Lit Crit

[saintbacchus]

Catlady writes:

<<
I always hated English classes all through school. The
lit crit people do a great deal of nonsense. HOWEVER,
once in a very long while the Freudian imagery IS
relevant, and I would expect it to be MORE relevant to
pre-Freudian works, whose authors had not been tipped off.
>>

Gee, I love English class. It's one of the few subjects
where classes enhanced my interest in the subject rather
than destroying it. (I guess I should note at this point
that I'm an undergrad freshman right now, so I'm mostly
talking about high school.)

Naturally, there's a certain amount of blue-skying that
goes on with literary interpretation. The argument about
pre- and post-Freudian works being more or less subject
to that interpretation begs the question: if the author
didn't put it there, is it there? I myself agree - and
Freud would concur - that authors may include themes and
symbolism in their works unconsciously and
unintentionally. I somehow can't see an author saying to
himself, "Now let's see, I need to develop the religious
allegory without diminishing the abandonment theme...."

--Anna