What were the main ideas we learned this past week?
I found this week to be an interesting one. In the past, I've noticed that I have spent too much time trying to convince students that Literature - with the capital "L" - is more important than commercial fiction. In other words, I didn't let them come to their own conclusions. But, this year I decided to try a different approach.
By allowing students to discuss their initial feelings about whether there should be a distinction between Lit and commercial fiction, respond to three questions in a weebly forum, read responses from CMU students about the differences, and, then, read an article about the differences it seems that we were able to come to some conclusions for ourselves in more meaningful ways.
As far as the debate about what those differences are, I've come to realize that we have some commercial fiction writers that we really love. And, as such, we become very defensive when we hear that their work may not be considered Lit by the powers that be.
This isn't a bad thing. First, I love that my students have authors who have touched them so deeply that they are willing to pick up a metaphorical sword to defend their honor. This is how we connect. Secondly, I love the cognitive conflict that was created.
I made the choice to help clear up the distinction between the two by asking why certain pieces of art are selected for museums and others are not? Just because it is art doesn't mean that it has an overarching appeal or critical statement for the time it was created. Literature is the same way in my mind.
Look. I still love to roam local art festivals, and I marvel at their beauty as much as I do with commercial fiction. But, there is something more when I go to a museum or read a work of Lit. Just like the sports players who have the "it" factor, the authors of Literature have "it" - even if for one moment in time - that speaks to all of humanity.
I found this week to be an interesting one. In the past, I've noticed that I have spent too much time trying to convince students that Literature - with the capital "L" - is more important than commercial fiction. In other words, I didn't let them come to their own conclusions. But, this year I decided to try a different approach.
By allowing students to discuss their initial feelings about whether there should be a distinction between Lit and commercial fiction, respond to three questions in a weebly forum, read responses from CMU students about the differences, and, then, read an article about the differences it seems that we were able to come to some conclusions for ourselves in more meaningful ways.
As far as the debate about what those differences are, I've come to realize that we have some commercial fiction writers that we really love. And, as such, we become very defensive when we hear that their work may not be considered Lit by the powers that be.
This isn't a bad thing. First, I love that my students have authors who have touched them so deeply that they are willing to pick up a metaphorical sword to defend their honor. This is how we connect. Secondly, I love the cognitive conflict that was created.
I made the choice to help clear up the distinction between the two by asking why certain pieces of art are selected for museums and others are not? Just because it is art doesn't mean that it has an overarching appeal or critical statement for the time it was created. Literature is the same way in my mind.
Look. I still love to roam local art festivals, and I marvel at their beauty as much as I do with commercial fiction. But, there is something more when I go to a museum or read a work of Lit. Just like the sports players who have the "it" factor, the authors of Literature have "it" - even if for one moment in time - that speaks to all of humanity.