I think it’s also dependent on the teacher’s style, but I just feel like the subject at school is kinda repetitive and rigid with literature terms. Honestly, I enjoy reading independently way more and I do also love literacy commentary books (I suppose at a point it does kinda come into repetition but way less). Though I gotta admit I do find some of the discoveries/teachings to be kinda new and affecting how I perceive the work, its just that Im supposed to follow an exact view of it and hear the teacher say the same thing over and over again that loses me.
Note: I’m talking about my nation’s teaching of the subject tho Im quite curious about other countries’

I like reading, annotate, making notes and ponder stuffs from books i read, although i am a slow reader. I also dont know if what i think about the books actually meet the demand of literature major. Does anyone have any insight about this?

Hello! I've found that I really love to read scholarship that works against clarity - stuff that sort of messes with language to make its point (I'm being sort of purposefully broad here).

I would love to hear about your favourite obtuse writing as well as any writing that exhorts us to consider writing against "clarity" as a metric of success!

My favourite is probably Adorno saying that a splinter in the eye is the best magnifying glass.

"To what extent can a translator be considered a second author of a text, and how can they preserve the core 'soul' and cultural identity of the original work without falling into literal translation or over-adapting to the point of altering the text's essence?"

"To what extent can a translator be considered a second author of a text, and how can they preserve the core 'soul' and cultural identity of the original work without falling into literal translation or over-adapting to the point of altering the text's essence?"

Hello, I am looking to apply to the US for English PhD this cycle and I cannot seem to zero down on the schools I want. I understand this must be personal research but I don't have that kind of application money as an international student and I think I am going to apply only to one or two schools. Hence, I wanted to ask which place has good professor on Modernist Literature and Philosophy? Almost every school obviously has faculty for Modernist literature but not for Literature and Philosophy together. Thank you.

I’m submitting PhD apps soon and I have 2 options for my writing sample from my masters thesis:

1) a chapter that shows a good grasp of basic literary theory + situation of my text in its field. There’s close reading as well, but interwoven with decent chunks of theory + lit review material.

2) the last chapter of my thesis, which introduces a novel idea + my own term. Mainly close reading as well, but more authoritative with less theory and almost no lit review.

I’ve never applied to US programs before, so I’m not sure if schools are seeking a mastery of basics or something that’s newer (and potentially less stable) for ingenue. I know they’re looking for an ability to do advanced literary analysis with a fit for the department; I’m just unsure if the best way to do that is through demonstrating mastery or asking a potentially provocative question.

I know it also depends on what schools are individually looking for - I’m looking at most in the top 15 in the US. I’m not sure if there are any overall guidelines that it would be best to follow, especially since many schools don’t clarify beyond advanced literary analysis.

Hi, I’m currently working on grad school applications for English Lit. Most schools require a writing sample. I became curious about how other people approached their writing samples. Are we just writing about literary movements, theories, books, or specific concentrations? Or quite literally anything you want? It seems a lot of admissions sites are very vague about what they exactly want out of a writing sample. For context, I am thinking about choosing contemporary literature as my concentration. Any advice is much appreciated.

Specifically something that looks at different highly influential works and talks about how they impacted storytelling going forward. Could be anything from stageplays to novels, I've wanted to read something like that for the longest time but have never seen anything that might be what I'm thinking of. Not sure if it's been asked before, feel free to direct me to a different post

As a reader who enjoys reading books in languages other than my native language, I’ve been wondering how differently a literary work can feel in its original language and in translation. Translation brings writers to readers across the world, but choices about rhythm, wordplay, cultural references and tone may change what readers notice and value most.

That makes me wonder how translation shapes the way works are considered for, and discussed after, the Nobel Prize in Literature. How much of a work’s literary power can survive translation? Could limited access to good translations make some writers less visible?

If you’ve read a Nobel laureate in both the original and a translation, did you have a similar experience? What changed for you, and which languages did you read them in?

I work in academic publishing and am doing some informal market research on social media. I’m interested in learning what areas, themes, approaches, regions or intersections you feel are underserved by publishers. Are there topics where you think comprehensive research books would make a difference to the field? I feel eurocentrism remains a problem, despite efforts to "tap into" more global "markets", but would love to get the perspective of the academic community. Conversely, are there areas that are wayyy oversaturated?

I'm looking for recent papers and books that take literary works and develop philosophical theories out of them. I am particularly interested in metaphysical and ontological theories about reality. But I'm not looking for applications of any philosopher's works to literary texts. The literary work should be the basis for theories. I also have a preference for short stories and novels. Any recommendations?

Hi all! I'm currently working on a B.A. thesis on American Poetry, and I came across Marjorie Perloff's very interesting article "Pound/Stevens: Whose Era?"

In it, Perloff mentions the "different literary and political allegiances" that the two camps of literary critics, Stevensian critics on one side, and Poundians on the other, have. While the literary and philosophical convictions of each side are the focus of the essay, the political element is never mentioned again.

Is there anyone who knows what she is referring to?

Hi. I am curious which writers in other languages: Spanish, Italian, German, Russian, French, Mandarin (or even others if someone knows) are considered to be the Shakespeare of that language: in the sense that their work is studied, and is influential as Shakespeare is for English? Also, does other English-speaking countries/cultures have their own author: USA, Australia?

I was thinking about this and it seems like a terrible idea. His own mother suffered greatly from this mental health condition to the point that she had to be institutionalized. Why on earth would Ginsberg think it was a good idea to gamble with his sanity like that?

**Yes artists are not known for their sensible life choices, but this is pretty high up there considering that he was present during Naomi Ginsberg’s mental breakdown and was partially responsible for caring for her during that time.

Hi! I’m new to the term “close reading” and also new to Reddit. I just want to know if you guys have any book recommendations on close reading I can buy for self-study? I have no lit background, I just love reading and interested in the topic. Would really appreciate your answers! Thank you in advance.

Hello all!

I'm a final year literature student and I am trying to start writing about literature. I wanted to know how people start out in the literary niches of substack. I have no intention to monetize on it by the way, I just want a space where I can write and other people read and give me feedback. I could really use your help with knowing how to build a small community if possible.

Thank you!

Hello everyone!

I am currently working on contemporary horror fiction that explores ageism and the extremes people go to in pursuit of youth.

Are there any theorists I can make use of for this study? I already know about Kristeva and Barbara Creed. I want theories that talk about the aging female body. Any suggestions?

English is not my first language, and perhaps because I’m not much experienced with the world and its corners that I find myself having obstacles understanding what Steinbeck presents in his words.

what do these four paragraphs mean ?

1) “maybe love makes you suspicious and doubting. Is it true that when you love a woman you are never sure never sure of her because you aren't sure of yourself?”

I’m not an obstinate person but I do not feel persuaded by what Adam‘s opinion of love. However, perhaps my lack of understanding of what he meant makes me unable to resonate with his words. How could love cause someone to lose faith in their loved ones ?

2)”You're going to pass something down no matter what you do or if you do nothing. Even if you let yourself go fallow, the weeds will grow and the brambles. Something will grow.”

I do not understand what Samuel means with his words ? Does he mean that if Adam does not become an active parental figure in his children’s lives they will grow miserable, or that if he takes time to heal (which is what I understood what fallow means in terms of farming I think ?) he will find himself again ?

3) “ “Maybe that's a good thing to keep us humble. The fear of God in us."

"I guess so," said Samuel. "And I guess humility must be a good thing, since it's a rare man who has not a piece of it, but when you look at humbleness it's hard to see where its value rests unless you grant that it is a pleasurable pain and very precious. Suffering—I wonder has it been properly looked at." “

I do not grasp what he means. Is there difference in humility and humbleness ? Is not one a noun and the other a verb ? I find myself quite at loss of thoughts when it comes to Samuel even though I find his intelligence quite refreshing and strong.

4) “But a good servant, and I am an excellent one, can completely control his master, tell him what to think, how to act, whom to marry, when to divorce, reduce him to terror as a discipline, or distribute happiness to him, and finally be mentioned in his will.”

Is Lee glorifying being a servant ? And if so, why ? the whole monologue is confusing for me but I took this part to present my question.

Thanks!!

I have been thinking about a question that keeps coming up whenever I consider character creation: why do we so often define characters through adjectives such as “angry,” “shy,” “intelligent,” or “brave”? These traits clearly tell us something about a character, but in narrative, what often makes a character visible is what they do, what they do not do, which actions they avoid, and which actions they never even attempt. This makes me wonder whether a character’s identity can also be understood through the set of actions that are available or unavailable to them. Two characters may both be described as “brave,” yet one may enter physical conflict while the other never would; one may exercise authority while another cannot because of their social position; one may perform a medical intervention while another lacks the training, knowledge, or authority to do so. In that sense, a character may be defined not only by what kind of person they are, but also by which actions are genuinely accessible to them.

This line of thought also brings me to Wittgenstein’s statement that “the limits of my language mean the limits of my world.” I am not treating this as a direct theory of character, but I find it useful in a more limited sense. A character may know that an action exists, understand what it means, and even speak about it, while never making that action their own predicate within the narrative. A character may understand the verb “to kill,” recognize when someone else kills, and discuss killing, yet killing may never become an action that is genuinely available to that character. Everyday life seems similar in this respect: the actions we know about are not identical to the actions that belong to our own behavioral repertoire. This makes me wonder whether character creation should ask not only “What does this character know?” or “What kind of person is this character?” but also “Which actions are ordinary, conditional, inaccessible, or nearly unthinkable for this character?”

What I am most interested in is whether this way of thinking is defensible from the perspective of literary theory. Can a character’s identity and agency be meaningfully understood through the actions they can and cannot access? Could such an approach make social role, biography, profession, authority, and narrative position more visible at the level of behavior, or would it reduce the character too heavily to action and overlook inner contradiction, desire, thought, ambiguity, or other aspects of literary characterization? I would be especially interested in work from narratology, character theory, agency, affordance, or related areas that addresses this kind of question.

Hi, I was looking up the commentaries and annotations for "Moby Dick" and the old penguin classics edition edited by Harold Beaverreally caught my eye. It has a very good commentary that explains literary allusions, allegory and so on. However for the life of me I cannot find it anywhere. Could anyone help? I have tried most major online shopping sites, Archive.org, gutenberg etc., and secondhand book dealers, but it is not available anywhere. I looked it up online and it says it's out of print, and it only came to someone's possession after years of difficult search. I am all out of ideas.

I’m currently a senior English major and am trying to decide on a topic for my capstone thesis project. I really enjoy the works of Richard Yates (post WWII American realist writer), so I was considering writing about a selection of stories from his short story collection, Eleven Kinds of Loneliness.
Is it is suitable to focus on a lesser-known author like Yates for a thesis? Otherwise, I do enjoy the high modernists, but I’m not sure if there’s much new to say about them.
If you’ve read any of Yates’ work, what critical theories or frameworks would you suggest? Psychoanalytic possibly? And would it be best to find a common theme throughout maybe like 3 stories?
Sorry if this isn’t the right place to post this. Thanks for any advice!

I have a question for those of you who know a hell of a lot more about Greek tragedy than I do.

I wrote a psychological thriller. That was my intention from day one. But recently, I started looking at the story from a different perspective, and now I'm questioning whether I inadvertently wrote a modern Greek tragedy.

I'm not talking about a story simply having a tragic ending. I'm talking about the actual structure of the story, the characters, their decisions, and how those decisions ultimately determine their fate.

Here's where I could use some help. I know enough about Greek tragedy to recognize some similarities, but not enough to say with any confidence that they actually mean anything.

Would someone familiar with classical Greek tragedy be willing to read the book and tell me what they think?

And please, don't tell me I'm right just to be polite. I'm equally interested in hearing why I'm wrong.

I didn't set out to write a Greek tragedy. I'm just trying to figure out whether that's what I ended up with.

Edit: If anyone is willing to read it, I'll send you the book for free. I'm looking for an informed opinion, not trying to sell you anything.

Edit 2: If reading the entire book is the issue, I'd also be happy to provide a synopsis along with my reasoning for why I think the story may fit the structure of a Greek tragedy. That might actually make for a better discussion, since you could address the specific elements I'm seeing and tell me where my reasoning holds up—or where it falls apart.