Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Followers
Blog Archive
-
►
2010
(5)
- ► 05/23 - 05/30 (1)
- ► 03/21 - 03/28 (1)
- ► 02/21 - 02/28 (1)
- ► 01/10 - 01/17 (1)
- ► 01/03 - 01/10 (1)
-
▼
2009
(16)
- ► 12/13 - 12/20 (1)
- ► 12/06 - 12/13 (1)
- ► 11/29 - 12/06 (1)
- ► 10/25 - 11/01 (1)
- ► 10/18 - 10/25 (2)
- ► 10/04 - 10/11 (2)
- ► 09/27 - 10/04 (2)
- ► 09/20 - 09/27 (1)
- ▼ 09/13 - 09/20 (2)
- ► 09/06 - 09/13 (2)
- ► 08/16 - 08/23 (1)
A.P. Tutoring Sessions
Attention all A.P. Literature and Composition Students!!!!
All A.P. tutoring sessions will occur Thursdays from 2:30-3:30 P.M.
Please report to either Ms. Kenall's room or Ms. Rinaldo's room.
All A.P. tutoring sessions will occur Thursdays from 2:30-3:30 P.M.
Please report to either Ms. Kenall's room or Ms. Rinaldo's room.
The power of positivity
"Be the change you wish to see in the world." ~ Gandhi
The literary criticism and theory that I most partake with is the section titled All of Reality. This is because All of Reality relates literature to the reality and truth of the real world. I agree most with this theory, because it is easier to see, and learn, from the morals in a book that is realistic. Within this section, I most agree with Psychological Criticism. In this theory you look deep into the work to see what the author was consciously, and subconsciously, thinking while writing the story. I agree the most with this, because I think it is interesting to see what the author was trying to portray in the story, and also how he or she meant for it to be interpreted. With this theory, instead of just criticizing a character on a shallow level, the reader searches for why the character doesn’t seem appealing. This also shows how everyone is relating to the literature differently, so the text is different for every reader.
ReplyDelete-Megan Stavens
I agree with Megan. I like reading books that feel real to me. I think that I get more out of them becuase I can relate with the characters and their situations. The author of any piece of literature can make some part of the piece true to help people relate to it. Making a part of the literature true helps the audience understand and learn from it.
ReplyDelete-Kelly Myers
This is not a response to Meghans comment, but merely a coincidence.
ReplyDeleteI also use All of Reality. When I am reading a piece of literature I try to engage myself fully by connecting parts of it to my life or past experiences. It helps me relate to the characters better and also aids me very well if I am having trouble understanding the context of something, like the time period.
If a book does not have something that I can relate to, if nothing more than an emotion, I find myself become very detached from what I am reading and almost apathetic at points. Griffith says "No matter what the author may have intended, they examine works of literature for signs of their own version of truth." The 'they' is referring to deconstructionists who try to make "minimal claims about the nature of reality"
Even these critics, who do not want to rely on 'truth' and are skeptical about it are looking for their own kinds of truth in the text. This further supports my confidence in using this critcism and theory.
-Kaela Shaw
I partake best with New Criticism. New Critics believe that understanding and appreciating a work of literature doesn't need to have any connections with the author's intended meanings, the author's life, or anything that could have influenced the author. I like this theory because I often think like this when I read. I often find that what the author was trying to communicate, was not the meaning I got out of the work. They believe that everything the reader needs to understand in a work is contained within the work itself. I also believe that everything in a work is meaningful and each idea adds to the unity.
ReplyDelete-Bethany Puniello
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI'll agree with Kaela and Megan, they stated the All of Reality pretty clearly and well. If I'm reading a piece of literature myself, I definitely focus on times or memories I've experienced with the story being told. I think that it does with everyone since it helps people think more about it, and makes people easier to connect with what's going on. When this happens it makes the reader more interested into the literature being told, and will most likely want to continue on since it relates to them in some way.
ReplyDelete-Nick Merisotis
The literary criticism and theory that I most partake with is within the section, All of Reality. I agree with this idea because I enjoy reading literature that is truthful. It has more meaning to me because true literature allows me to make connections to events that I have done or learned about. I agree most with psychological criticism because I like to look at the psychological perspective of issues. It creates a further outlook of the characters and the author of the work. When I read to understand the psychological aspect of the piece, I am able to obtain a deeper thought into the meaning of the literature.
ReplyDelete-Michelle Comella
I hate to have a repeat answer, but I agree the best to All of Reality criticism. I relate the best to literature when I can identify an event or emotion a character is feeling, or an issue he/she is dealing with. If I cannot relate to a piece of literature, I personally won't read it thoroughly and analyze it as efficiently.
ReplyDelete-Shannon King
Along with Kaela,Megan,and Nick, the literary theory I partake in the most is All of Reality. I partake most in this one because when i read i try to connect the story to something personal because that's how i understand the work. If there is a character that i can relate to, the book will become a lot more intresting to me and I'll enjoy it much more. If I am reading, and i can not connect or relate to anything I will find myself bored with the book and unintrested in reading the rest.
ReplyDelete-Abby McCarthy
Every single person said that they partake most in the All of Reality. I myself do this some of the time but if i can't make a connection to the story its not like im gonna not read the book. Sometimes finding a book you cant make a connection to is better. When your reading and the book reminds you of something from your life, that's great that it brings up old memories. One person said in this blog that if they cannot connect to the story then they find themselves bored and uninterested in finishing the novel. Don't get me wrong i do like finding things i can connect to, but if i don't find a character or a section of a book i can't connect to, i like to finish the story and maybe later on in life be able to connect BACK to the book i read.
ReplyDelete-James Smith
The literary criticism and theory that I most partake with would be New Criticism. I agree with it becuase it gives you more freedom as a reader. You don't have to agree with what the author intended you to see. Your own interpretation is just as good as anyone elses. Good literature should also be complex and have a lot of paradoxes that make a reader think about it more and try to better find the meaning of it. New Criticism is my favorite kind because you can't be wrong with what you think.
ReplyDelete-Shane Wilson
I agree with Shane because I also like to have freedom as a reader. Freedom as a reader gives you the choice to interpret the literature the way you want to, but I do not agree with good literature should be complex bacause literature that is to complex is not very appealing to me. The paradoxes are ok but with two many of them it gets a little to confusing. Overall I do agree with Shane.
ReplyDelete-Anthony Francini
I find the post of Megan Stavens most meaningful to me. When she speaks of all of reality, I agree with her that if I can relate to the book (because it is real and not fictional), then it is easier for me to take something meaningful from the book.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting how she writes about psychological criticism. As she thinks, I think it is interesting to see the opinion that the author uses when writing a text. It is another tone to consider (as well as your own) when you are reading a book with comments from the author that are mixed into the piece of literature. Psychological criticism is almost as if you have a friend reading with you giving you opinions on the subject, yet the author is the friend giving you the opinions on the text he/she wrote.
-Jamie Buczko
I agree with Shane and Anthony because they are pretty smart independent people and thats why they chose the literary critisism of New critisism. The reader is more open to interpret the piece of literature anyway that that reader chooses. It gives the reader the freedom to take a stance and support with the readersown opinions. I agree with Shane on the paradoxes because even if it seems like at times it is making the piece of literature more confusing it is adding more interpretations that the reader can make. It is better for a reader to have their own opinoins when it comes to reading literature.
ReplyDelete-Steven Blanchard
Like most people I think that the literary criticism I most partake in is All of Reality. I think this because it shows how literature is connected with reality and truth. This kind of literature is about connecting the real world with what you are reading. I like to do this when I read because I believe that it helps me focus more and engage myself into the book better.
ReplyDelete-Stephanie Bohr-
I most agree with the Reader-Response Criticism. I like this because each reader brings something to the text to make it more complete and make each reading different. This way you could read the same piece of literature and each time the reading would be different. I also agree that the context of the literature brings more understanding to the text.
ReplyDelete-Ryan Sullivan
Like alot of the other people, I think that the literay criticism I most partake in is All Of Reality. I think this because if I don't have anything to connect to, I won't enjoy or even want to understand the text meaning I'll just simply read over the words and not grasp the full meaning. Also, if the book is real and non-fictional, I can possibly learn something new from it, which means I'm almost looking for something in the piece of work and because I can relate to it I'll read it thorougly.
ReplyDelete-Kara McDonagh
The literary criticism I agree most with is New Criticism because it allows the reader more freedom and originality in their interpretation of the work. I feel as if most of the interpretations people make about novels are due to what others have thought before them. Not very many readers find a new interpretation of the work but merely base their interpretation off another's. When I read a novel I try to find a new way of looking at it and try to rid myself of the influences other's interpretations have put on me. This allows for more creative interpretations and, I believe, a better understanding of the book in general.
ReplyDelete-Matt Marchand
I personally partake with reader-response criticism. I believe that having other people read texts definatly helps make the texts better by letting the readers look at other perspectives. This also makes it so that equally valid interpretations of the texts are possible to look at and understand. This, I believe, make the piece of literature even better.
ReplyDelete-Emma Polinski
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Matt and Emma, because freedom to the reader and seeing other perspectives is something that can help an author have a more enjoyed book. Having new views on books can help others understand and look at the book differently, too. A group could use their freedom of interpreting and to compile ideas and better understand all parts of a book. A number of impressions and interpretations can help a reader grasp everything the book is trying to convey and say to them.
ReplyDelete-Ryan Sander
I most partake with Psychological Criticism. I chose this because i find Freud's theory of the unconcious very interesting whether it applies to literature or not. I like the idea that we cannot control our unconcious mind and the responses it evokes from reading literature. Freud believed that everyones unconcious mind is drived by sexual needs and sexual energy. I think it's cool how he applied these pshycological theories to literature and made it less boring to read about in this packet. I agree that you can find out a lot about the author by analizing his/her characters' motivations, conflicts, desires, and inclinations. What i find more interesting is that you can find pshycological clues from a readers response about the reader. This makes the text different for everyone and we can unconsciously connect with the literature.
ReplyDelete-Amber Pelletier
I hate to be another follower in already a long line of people but I must agree with the Reality Critisim. I often find that if I am reading a novel that I cannot relate to in anyway I become very bored with it and do not even bother to continue with it. This is why I did not like the novel "To Kill a Mocking Bird" many of my peers and mostly everyone who I've spoken to who has read it is a big fan. I for one am not, I could not find much if anything at all that I could really relate to that made the text mean anything to me. And in truth by not being able to simply relate to a text does not mean one should not continue to persue it, but in my case that is what I did.
ReplyDelete^^ -Judy Keylani
ReplyDeletehaha whoops.
The literary criticism and theory I partake with most is Reader-Response Criticism. This form of criticism is the idea that the text is incomplete until it is read, and that each reader brings something to the text that completes it. It also is the idea that the text has no life of its own without the reader. I completely agree and relate with this because all works of literature are meant to be read, each reader bringing a new perspective and interpretation, and ways to connect so that it to him or her life so that the work lives. Without the reader, they are just lifeless words on a page.
ReplyDelete-Jaime Trudel
I like the idea of partaking in New Criticism. It requires close attention to detail where you have to dissect the work in order to undersand it. You don't need to learn the authors life and the setting in which she wrote it. Everything you need is right there within the text. This seems the most pure method to analyze literature.
ReplyDelete-Kodi Doane
To all the people posting that they like to partake in All of Reality criticism, that's not a form of criticism. Its not even a category. Look at the chart on page 119, it's not even in the chart it's outside it. How can you can you interpret the literature by interpreting all of reality, that doesn't even make sense.
I agree with all the people who chose New Criticism. I definitely like the idea that I can interpret the literature the way I want to and find my own meaning in the work. I think there can always be multiple meanings found in one piece of literature. Even if the author meant one thing, it could be interpreted in different ways depending on the reader. Therefore, the New Criticism seems like the most reasonable choice in my opinion.
ReplyDelete-Becky Santos
I, personally, agree with Emma on the theory of Reader-Response Criticism. I really enjoy this theory because it states that the text is incomplete without the reader, and each reader has something different to take away from the text. I also agree with the statement that author's leave gaps for the reader's interpretation. I frequently become frustrated because I interpret something as one thing, but the teacher says that it really means another. Why can't I think for myself and have my own interpretations? How does anyone know for certain that this is what the author meant when they wrote it? This is why I also agree with New Criticism. It gives the reader freedom to make their own choices about a novel, good or bad. I'm very much a supporter of having your own thoughts and opinions (if you haven't guessed already) and not conforming to other people's ideas, which is why these themes are the ones that I connected with the most.
ReplyDelete~Lynda Chamberlain
I, along with many other people, partake most to New Criticism. This is because people do in fact think differently. This type of criticism is all about interpreting the work. I think it's very interesting how one small piece of literature, such as a poem, can be interpreted differently and can mean two seperate things to different people. I also like the idea of being able to read a piece of work and being able to interpret it in a way that I would like to. This helps to make the book more enjoyable for me because I will indirectly be adding my own thoughts, ideas, and connections to the book and this will make it more interesting in my mind.
ReplyDelete-Britney Curtis
The form of literary criticism that I most partake with is New Historicist Criticism. The belief of New Historicists is that "literature is history is 'enmeshed' in history" (Griffith, pg 134). I think that this is a good way to look at literature because people have learned so much about history just by studying literature. For example, the Bible was written many thousand years ago and gives historians insight as to the culture, society and events that occurred during the time period that the Bible is written about. In addition to believing that “literature is history”, New Historicists understand that a major reason for literature is to comment on society. The novels To Kill a Mockingbird and The Wizard of Oz comment on the current society at the time period that the novels were written. I think that this aspect of literature (using literature to comment on society) is important because it allows readers more insight as to the society they live in.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the Reader-Response critism the most because the purpose of literature, in my opinion, is to be enjoyed. It is meant to be interpreted and viewed or read. I think that literature is not complete without a reader because why else would the author write it if it was not meant to be viewed? Each reader can interpret the text in their own unique way.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Lynda Chamberlain when she says, "I also agree with the statement that author's leave gaps for the reader's interpretation. I frequently become frustrated because I interpret something as one thing, but the teacher says that it really means another." Personally, I like to read and have my own interpretations instead of being told what the author is saying. I believe that in most cases, the author may not have been trying to say anything and only wrote to have their text enjoyed.
-Sam Burke
I agree with everyone who stated they prefered New Critisism. I partake most in this because of the freedom it allows. It lets the reader have their own thoughts and makes the work much easier to write about because you won't be criticized for having discovered a different meaning than what was intended by the writer. I agree with Briney when she says that New Criticism makes the book more enjoyable because you get to see the work through your own perspective and really interpret in any way.
ReplyDelete-Garrett Mills
I personally partake in New Critisism. This is because when i read a piece of literature I dont want to be influenced by what someone else thought of it. I want to read a book or poem, ect. and feel something new or different. I enjoy having the freedom to interperate the piece in whichever way i want. I find that when it is done this way it is more meaningful in the end. Having your own thoughts and ideas on a subject is much more rewarding and in general helps to better understand the piece.
ReplyDelete-Aleesha Quintana
I agree with those who partake in New Critism. Part of why i love literature is because i like to infer on my own thoughts about symbolism and themes. When i can interpret a story the way that I want I find it more meaningful and insightful. As i have said in a previous blog literature can not be fully enjoyed with out interpreting a book in any way and New Critisim because one can have its own thoughts
ReplyDeleteray cohen
The form of literary criticism that I partake in the most is All Of Reality, just as many others who have responded have chosen. I feel as if without feeling a connection to a piece of literature in some sort of way, I cannot successfully interpret it. If the plot, characters, setting, or any other literary element seems unbelievable to me, I often feel as though the work is not worth my time. This does not mean that every literary element of a work must be true. For example, I LOVE the Twilight series, although many of the characters in the series are completely fictional. I find the truth in the setting and Bella's average conflicts of a teenage girl.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I agree with Judy on the fact that I partake in All Of Reality the most, I do not agree with her statement about To Kill A Mockingbird. That is one of my favorite books of all time because I went through the same struggles with growing up as Scout and Jem did. I also valued the historic accuracy of the book and the complexity of the plot. Judy, I totally value your opinion, but I will say that I disagree with that statement! (sorry!)
-Valerie Stickles
The literary criticism and theory that I most partake with is New Criticism. This is because the way it's stated "They held that understanding and appreiating a work of literature need have little or no connection with the author's intened meanings, with the author's life, or with the social and historical circumstances that may have influenced the author. Everything the reader needs to understand and appreciate a work is contained within the work itself." I agree with this statement because you honestly do not have to understand a way an author feels. All you have to see is how the story makes sense and appreciate what you like about that piece of literature, even if you have no connection to the author's life and how it's explained.
ReplyDelete-Jenna Audibert
I agree with what Bethany said. The way she described the New Criticism makes sense. I think its true that in order for you to like the work that someone wrote you don’t need to know and connect with the same things that the author did. I also like what Shane wrote when he said that you don’t have to agree with what the author intended you to see. I usually don’t see what the author meant in literature. I interpret what the author wrote in completely different ways because I don’t think like them.
ReplyDelete* Nicole Bernier*