theory.


I must start this by explaining no one actually provoked this by arguing with me. My brother simply asked me a question about literary theory, and this is what resulted. I will offer no apologies, but I am aware I am a huge nerd and a lunatic for this rant.

I hate literary theory. I was first introduced to theory (without a real introduction, just kind of thrown into it and then having it shoved down my throat) during my first year of college. The professor I had was just shy of being a femi-nazi, but I grew to like her nonetheless. My study of theory didn't end there, and I'm afraid it will continue yet another semester saturated with snobby old school teachings of literature.

So I wasn't biased (ha) I stole these definitions from Wikipedia so if you weren't familiar with theory, and still cared enough to read this, you had some background:

-Darwinian literary studies - situates literature in the context of evolution and natural selection

-Deconstruction - a strategy of close reading that elicits the ways that key terms and concepts may be paradoxical or self-undermining, rendering their meaning undecidable

-Gender (see feminist literary criticism) - which emphasizes themes of gender relations (this is the most insane approach)

-Marxism (see Marxist literary criticism) - which emphasizes themes of class conflict

-New Criticism - which looked at literary works on the basis of what is written, and not at the goals of the author or biographical issues (what I like to refer to as "Death of the Author")

-New historicism - which examines a text by also examining other texts of the time period

-Postcolonialism - focuses on the influences of colonialism in literature, especially regarding the historical conflict resulting from the exploitation of less developed countries and indigenous peoples by western nations

-Post-modernism - criticism of the conditions present in the twentieth century, often with concern for those viewed as social deviants or the Other


If I'm being rational, I can appreciate these theories for what they are. But that's simply what they are; theories. Theorists make this shit up because they are afraid of the power of the individual. I think theories should be an afterthought of literature, something you can bullshit with the professor after class to kind of defer him from trying to sleep with you. Literature is about the love for the word, about the art you can make with the word. Theory sucks the life out of the word, categorizes it, and psycho analyzes it until there is nothing left. Think about the most romantic event of your life, are you going to sit there and pick it apart? No! You're going to appreciate the beauty of it, and the joy it brought you. That's what literature is all about, at least for me. I find romance in literature (and not the cliche kind with roses and diamonds and illegitimate children), and I would never want to incorporate terminology to dry it up. The next time (if ever) you attend an English class and a professor tells you theory is something valuable, listen to him/her because if you don't you're probably going to flunk out, but in the process, jump up on your desk and contend the fight for romance in the word.