Literary and Cultural Theory, 2013

Hi everyone! My name is Liliana Patricia Castaneda Lopez, and I am very exciting (and a bit scared) about this class, I have to confess.

I hold a B.A. in Communications and Journalism from Colombia, and have pursued graduate studies in Pol. Science and Latin American Studies in both Colombia and Canada. My current academic interest is in memory and reconciliation through literature in countries affected by civil wars. I would like to apply for a Ph.D. program in Hispanic Literature in the near future.

Rather than talking about my expectations, which some of you have brilliantly exposed in your postings, I would like to reflect on my fears regarding this class as theory can be an enticing trap too difficult to escape from. I remember I took an intensive course on semiotics several years ago during my major, and I became obsessed with trying to find the meaning behind everything I perceived. Now, reading about the formalists and structuralists brought me back to that time as I tried to look for symbols everywhere and tried to unveil an author’s intention or meaning. Surprisingly, sometimes I realized such intention does not exist or is misinterpreted.

Although for the Formalists motivation seems to go to a second place compared to the procedure and the devices that make literature something autonomous, there seems to be an obsession of overly using a method to explain everything while diminishing other variables.

Hello everyone

My name is Sinead and I am very excited to be sharing my first blog with you all!

I am in my second semester of the first year of my masters in French here at UBC. I studied at The University of Birmingham in the UK where I completed my BA in French Studies.

My background in literary theory is fairly limited, which is the reason for me taking this course.  I am somewhat familiar with Vladimir Propp’s theory on the structure and sequence of fairy tales. I am also interested to learn more about psychoanalytic literary theories and have touched briefly upon Freud in some courses, though not in any great depth.

I am intrigued to discover new insights and different approaches to literary criticism and to share ideas with everyone. I am excited about the blogging component of the course as often so many things are left unsaid in class just due to time restraints. It will be enlightening I’m sure to continue debates and discussions outside the walls of the classroom. I hope that by the end of the course I will have gained access to a deeper understanding of theories and critics which in turn will hopefully help me enrich and further my own studies and interpretations.

Hello all!  My name is Bridget McCartin and I am a first-year Master’s student in French.  I am extremely interested in post-colonial and neo-colonial studies – I spent this past year on the French overseas department of La Reunion teaching English and was able to witness some unique aspects of modern French influence through that experience.  I would love to continue to study the dynamic between France and its overseas departments this year.  I’m also very interested in linguistics, specifically in second-language acquisition.

This is the first class I’ve ever taken on literary theory, though I’ve read some of these authors before – most notably Marx and Freud, who I studied in Political Science and Psychology courses in high school and university.  Regardless, I have never analyzed them in this particular vein – it will be interesting to finally let their ideas take the stage.  It dawned on me today that theory has been a common starting point throughout much of my education.  In previous courses, my professors often used theory as a small foundation for a broader contextual picture, and nothing more.  As an undergraduate, for example, we started by reading Marx for about 20 minutes before launching into a week-long study about the Cold War where he was not mentioned again.  We examined Freud and his theories before discussing various psychological disorders.  This has happened many times – theory being used as an introduction or a basis for a unit.  It serves as the backbone to so many things that I have studied, only to be left and abandoned after serving its purpose.  I am excited to examine these so-called “backbones” of my education a little more carefully.  I’m beginning to wonder what will be the new anchor for my ideas now that theory, once a smaller point of reference and context, is moving into the spotlight.

In terms of writing, the whole concept of theory is something I have often grappled with – balancing papers with both fact and theory is something I have yet to perfect (and that I may never perfect, based on our discussion yesterday!)  I’m hoping this class will enable me to gain some broader knowledge about the main theoretical approaches and the thinkers that drive these approaches.  It’s enlightening to think that by the end of the semester, we will have studied twelve different types of literary theory.  Here’s to further examining the foundations of our past – and likely future – education.

Hola, My name is Esmeralda Robles, I am currently in my second year of the masters program. I did my undergrad degree here at UBC with a double major in Psychology and Spanish. As I mentioned in class I’m starting to do research for my thesis and I had this idea that I had to find a school of thought that I liked the most and stick to it, but as Jon mentioned doing really limits your thinking and its unnatural to try to fit perfectly a primary text into one specific theory. I think my thinking is influenced by my psyc. background were you do choose a school of thought! But I’m very exited about this class and as Nancy mentioned I am ready to try on different “glasses” of thoughts.