Berlin

As some of you know I have a lot of trouble with theory, so I would like to say thank you to Chad. In his blog he states, "The structuralists and post-structuralists show how signifying systems are fundamentally disconnected from the real world, and how the self is constructed from them, and is fundamentally amorphous and conflicted because of the conflicting systems of signs, or codes, that constitute us." I found this helpful in understanding a great deal of what is going on in Berlin's work, and in articulating what I've gotten out of it.

The job that Berlin sees to be ahead for the college English instructor appears enormous to me, but when I read Chad's post, it appeared that while that job is still huge, we are already engaged in it. Whether a composition class is based on literary readings, or contemporary media,we are attempting to allow our students to explore the text on levels of interpretation that are different from those they may already have, or those that were given to them by others. I see this as a significant part of teaching, which in turn makes me wonder if I would make Hairston mad.

I found his ideas for the classroom extremely interesting, but also daunting. I don't know how anyone else felt, but his course outline for underclassmen was daunting in the material read, watched or listened to. Then the number of responses added in and you have one very busy set of individuals. I understand it, and it makes awesome sense, however, implementing it might be difficult. Someone told me the other day that our freshmen students were simply children. Not young adults, just children, which I argue with absolutely. Yet, even as young adults, I don't see loading them down with so much work for one course that they are unable to keep up the 18 hour course load many carry. Then add in the graduate student instructor who also has his or her own classes, papers, families to worry about and it becomes terrifying.

Berlin talks about the purpose of courses such as the ones he outlines. He states, "Again, the purpose of asking students to undertake this work is to prepare them to consider the ways in which the signifying practices in texts were working to form subjects, to create particular kinds of conciousness, along the lines of gender, class, race, age, sexual orientation, and related categories" (144). I would like to do this, because I think understanding that different voices creates different understanding of how "subjects" and etc., are formed is important. I'm just not sure I'm prepared to do it in the manner which he suggests.

On page 189 Berlin discusses a run in with another English professor. He tells us that the other man thought he was in error. He states, "My error, he explained, was that I grossly overestimated the influence of the English department in the lives of our students and the workings of our society. English teachers, he insisted are in the larger scheme of things just not all that important" (189). This professor from "a large Midwestern urban university" may be right. I also think he may just be bored with his job. I think we SHOULD overestimate the influence teachers and English departments have on students and communities. Not everything one teaches will make a spit of difference to the student, maybe not even a small portion, but then again, if something gets through---consider the networking capabilities.