I'm still an English professor. Shoot.

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > I'm still an English professor. Shoot.

Bel_Canto: Apr 23, 2007; "Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo."

Keshik posted:

Everyone says that a familiarity with the Bible is a vital component to anyone interested in Western literature if for no other reason than because of the dramatic influence that text has had on all literature produced in the past two millenia.

As an atheist, I can't read the Bible or any commentaries on the Biblical text without throwing my hands up in frustration. It's like reading every entry in the Star Trek wikipedia, except even less interesting. It all seems so stupid and pointless.

What do you recommend to anyone who hates the Bible but wants to gain a greater appreciation of literature?

I'm still only a lowly undergrad, and I don't have anything close to the OP's qualifications in English lit, but I can write as a fellow atheist who learned to appreciate the Bible. My advice would be to try to approach it as a work of literature rather than as some kind of book of morality. God is very much a literary character, and he's far from perfect; Genesis reads pretty damned well as an account of God trying to figure out what the hell he is/wants to be. And when you're ready for some serious moral ambiguity, read Job; it makes Dostoevsky look downright cheerful. There's also no reason not to read all four Gospels, but pay special attention to Luke and John. Luke shows just how hypocritical the Christian Right is, and John contains some VERY deep metaphysical speculation about the nature of the divine. Both are written in relatively simple language, but are obviously from the hands of extremely proficient writers.

I'm sure the OP has other (probably better) suggestions, but that's my two cents' worth

# ¿ May 11, 2009 02:00

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 18:43

Bel_Canto: Apr 23, 2007; "Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo."

Brainworm posted:

** People talk about the relative difficulties of different majors all the time, but different colleges take different approaches to general education, and some of these can be really rigorous.

What's your take on the various approaches to general education? I've heard a lot of people weigh in on this, but very few of them have been people who deal with students firsthand.

# ¿ May 12, 2009 21:55

Bel_Canto: Apr 23, 2007; "Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo."

Technically, "a lot" is a noun which then takes "of" in a partitive sense. It's a quantity rather than a quantifier.

# ¿ Jun 1, 2009 22:38

Bel_Canto: Apr 23, 2007; "Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo."

xcdude24 posted:

-A people's history of the United States
-Structural transformation of the public sphere
-Anything by Jorge Luis Borges
-Anti-intellectualism in American life
-A confederacy of Dunces
-Travel novels by Bill Bryson

Anti-Intellectualism in American Life is one of the finest works of American history ever written. Hofstadter's prose is both precise and exciting, and his scholarship is impeccable. In many ways he's an excellent antidote to Howard Zinn (the guy who wrote A People's History of the United States). Zinn appeals to the rebel in us that wants to completely invert the given order of things, but in the end he's really the other side of the same superficial coin. Hofstadter, on the other hand, is not nearly so partisan (although he was a well-known liberal firebrand in real life): he is interested in a fair-minded examination of American anti-intellectualism, and that's precisely what he delivers. Sometimes he comes to no conclusion, because on some matters no conclusion is possible, but it's an extremely enlightening book.

I also highly recommend Borges, especially if you want stories that will give you a world-class mindfuck. Borges is a master at playing around with time and personal identity, and even when he lays it on a bit thick, it's still very fun to read.

# ¿ Jun 4, 2009 20:08

Bel_Canto: Apr 23, 2007; "Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo."

OctaviusBeaver posted:

Great thread so far!

I just started on Julius Caesar, do you have anything I should be looking for or thinking about in particular while reading it? I have already seen it performed so I don't have to worry about spoilers.

One thing that has already confused me is why the other plotters want Brutus on their side so much, the plan to kill Caesar doesn't seem that complicated and Brutus manages to screw it up by not killing Antony, so why include him in the first place?

I can clear this up, because it's a historical detail as well as a dramatic one. Basically Marcus Iunius Brutus was a HIGHLY respected Roman patrician, and therefore a good person to have on your side. He was renowned for his character, he came from an extremely old and powerful family, and he had a lot of cash. They think that his participation will lend a lot of credibility to their cause, and it honestly did. Didn't do much good in the end, of course, but they certainly wouldn't have had nearly as much of a chance without him.

# ¿ Jun 13, 2009 04:17

Bel_Canto: Apr 23, 2007; "Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo."

MagneticWombats posted:

I think that construction is the old timey way of doing the perfect.

It is; it's a result of 18th and 19th century attempts to make English more like Latin, and that construction exactly mirrors the perfect passive in Latin (i.e. a form of "to be" plus a perfect participle).

# ¿ Jul 22, 2009 16:52

Bel_Canto: Apr 23, 2007; "Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo."

Brainworm posted:

Well, I think the bits that I said about Gen Ed. earlier are probably close to party line for my school -- others might have tweaks here and there, but I don't think anyone would be in downright opposition.

That said, our current GE practices miss some important marks. And everyone knows it. So I got on board a GE assessment matter -- got a grant from Teagle to measure outcomes, do some tests, and get an idea of what our students develop from the beginning to the end of our GE sequence. That way, any GE changes can be informed by where our current system succeeds and fails. I cannot overstate how slow this measurement and redesign process will be.

I mean, a GE revision is probably going to be chiefly ideologically driven -- students should do more of this or that because it's inherently valuable. But I want to make sure that our current successes and failures shape what happens, too. But that means having data with some weight.

So, realistically, we've got another two years of measuring outcomes, plus another two years to design and run new metrics that'll answer questions raised by the first set of measurements. Then we can start talking about a GE redesign. Best case, that redesign takes a full year -- probably two -- and rolls out over the course of four years as students graduate under the old system. So call it seven years through the GE redesign, and a decade before students graduate under the new system.

In short, then, I'm part of the beginning of a GE redesign, but what shape that redesign takes, and when, is over the horizon. It's far enough out that I don't like to think about how much work it'll be.

I'd be really interested to hear more about this as it unfolds. My university is a huge believer in general education, and although I love the way it's done here, I'd love to hear about how a gen-ed revamp might play out elsewhere.

And while we're talking gen ed: I read your earlier posts on the subject, but I don't think you mentioned what sort of system you favor in the now-age-old "distribution requirements vs. specially-designed courses" gen ed debate. Any chance you could weigh in on that?

# ¿ Sep 1, 2009 02:25

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 18:43

Bel_Canto: Apr 23, 2007; "Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo."

Norton Juster's The Phantom Tollbooth. Seriously, it's one of the best children's books ever written.

# ¿ Sep 13, 2009 14:40

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > I'm still an English professor. Shoot.