Bitterly Dreary – aka Literary Theory

The Philosopher in Meditation (thought to be by Rembrandt)

The Philosopher in Meditation (thought to be by Rembrand

I found the image above when I was doing a bit of obsessive-compulsive boning up for my forthcoming final (thank the god of philosophers) subject for my MA in Creative Writing, which starts tomorrow.  It about sums up what I anticipate from the experience… incarceration in a dusty garret, with only the cobwebby thoughts of ancient eminences grises to keep me company.

I am intimidated just by the title – “Literary Theory“.  Well not intimidated so much as resentful of being forced to spend the next 3 months or so entombed in the philosophy of literature  when I’d much rather be writing.  For some reason that eludes me, this subject is mandatory to qualify for my degree.

I have no qualms with being required to study theory as opposed to practice, as to become good at something, it’s good to have a mix of both.  What I am peeved about (and here I trust no curious eye from the teaching staff at my esteemed soon to be alma mater will light upon this whinge, or I’ll get an automatic deduction of points before I even start),  is that there is absolutely no alternative to this particular subject.  If I’d wanted to study philosophy, I’d have made an appointment with a psychologist immediately, and I wouldn’t have signed on for Creative Writing.   Don’t get me wrong.  I love literature, and I’d have joyously thrown myself into 19th Century Literature, Gender & Genre, Australian Women Writers – or any number of  other subjects on offer at the Faculty, but not on offer for this degree.  No, I was informed, Literary Theory it must be and nothing less.

A brief perusal of the literature on the topic of “Bitterly Dreary” reveals a daunting sub-dictionary of buzz words and terminology, e.g. “hermeneutics”, “alienation from consciousness”, “generic integrity of discourse”, “post-structuralism”, and so on.   As well, it includes a veritable roll-call of esteemed scholars, e.g. Descartes, Hegel, Foucault, Marx, Nietschke, Freud, Ricoeur, any one of whom is enough to send cold shivers of inadequacy down my spine.

Oh well, perhaps I protest too much.  There’s no question that I’ll come out at the end of it more informed than I am now, even positively erudite on the subject.  Somehow I doubt that questions of Bitterly Dreary are ones you can confidently toss into dinner party conversation however.  At worst, I’ll suffer only a temporary alienation from consciousness, and the end is in sight.

 

 

Advertisements

About annegreen2013

I'm a freelance writer passionate about all things culinary and literary, especially South Australian food and wine, food writing, ethical eating, animal welfare, healthy eating, nutrition and food sustainability
This entry was posted in Books, Writer's_life. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Bitterly Dreary – aka Literary Theory

  1. You’ll ace it Annabelle, bitterly dreary as it will be at times. Just think how well-equipped you’ll be to argue against the exclusionary antics of Foucault and Co ; )

  2. Francesca says:

    let me know when you are over it and not likely to propound on literary theory at the dinner table and there’s a dinner invitation in it for you!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s