English

[EUOL]

So, here's my rant.  Why do we have English programs, anyway?  I mean, what do they do?

1) Analyze literature
2) Teach people to write
3) Analyze grammar
4) Teach people how to edit.

It just seems like that's too broad.  English programs should be eliminated completely, and the following programs should take their place:

1) Comp lit for the literature.
2) Creative writing (as it's own department in the humanities or the arts) for the writers.
3) Linguistics for the language
4) Separate editing programs for the editors.

What would this do?  Well, it would clear up a lot of confusion.  When you say you have a degree in 'English,' it just doesn't say a lot.  People really have no idea what you can do, or what you were trained in.  Having these demarcations would help people to understand the purpose of the major.  

Also, it would stop wasting everyone's time.  Creative writers don't need comp lit classes, yet the bulk of my undergrad credits were really in this field.   Creative writers need classes that look at writing, then analyze how the author achieved his purposes.  That is completely different from analyzing a text to find its feminist themes, or some other mumbo-jumbo.

Let's call things what they are so that people can study what they need to.

[Fellfrosch]

The trouble with that idea is that most people don't have a focus--they study English because it's easy (much like a generic Humanities degree). Also, a lot of graduate programs really like the current English degree because it gives a solid background in all areas of the language, and thus serves as a base for further academic study.

[House of Mustard]

Couldn't they just have an optional emphasis?  For example, with my degree (political science) you could opt to just get the generic degree, or you get a certificate in Public Administration, Public Policy, International Relations, or Practical Politics.  I don't see why the English department couldn't try the same thing.

[42]

Yes, but for getting jobs and even getting into prestigious academic programs, being well rounded isn't good. They want a specific understanding of what you do well.

I actually think there should be a core level of English classes that also includes the GE classes. The core would be the broad range of english skills that don't necessarily relate to the majors, but would be completed in a year or so and would allow the give broad mediocre training with less pain. Then for majors they should have to pick a particular kind of english major that is focused and will give them great skills in one area rather than a bunch of mediocre skills in a lot of areas.

I think EUOL is missing a couple of of Programs:
Technical Writing
English Education (which would be more detailed than english teaching being more than just a english degree with a teaching license.)
English History

I suspect we have so many english programs because it is so crucial to elemetary teaching. Learning to read and right makes up the majority of Elementary teaching. Unfortnately, I think most people grow out of that and don't really need it starting shortly after Junior High. I think literature is kind of a waste of time for the general public. Mostly because I see art history to be about as important, but I know a lot of people who know very little about it and seem to be getting by just fine. It's not the end of the world if someone hasn't read Jane Austin or Hemmingway. They don't offer many job skills and really are just leisure activities.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

Fell, that "problem" sounds more like a solution.

I hated that so many people took "English" because they had no direction.  I agree with Fell. They can actually all (mostly) be in the English dept, but the degrees be those specified above. The exceptions are linguistics and comparative literature, which aren't studying JUST English, but multiple languages.

[Lieutenant Kije]

When I was at school you could focus within the English department.  You couldn't declare a focus or anything, but if you were studying editing you could take the editing courses.  Or the creative writing focus if you wanted that.  I myself did the teaching track, and so at least half of the courses I took in the English department were education classes that focused on English, and were taught by professors who specialized in education.  I kind of missed taking creative writing or editing, because the requirements for my degree were pretty stringent.  So there exists a teaching focus (and separate major) already.  

I don't know the extent of the other focii.  If it's such a big deal to have a declared focus then declare it.  Put it on your resume.  Who cares if the university doesn't put it in subtitles on your diploma.

[Mistress of Darkness]

My issue is, why should I have to take three university classes (Eng 115 equivalent, Eng 251, and 252) that basically covered what my AP 12th grade English class covered?

I, personally, loved my Eng Lit major. It offered the large spectrum of subjects I wanted to study. I couldn't have done Comp Lit, because my ability to learn another language is small, and having my major depend on my ability to read and understand a piece of literature in another language would have been mortally frustrating. Yes, my major did not lead into a job in my field, but neither (to my knowledge) does Comp Lit, or Communications.

I'm not sure that more specific majors are the answer either. Some of the majors EUOL suggested, like Editing and Creative Writing, wouldn't really benefit from more dedicated classes, imo. Editing and Creative Writing largely break down into practice. Alot of practice. Industry experience (I use EUOL and stacer as my examples) is what got them where they are today. They were willing to put in time at stupid jobs that didn't pay them what they were worth in order to gain experience (in stacer's case) or in order to pay the bills while still giving them time to work on their craft (EUOL's case).

And I don't think that studying English is completely pointles. I have learned how to look at a work of fiction or film more critically which allows me to better appreciate the work of art. That ability to look at a written piece of information critically stands in good stead for law and business students, who will spend the rest of their lives relying on those skills. Not that an English major is the only place to learn those skills, but if you enjoy reading Shakespeare and Poe, then why not learn an important skill while enjoying yourself?

[Entsuropi]

I think English is a horrible subject that should be murdered with red hot irons and pointy pieces of chocolate. It stinks.

And the first person to crack a "makes sense for a scotsman to hate english" dies. Via use of a taco.

[Mistress of Darkness]

mmm, chocolate

tacos . . .

[Gemm: Rock & Roll Star; Born to Rock]

Makes sense for a Scotsman to hate Welsh.

[42]

Academic Programs that encourage a lots of practice are usually called vocational and tend to be highly desirable to employers.

As for a greater appreciation of the arts? I kind of wonder about the value of that and how that can be taught. My english and art classes have actually caused me to feel less appreciative of the arts. Learning to criticize has kind of taught me to be ungrateful and dissatisfied with art and mostly has robbed the enjopyment for me that I used to have before I started critical analysis of works.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

I go the opposite route. Having taken classes in aesthetics and criticism allow me to see lots of stuff in art, film, and literature that I never would have before. Without my Grail Literature class I would just think the Joe Versus the Volcano is another goofy movie instead of the goofy soul-searching epic it is. Without my CmLit 310 class I still wouldn't have a single nice thing to say about Thoreau. Etc. Etc.

[Mistress of Darkness]

Yeah. I can look at movies like What a Girl Wants . . .

/me waits for laughter to subside

and I appreciate the small things like camera choices and facial expressions. Eileen Atkins's performance in that movie was really amazing, and she has like four actual lines. It's her facial expressions at events in the movie that really build the character.

[EUOL]

MoD makes some interesting points.  I would note, however, that I do think that creative writing could stand some more specialized classes.  In particular, I think that lit majors and writing majors should study literature differently.  Lit majors want to know why they wrote what they wrote, or perhaps what effect that writing produced.  They look for metaphors, symbolism, and deeper meanings.  Creative writing majors want to know HOW they wrote what they wrote, what tools they used--and most importantly how to emulate them.  I see this as a major difference.

[JP Dogberry]

Having just done two years of three and four unit advanced English at school, I would say my appreciation has been increased. I now can no longer enjoy a film simply for action or exciting plots. I take far more enjoyment in analysing the cinematography of the piece. I get less excited over the climax of the film than a well used film-noir style light/shadow juxtaposition. And any text needs to discuss deep ideas and make social comment.

Hmm...I can no longer enjoy a non-art movie...does that really count as"increasing appreciation?"