wallace Stevens ones. My point on Bloom was that his massive bibliography, with at least 6 academically relevant books, gets him but a mention, as only his introduction to the AoI is included.
The content of the book is biased, they prioritise too much the modern marxist school and apart from a slim part devoted to New Pragmatism, nothing new gets into it, apart from lesbianic / post-colonial / ethnocentric / genderspecific etc etc criticism.
>>7661045
>This is further exacerbated by the combination of anti-intellectualism (>falling for the college meme, etc.), disregard of theory (anyone can read/why do you need to listen to someone else tell you how to read/etc.), and strawmanning (cultural marxists dominating all of academia, english literature is a SJW spook, etc.).
If you want to counter this, you may want to start by advocating a more neutral book. The Norton, especially if your professors only select the Frankfurt School's writings, may invoke spooks.
>>7661069
1. The Poetry anthology has zero bearing on the quality of this book
2. Most authors get 1 - 2 excerpts. Bloom only having Anxiety of Influence is very very normal and acceptable.
3. Schopenhauser is incredibly unimportant for literary criticism in the grand scheme of things.
4. The emphasis on modern marxism is grossly overexaggerated.
>>7661078
Key pieces like Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction and ideas like culture-industry merit discussion. No one is dedicating large portions of intro to theory classes on the Frankfurt schools at respectable institutions.
>>7660974
Pathetic
>>7661094
>No one is dedicating large portions of intro to theory classes on the Frankfurt schools at respectable institutions.
My Uni did, and it is in the top 20 world-wide.
>>7661120
name uni, post syllabus
>>7661123
University of Edinburgh, I read Comparative Literature, English Literature and Philosophy. This is Year two semester 1.
>The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism, ed. Vincent B. Leitch et. al.[2nd edition]
>The Norton Anthology of English Literature,ed. M.H. Abrams et. al. [9th edition]
>The Edinburgh Anthology of Scottish Literature
>Austen, Jane. Northanger Abbey(Norton Critical Edition)
>Dickens, Charles. Hard Times(Norton Critical Edition)
>Edgeworth, Maria. Castle Rackrent(Oxford World Classics)
>*Franklin, Benjamin.Benjamin Franklin’s Autobiography(Norton Critical Edition)*not a core text shared with Scottish Literature 2*
>Gaskell, Elizabeth. North and South(Norton Critical Edition)
>Irving, Washington. The Sketch-Book of Geoffrey Crayon, Gent. (Oxford World Classics)
>Mackenzie, Henry. The Man of Feeling(Oxford World Classics)
>Paine, Thomas. Common Sense and Other Writings(Norton Critical Edition)
>Shelley, Mary.Frankenstein, 1831 edition (Penguin)
>Smollett, Tobias. Humphry Clinker(Norton Critical Edition)
>Sterne, Laurence. A Sentimental Journey(Oxford World Classics)
>>7661163
i don't know how it's structured across the pond, but in the states, individual classes have their own syllabus. the norton would be found in an "intro to critical theory" class or some equivalent, and would usually see the class work through a majority of the texts chronologically. you're not going to see someone jump straigh to the frankfurt texts and fixate on it - it'd be ridiculous, anyway, considering there is a grand total of ONE frankfurt text in the norton.
>>7661163
Nice Frankfurt school, bro.
>>7661233
>Crusoe taught as imperialism
>Eyre only lectured on as relating to gender
>Frankenstein as gender and postcolonial theory
>Great Expectations taught as gender theory
>
>
It's not the prescribed texts, it's how they are understood
>>7661520
yes i'm sure that's exactly how it transpired. no one ever distorts and exaggerates stuff on the internet to make their case. ever
get over yourself.
>>7660942
>validate me
>>7660942
Would love to go through and fill in some gaps in what I've read, but since I've already got a big load of reading this semester who are the most seminal authors?
>study hermeneutics in philosophy/history
>get into lit theory as seeming dilettante because of it, start using lit in own studies
>bootstrap myself for a year or two in major traditions
>all just for fun
>decide to go to english/complit departments to audit grad classes for fun
>tfw sitting in rooms full of people who have devoted their lives to repetitively applying a 130-page commentary on lacan to transgender fart literature
>tfw professors keep asking "wh-what department are you from again..?"
>>7662463
translation: "I went to state school and am about to be unemployed when i have a state school philosophy/history degree"
I got a bunch of Bloom, where do I even start? Something else?
