JD Salinger dead at 91

[@Li3n]

You guys must have had shitty teachers or something. All my profs were of the mind that you can interpret things however you want as long as you can support it with the text.

Even the good teachers had us learn the mainstream interpretation because they didn't want us to fail tests...

he studied Dracula in Romania.

What does that have to do with anything?! Except that he'd know that Bukovina isn't part of Transylvania...

True, except that I've been told by a professor that, even if the author wrote about his intentions, you can still interpret it however you want. This is more what I'm addressing.

I give you George Lucas and the many contradictory interpretations he gave for SW over the years... you'll probably find authors of literature that did the same.

The idea is that you're learning how to apply critical thinking to literature or something...

And there's also the fact that there are examples where a still living author came out saying that the critics where full of shit and got what he/she was trying to say wrong.

And then there's the stuff that comes out subconsciously etc.

 

[makare]

You guys must have had shitty teachers or something. All my profs were of the mind that you can interpret things however you want as long as you can support it with the text.

Even the good teachers had us learn the mainstream interpretation because they didn't want us to fail tests...
[/QUOTE]

What tests? All of my Lit tests were essay tests written by the teacher so it was just another area where we got to show our own interpretations.

 

[@Li3n]

Well rub it in why don't you...

 

[Chazwozel]

Well rub it in why don't you...

yeah, I'm pretty confused as to standardized lit tests?

 

[@Li3n]

Well they weren't standardized per se, but they did try to make them resemble the one we would take once highschool was over...

 

[Chazwozel]

Well they weren't standardized per se, but they did try to make them resemble the one we would take once highschool was over...

Like what? From experience college level lit profs do things their own way. I've never heard of a gold standard lit paper. Do me a favor and stop trying to pile 10lbs of bullshit in a 5lbs sack.

 

[tegid]

He's not talking about college but a sort of standarized test at the end of high school. We have one that determines access priority to different universities.

 

[ElJuski]

But those tests are broken up into different sections...the multiple choice parts don't question interpretation but rather how well one can read for figurative language, context clues and understanding of basic reading comprehension. There's usually a graded essay portion that goes along with it whose purpose is to see whether or not the student understands analysis and interpretation. And, it usually isn't graded on what the grader deems is the CORRECT interpretation, but if the student knows how to apply it to the text itself.

 

[tegid]

Well, as I understand it, what @lien is saying is exactly that, in his case, the graders only take into account if you know what's supposed to be the correct version.
I believe there was some of that in my case too :S

 

[ElJuski]

I mean, you can believe what you want. Personally, its more reasonable that in your cases you were both in the wrong, and not the graders. A case of not understanding HOW to interpret, which is what the graders are grading--not the actual interpretation itself.

 

[Chazwozel]

I mean, you can believe what you want. Personally, its more reasonable that in your cases you were both in the wrong, and not the graders. A case of not understanding HOW to interpret, which is what the graders are grading--not the actual interpretation itself.

From my understanding, tests like the SATs, are looking for basic reading comprehension and not in dept literary analysis of the short essays they make you read. There is a difference.

 

[tegid]

Well, from what I remember I was asked to describe the characteristics of a particular writer's style found in a text, so it's not my case.
But, as I read @lien's case, the teachers actually taught the dry-cut 'correct' answers to prepare them for that exam, so that they would pass.

 

[Hailey Knight]

Graduated lit major here. Let me clarify.

Each professor does their own thing. A good literature professor is going to expect you to interpret things based on the text. This means if you have something to say, you better back that shit up with something from the text itself, and be prepared for other stuff from the text to counter it.

A bad literature professor will want you to interpret things their way, with or without examples. I decided to test this with one of my professors who I was certain was a bad one. I wrote a crappy final essay for the class, didn't cite, didn't try, it was a C- or D paper. I was betting my final grade on it as well. I wrote it tailored to her tastes though, how she interpreted the book, in fact vehemently arguing her point of view.

Got a B+.

 

[makare]

I never had a professor like that. I did have a professor who was constantly telling me how every idea I had fit into someone else's theory - oh that's very Foucaultian or very Sartresque. She is a brilliant professor, and now a good friend. But it really pissed me off.

But I do have a deep seated understanding of pastiche. Lol.

 

[@Li3n]

Whoa, it's almost as if i went to school in another country then you guys...

---------- Post added at 09:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:47 AM ----------

To clarify, our SAT equivalent had us, besides some other stuff, do a synopsis mixed with a literary analysis of a major work we studied during highschool...


Oh, and i'm still looking for an explanation to this btw:

he studied Dracula in Romania.

What does that have to do with anything?! Except that he'd know that Bukovina isn't part of Transylvania...

 

[Chazwozel]

Graduated lit major here. Let me clarify.

Each professor does their own thing. A good literature professor is going to expect you to interpret things based on the text. This means if you have something to say, you better back that shit up with something from the text itself, and be prepared for other stuff from the text to counter it.

A bad literature professor will want you to interpret things their way, with or without examples. I decided to test this with one of my professors who I was certain was a bad one. I wrote a crappy final essay for the class, didn't cite, didn't try, it was a C- or D paper. I was betting my final grade on it as well. I wrote it tailored to her tastes though, how she interpreted the book, in fact vehemently arguing her point of view.

Got a B+.

That's the easiest way to get good grades in liberal arts courses. I had to take a bunch of that shit due to university requirements. I swear those were the easiest classes to ace. No studying involved. Just show up to class, get the gist of what the prof likes to hear, write bullshit term papers, and viola.

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

Oh, and i'm still looking for an explanation to this btw:

I asked the same thing earlier and was answered with a link to some sexy serial killer chick.

 

[ElJuski]

Whoa, it's almost as if i went to school in another country then you guys...

---------- Post added at 09:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:47 AM ----------

To clarify, our SAT equivalent had us, besides some other stuff, do a synopsis mixed with a literary analysis of a major work we studied during highschool...


Oh, and i'm still looking for an explanation to this btw:

he studied Dracula in Romania.

What does that have to do with anything?! Except that he'd know that Bukovina isn't part of Transylvania...

I...I answered that...like a page ago...guy.

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

You answered it with a link with no explanation. Did Stoker care about historical and geographical accuracy? Was he writing with any significant knowledge of Romania? Because, if the facts he was drawing on were just the gossip or fancy tales circulating through London at the time, a reader with far knows Romania isn't gonna be able to analyze his work as well as someone who knows London.


I mean, knowledge of the Catholic Church doesn't help you analyze anything in the DaVinci code beyond "Dan Brown is spouting bullshit" But then, Brown wasn't writing about the Catholic Church, he was making shit up to tell the story he wanted to tell.

Was Stoker writing about Romania, or was he making up shit to tell the story he wanted to tell?

 

[ElJuski]

The Countess Bathory, whom Stoker was purported to base Dracula on, who lived in Romania.

 

[Chazwozel]

The Countess Bathory, whom Stoker was purported to base Dracula on, who lived in Romania.

Isn't that the lady that got her jollies off by bathing in virgin girls' blood?

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

The Countess Bathory, whom Stoker was purported to base Dracula on, who lived in Romania.

This doesn't help me understand how someone studying the book in Romania can school you on the book.

 

[Espy]

The Countess Bathory, whom Stoker was purported to base Dracula on, who lived in Romania.

Isn't that the lady that got her jollies off by bathing in virgin girls' blood?[/QUOTE]

My understanding is that is a legend that developed long after her actual atrocities were committed.

 

[Calleja]

My understanding is that is a legend the developed DURING the scandal of her arrest, conviction, etc.

 

[ElJuski]

The Countess Bathory, whom Stoker was purported to base Dracula on, who lived in Romania.

This doesn't help me understand how someone studying the book in Romania can school you on the book.[/QUOTE]

Think of it as being in the Southwest or visiting the Chicago Art Musuem while studying Song of the Lark. There's immersion, and if done right, you get taught on multiple interlocking levels instead of just focusing on the book. You get more context.

---------- Post added at 06:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:38 PM ----------

And, whenever the legend was developed, its still a legend, and purportedly the one that Stoker heavily based Dracula on.

 

[@Li3n]

Whoa, it's almost as if i went to school in another country then you guys...

---------- Post added at 09:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:47 AM ----------

To clarify, our SAT equivalent had us, besides some other stuff, do a synopsis mixed with a literary analysis of a major work we studied during highschool...


Oh, and i'm still looking for an explanation to this btw:

he studied Dracula in Romania.

What does that have to do with anything?! Except that he'd know that Bukovina isn't part of Transylvania...

I...I answered that...like a page ago...guy.[/QUOTE]

I looked and didn't see it... because you answered before i asked...

\"http://www.halforums.com/forum/showthread.php?p=336583#post336583\" The Countess Bathory, whom Stoker was purported to base Dracula on, who lived in Romania.

No she didn't... even ignoring the fact that there was no Romania back then, she wasn't even in Transylvania, her family just had ties to it (it being under Austro-Hungary at the time).

Check the wiki link you posted, she was in what is Slovakia today...

Like i said, the only thing one would get from living in Romania is that Bukovina, where Dracula's castle was, is not a part of Transylvania, but Moldova, even if it was under the Austo-Hungarians at the time.

 

[ElJuski]

Well, I must have been wrong about WHERE my friend went then; but he did study the book around the area, went and visited Bathary's place, etc. etc. My bad, but the point of immersion still is valid.

 

[Espy]

[/COLOR]And, whenever the legend was developed, its still a legend, and purportedly the one that Stoker heavily based Dracula on.

Oh, I wasn't saying it's not a valid story! Also, She did some REALLY horrible stuff, I'm sure she gave Stoker LOTS of material.

 

[ElJuski]

There's a really shlocky D-movie based on her, too. Think its called "LADY DRACULA". Pretty shitty, funny stuff.

 

[@Li3n]

Well, I must have been wrong about WHERE my friend went then; but he did study the book around the area, went and visited Bathary's place, etc. etc. My bad, but the point of immersion still is valid.

Well it is pretty close... and her family did have castles in Transylvania (i believe one of them ruled it at the tiem). If they made a castle where Vlad Tepes (who ruled Wallachia, not Transylvania) stayed maybe a few months once into Dracula's Castle i'm sure they could have turned one of those into a tourist attraction.

Oh, I wasn't saying it's not a valid story! Also, She did some REALLY horrible stuff, I'm sure she gave Stoker LOTS of material.

Have you actually read Dracula?! It's not very gory (by non-victoria standards anyway), so besides the "using blood to get young" and the area there's not much material there.

---------- Post added at 08:07 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:05 AM ----------

Oh, and the actual castle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Čachtice_Castle

 

[redapples]

Countess Dracula: Its a classic Hammer Horror from 1971. How dare you call it shitty!

 

[Espy]

Oh, I wasn't saying it's not a valid story! Also, She did some REALLY horrible stuff, I'm sure she gave Stoker LOTS of material.

Have you actually read Dracula?!

Yes I have. Thanks for asking.

It's not very gory (by non-victoria standards anyway), so besides the "using blood to get young" and the area there's not much material there.

My point wasn't about "gory stuff", I have zero idea what he may have taken from her story, merely that there is plenty to her story an author could draw on.