ForumsDialogue is Action
Welcome to The Forums! Remember, you may post up to 150% of any required number of posts for credit. This summer, therefore, you can post up to 15 times for credit. In general during the school year, five substantive posts are required by each Friday midnight. Have fun!
Forum check complete for 10/23/20.
At this point, you should have ~35 total posts for 100%. Remember that you can post up to 8x/week for up to 150% per week, if you need to catch up! On MiStar and elsewhere, know that any points beyond 105% total will be reduced to 105% (District limit on extra-credit!)
Forum Credits (these do roll over to MP2):
- The first few times you write, your post may be kept in moderation for my review. After that, posts should publish immediately. I just want to be sure who is posting and the substantive value of the post for people new to the forums!
- All posts should now be visible on all AP Lit boards. You should be able to post without problems (if you have a working chisnell.com username!). If this is not the case, please write me: email@example.com
- Remember that you must be logged in to post! If you do not see your chisnell.com username in the upper right of the page, you are not logged in and your "anonymous" post will not be approved. Are you one of the people who did not get a post approved? Maybe this was the reason. Contact me!
I agree with you that what the point of writing if there is no emotion. I think writing novels is a very emotional process and I think we see this inside Invisible Man there is a lot of emotion that is put inside that work and I don't think you can complete that the feeling that the novel produced is with the issues faced by African Americans in that time period it is needed. I think that Arnold was right when he said you are a viper sucking the emotion from literature because he really is. You can't have this scientific view of art because art isn't physical it is metaphysical at least in my opinion. thats what is important
@gil I think this is a great point to bring up about emotions and writing. We always say to take bias out of writing and reading when it comes to modernism, yes, but then we also say that a piece is meant to invoke emotion, and often bias and emotion come hand in hand. So, that is a very valid point to bring up about modernism and how it can contradict other philosophies very easily.
I completely agree with you in that modernism is good for providing society with some form of a structure in how to gauge the depth and beauty of art. To me, the strong correlation between modernist theorists/authors and depressive states is near impossible to miss. I believe that this may be due to the authors going down the path of modernist thought and found themselves viewing the world differently, and in a way that is relative causation for depression. The thought that art and literature shifted with the modern era into something else can be a disturbing thought to ponder. Has society gone too far? Or is it too early to understand the good that may come with the change?
@MangoMan - I really like the point you make here. I guess I haven't really thought about it from that perspective. Modernism literature and its meaning to stand the test of time because it only focuses on the writing itself, not the emotion that it causes. Emotions change so this ensures that the meaning always stays the same. I still think it is quite difficult however to keep one's own feelings about the piece separate.
For once I find myself in slight. disagreement with your train of thought. I also feel that writing’s meaning can much be drawn from emotional drives. But to be fair, we must consider all of which that is not emotional. Although there is emotion present in order to appeal to the human craving for emotion, the end goal of many writings is to have to reader take something from the writing as a lesson typically derived from the theme. The lesson that one should follow the rules can be found in many stories packed with emotion, yet the end goal isn’t to get you emotional, it’s to teach you the lesson.
@octavia I most definitely agree with you! It would be very difficult to completely be unbiased towards a piece. Our personal experiences and beliefs really find a way to sponge themselves in when we read a piece of literature. I don't really think there are wrong interpretations, there are just those influenced by our personal thoughts and experiences. To be unbiased to the emotions a poem expresses is challenging. I don't think we can capture the full image of a poem if we ignore our initial emotions. Even the thought of being unbiased to a piece of literature is something of a hurdle in our minds.
I have a hard time grasping the idea that you don't need emotion from the reader when they read a piece. I think its because we've been taught that you need to connect to a piece through what emotion you feel and what emotions it's many to represent and envoke.
@conster I think this is a very good point. I definitely agree that a writing can be emotional without having an emotional message, however I think that if a book is only looked at through an emotionless lens then I think that meaning will be lost. I can't think of any examples right now, but I'm sure that it is possible for a piece of writing to have an emotional message that the author tries to impart in you, and if the book is looked at like a machine, then any emotions contained in the book might be overlooked as extraneous, when in reality there is no way of telling if they were.
@gil, I think you made an excellent point in this post. I typically agree with the idea that how you feel about a piece shouldn't affect how you feel about it, but I agreed with what you said about how an author's purpose can depend on the audience's emotion. I think this shows an important question in the idea of modernism. I do think you can objectively look at how a piece is able to elicit emotion. Rather than judging a piece on how it made you feel you can judge the piece on its ability to draw emotion from the audience.
@aaparrot Haha yes there is no way to ever truly separate our humanity from our judgement. I like your question of is it necessary for the society and the literary community... because I don't think modernism is. By objectively judging a piece of work you disregard the valuable aspect of personality. I would argue that Modernism creates a larger gap between literacy experts and the common people who read poems. By claiming that the only way to understand poetry is by an expert's analysis of the meaning you limit accessibility. Poetry does not exist for only the educated, it is for everyone. While yes, an expert's judgement may be more valid than a layperson, it shouldn't be the only way to interpret it. If someone wanted to express and idea or theme, they should just write an essay about it. A poem is meant to be felt through emotion and art, then it should be evaluated that way too.
I think that you bring up a very interesting point about our conceptual training of the literature. I know that personally I look for emotion in text. Specifically novels seem to have some kind of emotional as a fundamental part. I will only find myself not feeling emotion when reading something like a science textbook. Although I believe that I subconsciously do this, does it necessarily mean that I am trained to do so? To this I am not sure, but i am certain that regardless of what we subconsciously search for, we can consciously search without looking at emotion.
@conster I do agree with you man, no matter what we are always going to look at the book with emotion. We are social creatures so no matter what the author is trying to convey, we will always try our best to associate with an emotion so we will be able to understand the piece of literature. And I disagree with you on reading informational pieces not bringing up emotions. I defenitely do feel like the bring some sort of emotional value to the brain wheter that be curiosity or exahuastedness.
@gil I don't think the modernist theory says that the point of writing is to write something that doesn't convey emotions. Modernism doesn't say that we shouldn't have emotions. Eliot recognizes that people have feelings toward pieces of work, and states that this isn't a bad thing. But he says that our emotions can't influence our interpretation. Interpretation is found in something that the reader can point to and explicitly show where they found it in the text. Emotion cannot be found in the text because it is something that happens within the reader. So it isn't wrong to have emotions, or for an author to try to evoke certain emotions- these are good things! Rather, Modernism is just saying that emotion cannot change interpretation because emotion isn't objectively found within the text.
@aaparrot I agree with your counterpoint; that deeply analyzing can really assist in understanding. To respond to your earlier point, it is not necessary to quantify literary work, but like you said, it can be extremely helpful in understanding in a deeper fashion.
@aplitstudent123 your point saying that
If a piece cannot communicate its meaning without a reader looking at its history, then the piece is not a good piece of literature.
really reminds me of in one of the videos we were given in canvas. T.S. Eliot had said a similar thing saying that if it the reader does not get the intended meaning, then the author did a bad job and the piece does not matter. Nicole had started another forum on whether retaining the meaning is the author's or the reader's job, I think you should check it out. Bringing some ideas over, I think that it really depends on your beliefs on theory
- Only Substantive Posts earn credit.
- Five posts/week earn 100% for that week.
- Deadlines are Fridays at 11:59 pm.
- Any single week can earn up to 150%:
- Six posts = 120%
- Seven posts = 140%
- Eight posts = 150%
- Nine posts = 150%, etc.
- One successful podcast replaces 5 posts.
- Are usually several thoughtful sentences in length:
- Demonstrate that reading was done or a concept is understood
- Might quote text
- Express a thoughtful idea about that concept/reading
- May be questions, but if so, also speculations
- Demonstrate that reading was done or a concept is understood
- Are constructive and productive to the discussion
- Are supportive of other members and their ideas
- May/should challenge/provoke/take risks in thinking