So I've been doing this for a quarter of a century.
A very brief survey of the use or poetry in high school since
the 1980s, poetry, with bookends…
Riding and Graves made the problem of
critical readings obvious in A survey of
Modernist Poetry (1927):
‘what in so many
words’ ’the critic reader will ask, ‘is this all about’?’ Now to tell what a
poem is all about ‘in so many words’, is to reduce the poem to so many words,
to leave out all that the reader cannot at the moment understand in order to
give him the satisfaction of feeling that he is understanding it. If it were
possible to give the complete form of a poem in a prose summary, then there
would be no excuse for writing the poem: the ‘so many words’ are, to the last punctuation-mark, the
poem itself.’(p 67)
In their discussion which follows, they describe and criticize the way in which the critical reader
goes hunting for the meaning of the poem, or what Riding and Graves called ‘the
prose idea’ which they say is supposed to have proceeded the poem.
The idea that the
poem is something to get behind or inside, to find the ”prose meaning” that must
underwrite it, has been the staple of English teaching in high schools and
universities since the inception of literary studies. Although the type of question changed, the movement was from
“what the poet was trying to say” to “which discourses are evident in this
poem” (whatever that might mean) the assumption that the poem is a carrier of something that can be separated from it remains.
In ‘Enjoying
Poetry” (1981) a book that was ubiquitous in schools here, Sadler Hayler and Powell, introduced
their choice of poems:
‘Poetry like other fine arts, exists to be enjoyed and
appreciated. The difficult task for any teacher is that of developing this
sense of appreciation and
enjoyment in students who initially ‘don’t like poetry’…
Students must learn to examine poems critically and
thoughtfully, to see what the poet is driving at, to consider how well he or
she is saying it, develop appreciation of poetry.” (p.xi)
Exactly why all students are supposed to learn to
enjoy and appreciate poetry when 99.9 percent of the adult population
don’t, is an intriguing and
unanswered question. The
students, reading thoughtfully,
must learn to see “what the poet is driving at”. How they learn to do this is
by treating poetry as a comprehension exercise. Reading a poem and Analyzing a poem are always treated as
synonyms.
For the “Man From
Snowy Rriver” (p15-20) part of a section called “Our Land” there are 13
questions and a discussion point. The first question sets the tone: “Why was
Old Regret’s Colt Worth Chasing?’ but the questions get less factual and move
towards critical statements which then ask the student to speculate about what
the poet did and why. Questions
11, 12,and 13 (p20), end respectively: ‘Can you suggest why it might have been
written this way; why did the poet write it this way; can you say why?”
The final
discussion point, separated graphically from the questions, states: ‘The qualities
of courage skill and endurance shown in this poem are still present and still
needed in Australia today. Do you agree?’
The change in the
class room, or at least in the Syllabus, can be seen in Miller and Colwill’s Queensland Senior English: Theory –practice
connections’ (2003 Macmillan Education Australia, South Yarra) a book which
was marketed as being a resource for the then new 2002 Qld English syllabus.
The authors quote
the Syllabus document in their introduction:
Central to the study of language in this syllabus is
the development of understandings of how discourse, genre, register and textual
features interact and are interdependent in texts, and how they are used in
making meaning or producing readings from, texts.
Queensland
Board of Senior Secondary school studies (QBSSSS) 2002 English, Senior Syllabus
2002.
And go on to say,
“the main focus of this book is on
developing understandings about the constructed nature of texts, with
particular emphasis on how discourses shape and are shaped by, language choices.
The questions
have changed, though the underlying assumption is still there. The poems are to
be got inside and behind. But poems are no longer poems, they have become
“texts” and the assumption was, and still is, that what the novel and the
recipe and the poem as texts have in
common is what is important.
Discussing
Komninos ‘if I was the son of an englishman’:
There are five
questions (p29), ironically framed in a box labeled ‘discussions’: the second:
‘In what way does the narrator position himself as being excluded from dominant
discourses of Australian Identity’: the fourth, ’The poem, although it is
satirical, still privileges masculinist discourses and representations of
Australian Identity? How does it do this?’ (‘Ironic’ because in teaching terms
these are NOT open questions which explore the
text but closed. A statement tells the students the writer’s preferred
answer and then forces them into proving it. We are in the world of Right
Answer English. It’s called indoctrination when your enemies do it. Masculinist
is always a negative term and whatever “discourse” might mean its presence is
one of the markers that “Literary Theory has entered the
classroom.)
Discussing two
poems by Oodgeroo, there are four questions: Question one: ‘In these two poems
consider how Oodgeroo constructs the impact of colonization on Aboriginal
experience and identity’. Question Four; ‘What version of the dominant culture
is offered in these poems and what discourses are mobilized to construct this
version?” (p34)
In case I’m
giving the impression that all this radical work was going on in Queensland
alone Insight, Literature for Senior Students,
by Robert Beardwood Insight Publications
written with the VCE in mind..2006
The section on
“the nature of poetry” which heads the section on poetry in Chapter 1-guide to literary technique and
analysis (p47-62) ends ‘because of the condensed and often abstract quality
of poetry, the meaning of many poems is not immediately apparent, and the
skills of interpreting and analyzing poetry take a long time to develop’ (p47)
Having learnt the
technical terms selected for attention, the student then learns how to do ‘close analysis”, which differs from the comprehension
tasks of Enjoying Poetry in that the
generic poetry worksheet (p92) now includes questions not only on “concepts and
ideas’ and ‘major concerns: themes and issues”, and ‘values’ but ‘multiple
readings: summarise alternative viewpoints you have read or developed” with
references to Chapter Six: which includes a section on Theoretical Perspectives (p166=172) with subsections on ‘Practical
Criticism and New Criticism’,
Marxist, Feminist, and Post Modern readings. (as though a few pages were
enough to help a 17 year old understand and operate efficiently in any of those
intellectual fields. ) Leading to
the sample student response on poetry dealing with three poems by John Donne
with the assessor’s comment:
This is rather a ‘safe’ discussion-the student allows
the dominant reading of the poems to be the strongest voice in the this
presentation. However, they do acknowledge that an alternative feminist reading
could easily be performed. [The student writes: ‘Such a masculine perspective
presents a challenge for some modern readers but would have been less of a
concern for the readers of Donne’s time.’ The
student writer offers no evidence for the latter claim but that’s ok cos in
class she learnt they were all intolerant misogynist racists back in the day] This might have been more confidentially explored. (p221)
(anyone used to
the way such comments are phrased and read in the world of education will
immediately realise the implication which is that ‘might have been’ translates
as ‘she should have done this’.)
The underlying
concerns in this change in reading practices were not literary, and were made
explicit in such books as Reviewing
English (ed Sawyer, Watson, Gold 1999 St Clair press Sydney Rozelle NSW.)
and Reviewing English in the 21st
Century (ed Sawyer and Gold Phoenix education , Melbourne 2004)
In his
introduction to the latter, Graham Little wrote:
However , to argue that a close reading of the
eighteenth century poems of William Cowper and James Thompson for aesthetic
purposes is more valuable and useful for students than a deconstructive
analysis of advertisements for a McDonald’s Breakfast is the kind of nonsense
we get from those with vested interest in socializing students in compliance
with prevailing consumerist patterns of thought. The massive profits of the
health degenerating fast food industry is evidence of the need for deconstructive work on a
McDonald’s breakfast! p15
Not
only is this paragraph is a good example of the use of language and level of
argument but it epitomizes the arrogant
assumption that my students are so thick they can’t see through MacDonald’s
advertising without my help.
In an attempt to explain and make sense of
Post Structuralism, and show how it could be imported into the English classroom, Ray Misson wrote;
The theory of the discursive construction of
subjectivity (i.e. the construction of our subjective selves through discourse)
does give an urgency to work on examining how texts are positioning us, because
these texts may in fact be quite powerfully creating us and our belief systems.
We may need to deconstruct the texts in an attempt to defuse their potential
power over us. (p99)
The number of
conditionals in this quotation illustrates the fragility of the base on which a
teaching method was constructed. This
historical shift to treating poems as carriers of ideological viruses, where
the perceived politics of the poem and the poet became the subject of scrutiny,
and where readers had to learn to insulate themselves with a prophylactic
reading practice, ‘We may need to deconstruct the texts
in an attempt to defuse their potential power over us’, may have made some teachers who didn’t
really care much about poetry in the first place feel as though they were
doing something of earth shattering importance, but the reality was that we
were dragging students through “texts’ they weren’t ever going to read so we
could teach why they shouldn’t be reading them.
The absolute,
obvious, idiocy of the approach
can be seen when the idea that poems are going to infect us ideologically is
actually questioned. Outside the classroom where students do whatever they have
to do to survive and get the marks they need on the way to somewhere else, real people use ‘texts’ in whatever way
they want.
In The Intellectual Life Of The British Working
Classes, 2001 second edition(2010)
Yale University press New Haven and London (which is a beautiful and thought provoking door stop of a
book) Jonathon Rose, having studied the evidence for what people read and what they
did with that reading wrote:
The failure of political criticism, as it is actually practiced, is methodological , with some exceptions, it ignores actual readers. In this terrain, critics repeatedly commit what might be called the receptive fallacy; they try to discern the messages a text transmits to an audience by examining the text rather the audience. This blind spot is not easy to excuse or even explain, given that over the past two decades we have become used to the notion that readers make meaning: they may enjoy a wide latitude in interpreting what they read. We can discover how an Edwardian housemaid read ‘Tess of the D’Urbervilles but only if do some serious scholarly retooling. (p4)
Schools and
universities can, and will, continue to use poems in whatever way is currently
fashionable in the sealed acoustic of their own institutional needs, and it will
always be academically fashionable to make claims for your preferred practice
without ever having to validate it with what would pass for evidence in the daylight
world. Pretending that your version
is in some ways better than the ones it superseded is good for your career and your self-esteem.
The danger for
the writer of poems is that with so few people reading poems outside the
academy, a usage gets confused with the thing being used.
No comments:
Post a Comment