Liberal Humanism is the idea that we read literature to learn its messages (the truths about human nature). I feel that the 10 tenets of liberal humanism and the 5 recurrent ideas of theory effectively supported the theory and provided a solid grasp onn all of its components.

Marxism involves assessing and analyzing a literary work in terms of ideology while questioning and/or supporting that ideology to promote hegemony. This hegemonic power is conveyed through the dominant and dominated in terms of literature.

Structuralism is a theory that says that language is a system that works in specific ways and this language is arbitrary. This theory goes against liberal humanism. It says that meaning is not essential, but reality is meaningful. Signs are read within a literary text with the signifier and the signified. The signifier is represented as a sound or image and the signified is represented as a concept. The equation of the signifier and the signified resulting in the sign is arbitrary. This aspect of the theory especially stuck with me because of the example that was used in class. With the example of the tree, I could visualize what was trying to be conveyed and use that as a reminder of what structuralism says. Structuralism looks at the instability of a text and gives meaning to things based on the differences that surface.

Post-structuralism deconstructs the text to find controversies and conflict. It says that meanings are at odds with eachother to produce new meanings. Derrida is interested in decentering texts and challenging Strauss's Structuralist theory that the study of reality is a tangible presence. Derrida wants to know know why being and presence exist together as the center.

Pyschoanalytic criticism is a language of differences with no positive terms, but gives meaning to "I" within symbolic network. Its simple and straightforward, but we cannot know the unconscious; it affects us but we have no access to it because its unknowable. The center of your being in the unconscious and the subconscious is where dreams happen. The subject is divided into 3 fragmented parts: the imaginary, the symbolic, and the real. In terms of literature, the focus of the text is an expression of the unconscious; an answer can be found regardless of the complexity of a dream.

The theories that I mentioned are the ones that I feel posed the most questions. Whether it was me questioning everything about the theory or it was me questioning why some things about the theory are the way they are, these are the points that made me think. But overall, I really enjoyed reading Mantissa. It was a good book to read because of the engaging and interesting plot, which also made it easier to analyze in terms of literary criticism. The novel includes many of the areas that we discussed in class, such as jouissance and psychoanalysis. I would say that reading the novel was one of my favorite components to the class, I think that it was very helpful for me personally to be able to relate the theories to a text.

Hasta luego,
La Sonrisita

At this point in the semester, I will say that the guest posts have been incredibly helpful. This post was no different! Dr. Krouse, thank you so much for you insight!

When we often think of the term ‘feminist’, there are definitely some negative connotations that surface that seem to fuel the fire of stereotypes. I admit it, it too have found myself jumping to the common stereotypes that can be heard at any given time. But I also don’t think I’ve really ever given it much thought to create new terms, in my mind at least. I've heard people refer to feminists as man-hating butch lesbians who are hairy and unattractive and are more masculine than feminine. Some assume that all lesbians are feminists and are furthermore simply failed heterosexuals. Honestly one term that immediately comes to mind when i hear the word 'feminist' is extremist. I think of someone who is willing to protest very vocally in an attempt to praise women and show that women should be valued for who they are, not for who they are not (men). But like I said, I never really gave it much thought to expand my opinions to any other degree.

After reading Barry's comments on feminism along with our class discussion and the guest blog post, I will say that there is much more to feminism than I really expected. Its more than just yelling and demanding for women to be thought of as the omniscient species of the human race. Feminism is the belief that women should have equal rights as men. And the fact that women in our history have fought for the rights of all women makes me both proud to call myself a women and ashamed that any women would ever have to feel that she needed to make it an effort to be thought of as valued. I also had no idea that there is no law in the United States that says that women are to have equal rights as men; I just assumed it was a given!

Dr. Krouse's post on feminism not only provided me with insightful information about feminist theoretical perspectives, but also about how I personally define feminism. I can gladly say that my definition is now expanded, or at least more educated and supported!

Hasta luego,
La Sonrisita