Just wanted to leave a comment to thank you for all these videos. You've helped me understand my Literature class so much better and more in-depth than I could have by re-reading the textbook on my own.
Hi Tim! I'm currently studying for my Literature in English GRE Subject Test. I just wanted to let you know how helpful this playlist of literary criticism videos has been for me. They serve as really nice jumping-off points, and they're very well-made! Thanks for creating and posting them.
Thank yoy so much sir, it helps me a lot n I'm happy that I can face tomorrow's class confidently🙂 It's very hard for me to just catch up my teacher lectures, but I find easier here, once again thank you.
I would love to see you do one about Structuralism and Post Structuralism. Thank you for doing these. They've been super helpful in my Lit Theory Class.
I'm about to have a teaching demonstration about this topic and your explanation inspires me to learn more about my topic first before planning out my class outline. Your explanation is superb! Thanks a lot!
You're a life saver, mate. This is what we're going over in my Intro to Critical Approach class this week, and this break down really helped me understand my assignment.
Wow, ang video na ito ay talagang nakakatulong sa akin! Matagal na akong interesado sa paksa na ito, at ang iyong paliwanag ay talagang nakatulong sa akin na mas maintindihan ito. Pinapahalagahan ko ang iyong kahusayan at pagkahilig sa paksa na ito. Ako rin ay isang content creator, at nag-eexplore rin ako ng mga katulad na tema sa aking channel. Gusto ko makipag-ugnayan at magpalitan ng mga ideya sa mga taong may parehong interes. Keep up the good work!
Hello sir! First thank you so much for your videos, they are very helpful. And I'd like to ask you about what are the similarities and the differences of this theories?
Tim, these videos are fantastic - very clear explanations of complex concepts that can easily alienate students. Can you cover Marxist criticism for us, please?
Hi Tim nice to meet u I have to Question if you like to answer it (it’s about Reader-Response Theory ) Thanks anyway you help me a lot 1- Major Principles & Premises (What is this theory about? What does it call for? What is it against?) 2- Major Concepts & Their Definitions
Tim, excellent. content was good and engaging as were your facial expressions. The editing was superior. And you had it down to 3.05! Do you think placing yourself as afocal point Screen right is more effective then screen left?
Thanks! I try to be expressive to keep video lectures from being dry. I frequently do put myself in the center in lesson videos, but I was trying out the side so I could highlight text on the board and make it feel more like a demonstration. I may film the last three in this series in my library, so I'll probably shift back center for that. Thanks for the comments! I appreciate all feedback!
Tommy Coughlin Oops, I realized that I misread your comments. Yes, I do think screen right is more appealing than screen left. Funny how directions have feelings. Do you know what the old word for left was in Shakespeare's day?
Tim Nance Let's see I'm a southpaw. We shake hands righthanded so we can see there is no knife coming at you. A sinister person might use an Oddsbodkin. ;)
I've been stuck on the same reading response worksheet for like 4 hours knowing what to do ish but not knowing what to write;-; I feel like my teacher's gonna call my blank mind and unfinished homework laziness
I have read several articles to understand these concepts but I couldn't figure them out, and then I came across with your videos, How clear, didactic and expressive you are, How lucky your students are! I only see passion for literature!! Really useful for my public examinations!
Hello, Mr. Nance. May I please know how appropriate is the reader's response approach in analyzing a text when other literary theories are not applicable to it? Thank you.
@@Nancenotes For example, a work doesn't have narratives linked to feminism, Marxism, or post-colonialism, then why is reader's response appropriate to use? Thank you for noticing my question.
Let me clarify one thing, and then I’ll answer your question. Just because a text doesn’t appear to have a feminist or Marxist or post-colonial narrative, doesn’t mean an academic can’t use one of those theories to interpret the story. Here’s a secret: it’s all a language game. One can make anything mean anything if one doesn’t care about the integrity of the text. So, Deconstruction suggested that language isn’t centered on any absolute meaning, and therefore it can be stretched and misunderstood and warped. So, if you want to see feminism, you just look for something pointy and pretend its oppressive-does a character write with a pencil? It’s probably actually a phallus symbol and so he’s the patriarchy! Or you want to see economic disparity? You want to see football as slavery? You just keep bending the picture to make it fit the story you’re telling. People have taken these theories and applied them to culture and pretended that they legitimately show “the truth,” which is why you get weird opinion pieces about how cheese and bird names are racist. Nope. It’s a language game, and there are no rules except creativity. As the cynical devil Mephistopheles says somewhat sarcastically about the abuse of language in Faust, “no need, though, to be racking One’s brain, for just where concept’s lacking A word in time supplies the remedy. Words are good things to be debated, With words are systems generated, In words belief is safely vested, From words no jot or tittle can be wrested.” Now, to your question, Reader Response is always easy to apply because the meaning stems from how the reader responds to it and how the text invites a reader to respond. Therefore, in some ways the content is less interesting than the interaction between reader and content. So, if you have trouble finding other ways to explore the content, yes, a Reader Response technique would always be a possibility.
To be honest, the terms can usually be used interchangeably. If I were to differentiate, I would note that “elements” emphasizes what one might find when looking into literature, while “tools” and “devices” emphasize what an author is doing. They’re two sides of the same process-creating a literary effect versus observing a literary effect. Also, I can’t think of any distinction between “tools” and “devices”.
I think that’s a good organization-features more connected to observation (inherent to the text) as elements and the features that are more connected to creation of effect (specific to the author’s creative choice) as tools or devices.
@@Nancenotes but what if it might not be accurate? Like the way my lecturer wants it......😣 She's pretty strict and I try to imagine it buuut ugh!............and also I'd like to ask if it's okay to give a plot summary of the story before applying the reader response criticism to it👀...btw happy New Year
Happy New Year to you as well! Here’s my advice in response to your questions: 1. Literary criticism is pretty fluid-there are a lot more right answers than wrong ones. 2. That said, you need to know your teacher/lecturer. Obviously, she has expectations and preferences. 3. Your teacher’s preferences also apply to the summary question. I don’t know what she’d prefer, though in my case I wouldn’t spend a lot of words on a summary. Especially if you’re exploring how a reader develops expectations throughout the text and then deals with those expectations. Probably most of the main points of the text will come out in your essay anyway. By the way, what is your text? What are the other specifications of your assignment?
@@Nancenotes thank you for the reply honestly.......it's a book called "lagos noir" featured in Akashic noir series.....and just so you know I'm a Nigerian and I live in lagos, so it's basically a compilation of multiple stories from different nigerian authors about the place I was born and grew up in and tbh most of the stories I do relate to some kind of way but just not a first-hand kind of experience, I can only directly relate to two or three of the thirteen stories in the book which I've attempted to analyze and I'm pretty sure I did the wrong thing maybe but it's my first attempt at doing something like this soooooo........ but the rest are pretty difficult and we were told to analyze at least 5 stories from the book using a paragraph for each stories.....I'm stuck.......btw I recommend the book if you haven't heard of it....... it's a really interesting way to learn about major cities in different countries......Akashic noir features many cities in their series and we're also still gonna treat another series from it which "Mumbai noir".........so long story short the book is interesting but I can't analyze it the way she wants us to but it's maybe because I really don't understand the " reader response criticism".
Sounds interesting! I’ll see if I can get myself a copy! So, since you’re just doing a paragraph for each story, I wouldn’t summarize. Instead, I’d start with the first few lines of the story and talk about how they set up expectations for the reader. If the events in the story don’t connect to you, you can talk about how culture and setting set up expectations for you as a reader. Then, as the story progresses, note how those expectations are fulfilled or redirected. Does it set up an experience familiar to you, but then reverse it or incorporate unfamiliar experience? How do you respond to that? Etc.
What you discussed is only the subjectivist version of Readers'Response Criticism. How about the ones from Gadamer, Fish, Iser, Chomsky, Eco, Jauss, and others?
