Difference between revisions of "2007-08 BM1: Session 2"

From Angl-Am
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 9: Line 9:
 
*The future is a relatively new invention of our historical debate.
 
*The future is a relatively new invention of our historical debate.
 
*If you do written work on the university level
 
*If you do written work on the university level
:*Do not open your seminar papers with explanations of the spirit of the period - which you feel your reader might need to understand the work you want to write about.
+
:*Do not adorn your seminar papers with explanations of the spirit of the period - which you feel your reader might need to understand the work in question (your reader can expected to inform himself on such trivia).
:*You can discuss common notions we have about these periods (as to be found in ''Wikipedia'', the ''Encyclopedia Britannica'' or in specific scientific works) critically - that is if you feel they distorted our view on materials of this period.
+
:*You may '''critically discuss common or less common notions about periods''' (as to be found in ''Wikipedia'', the ''Encyclopedia Britannica'' or in specific scientific works) - if you feel these notions distorted our view on materials you want to examine closer.

Revision as of 16:22, 3 September 2007

Back to 2007-08 BM1 Introduction to the Critical and Scholarly Discussion of Literature, Part 1


  • Our present histories of literature show different periodisations
  • Two positions towards periods should at least be reflected:
  • Periods exist with each period producing its own special works. The literature of a period helps us to understand the frame of mind of the respective era.
  • We produce ever changing periodisations to prove historical developments we want to claim as parts of our cultural heritage. We base our notions of these developments on a canon of literary works which we select and interpret so that they will fit into the respective period.
  • History and the past have played entirely different roles over the centuries.
  • The future is a relatively new invention of our historical debate.
  • If you do written work on the university level
  • Do not adorn your seminar papers with explanations of the spirit of the period - which you feel your reader might need to understand the work in question (your reader can expected to inform himself on such trivia).
  • You may critically discuss common or less common notions about periods (as to be found in Wikipedia, the Encyclopedia Britannica or in specific scientific works) - if you feel these notions distorted our view on materials you want to examine closer.