Books and lectures
Oct. 8th, 2003 08:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
triskellianOne of the things Philip Pullman said last night in the lecture I went to with ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
secretrebel (smiorgan didn't feel up to it in the end, so she came after all - thanks!) was that you should always say the stuff that seems obvious, because it might not be obvious to everyone else, and because if you don't, people might think you didn't notice. It's something I struggle with.
My current course, Contemporary Writing, studies texts that are, for the most part, too new to have much in the way of critical response to them. We don't know yet whether they're going to be considered good or bad in the long term, and the tutors are discovering their interpretations of them along with the students. Part of today's lecture was about how it's OK to dislike some of the texts and to scrabble for meaning in them. This, combined with the basic reluctance of most people to speak in large groups, means that the seminars have so far been rather stilted. It's hard to find something to say that you're confident with, and I, at least, am dismissing many of the things I might say because they seem obvious to me. Of course, this leads to me kicking myself when someone else voices the very thought I've discarded. Should I have said it after all? Or should I be dismissive of the person who has been confident enough to say it, because it's too obvious to point out? Being older than most of them is both an advantage and a disadvantage. I'm more confident than most, I think, and willing to speak if I have something to say, but see less point in saying something obvious, just to have something to say. Or maybe it's nothing to do with age, and it's just me. Maybe I'm merely justifying myself. Perhaps my general confidence is vying with my academic insecurity. Whatever the reason, it's adding a whole extra level of challenge to the experience.
Today's book, the Granta anthology of the best young British novelists, is the one that started with 'Helen and Julia', the Sarah Waters story that I didn't like. Since then, I've read various other stories in the collection, and disliked quite a few of them. Fortunately, the one I read this morning, AL Kennedy's 'Room 536', was one I liked much more. I'm feeling re-energised about the reading list, and determined to have another try at liking Austerlitz, which I've been attempting on and off all summer, and hating. So that's enough writing for now - I'm going to read for the rest of the evening.
secretrebel (smiorgan didn't feel up to it in the end, so she came after all - thanks!) was that you should always say the stuff that seems obvious, because it might not be obvious to everyone else, and because if you don't, people might think you didn't notice. It's something I struggle with.My current course, Contemporary Writing, studies texts that are, for the most part, too new to have much in the way of critical response to them. We don't know yet whether they're going to be considered good or bad in the long term, and the tutors are discovering their interpretations of them along with the students. Part of today's lecture was about how it's OK to dislike some of the texts and to scrabble for meaning in them. This, combined with the basic reluctance of most people to speak in large groups, means that the seminars have so far been rather stilted. It's hard to find something to say that you're confident with, and I, at least, am dismissing many of the things I might say because they seem obvious to me. Of course, this leads to me kicking myself when someone else voices the very thought I've discarded. Should I have said it after all? Or should I be dismissive of the person who has been confident enough to say it, because it's too obvious to point out? Being older than most of them is both an advantage and a disadvantage. I'm more confident than most, I think, and willing to speak if I have something to say, but see less point in saying something obvious, just to have something to say. Or maybe it's nothing to do with age, and it's just me. Maybe I'm merely justifying myself. Perhaps my general confidence is vying with my academic insecurity. Whatever the reason, it's adding a whole extra level of challenge to the experience.
Today's book, the Granta anthology of the best young British novelists, is the one that started with 'Helen and Julia', the Sarah Waters story that I didn't like. Since then, I've read various other stories in the collection, and disliked quite a few of them. Fortunately, the one I read this morning, AL Kennedy's 'Room 536', was one I liked much more. I'm feeling re-energised about the reading list, and determined to have another try at liking Austerlitz, which I've been attempting on and off all summer, and hating. So that's enough writing for now - I'm going to read for the rest of the evening.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-28 07:03 am (UTC)That is, in fact, the very conclusion I am slowly coming to. I shouldn't be, but am, surprised how little most of the straight-from-school students actually engage with what the tutors, and those of us who do speak in class, say.
Your comment about it getting better with postgrad study ties in with my half-theory about it being an age thing, as well. All (sixish) of the 'mature students' in my class contribute; only about two of the (twentyish) kids do ;-)