How to study English in MH101

karaokeman

Hi all, I'm in MH101 English through Arts.

I'm using the new first year textbook to see if I can learn myself to adjust to the way English is thought at university level.

I have the Wordsworth assignment finished (thankfully:D) and have just read The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. I know that in college you're expected to read and analyse texts yourself so I'm trying to do that now looking at all the different ways of reading Huckleberry Finn.

I'm wondering other than a lot more theory, in what ways is writing about literature different to the LC?

Seren_

First of all, learning how to do up a bibliography and cite texts properly is really important. You won't lose that many marks in your first few essays for not referencing properly, but after that they get very strict about it. The referencing style used by the English department is MLA (Modern Language Association) style - there is probably a document on moodle explaining how it's done; there's loads of info online too. If you spend a little while trying to understand it now, it will be really handy for you later on. Referencing is not hard, it is basically just like following a pattern Remember though, each subject you're studying will usually have a different style of referencing to learn.

There isn't a huge amount of studying that needs to be done for English really... Read a few secondary articles on the texts you've studied in class and make notes on these. Just try and understand the various different ways of looking at the text, and you will be grand.

wonton

The most important part is probably reading secondary texts, there should be books in the library on specific texts you do or at least authors which will have chapters on certain works.

Theres usually plenty of info in these books and if you should combine this with some original thought and ideas, maybe saying why you agree or disagree with some of the analytical points.

but you text is right in saying that you really must learn to reference properly its defo the most important new aspect in college.


tbh even the fact that you are asking stuff like this so early shows that you are going to put in the work, so I imagine you will do good!

karaokeman

Thanks guys/gals.

I will defo learn how to reference properly and get my head around this.

What is the comparative study like? Is it similar to the LC and would we be asked about it more often than a single text?

pennypocket

Hi, former English student here, great that you're interested so early in engaging with your work. I would agree with other responses on citing properly and reading the secondary texts. I would add that it is most important that you read the secondary works recommended by lecturers in course outlines (that includes those on reserve in the library!!) but the most important and perhaps distinctive element in university is engaging with those texts on your own terms -especially the primary works. The leaving cert English course usually involves a regurgitation of the agreed consensus on a particular writer to do well; in university rote learning only gets you so far. Enjoy the freedom and the intellectual exploration involved (backed up by cited evidence of course!), and the amazing teaching from some fabulous lecturers. Read widely and be relevant to contemporary academic research, and above all remember your own perspective is key.

CaoimH_in

Final year English student: my advice is to think about the theory in a practical sense (i.e romantic theory, feminist theory &c); look at your sentences closely and try to get a feel for something that resembles the eloquence you see in some of your secondary sources; buy this, and this, or something like them and most important of all, give yourself time, there will be a certain amount of quality lost if you rush and you're not a competent writer.

P.s. They will barrage you with 'readings' for lectures. I cannot speak for my fellow English students but I didn't get all of them read, sometimes if there were five, I might get two big ones or three little ones read. While for seminars, I advise you to read and understand most of whats given and make notes. Lecturers can be an intimidating bunch when your face-to-face with them in seminars, but do try and add to the discussion.

karaokeman

Thanks again for the advice CaoimH in and pennypocket.

To be quite honest I was never really a big reader before I started college but so far I read Huckleberry Finn in a week (a pace I never would have been able to work at in secondary school) and Kim is coming along well.

I am ready to read extensively and that means keeping up with the secondary reading on moodle and following what is going on in tutorials.

I actually got 50% in my first tutorial assignment and 40% in my second but I'm not willing to let that stop me. In secondary school I failed English in my 5th year christmas exams and moved on to getting A essays in 6th year and a B in the LC, in honours of course. So I know how bad I do won't affect me in the long run, if I learn to deal with how the course is thought. I am putting all the effort I can into the next assignment for monday and am determined to do much better in it.

Currently I've compiled a list of the complete literary history going from Old English up until Post-Modernism and I also made lists of the major writers and the major works. Also summarising the main definitions of each period in my own words for the start of each section. I will refer back to this big sheet whenever I need to understand the literary chronology.

And of course I will make my own points and put them forward in tutorials.

Hopefully if I learn the formula for doing well and getting A standard essays I will be able to keep it up. I know in college the formula will be much different but in secondary school thats how I learned to go from F essays and jump straight to A standard's. I also won't be relying on rote learning in the long run because I know a degree is all about independent learning and I will realise that.

Cavehill Red

Ignore that Saussurean death of the author stuff. It might be some time since Penny was a student; that stuff is very dated nowadays.

karaokeman wrote: »

Currently I've compiled a list of the complete literary history going from Old English up until Post-Modernism and I also made lists of the major writers and the major works. Also summarising the main definitions of each period in my own words for the start of each section. I will refer back to this big sheet whenever I need to understand the literary chronology.

I'm not sure how useful that would be as an exercise. Context is useful, but definitions of what the English canon contains differ widely.

karaokeman wrote: »

And of course I will make my own points and put them forward in tutorials.

This is crucial - in a sense the purpose of the course is to help you learn to think for yourself and generate your own perspectives.

karaokeman wrote: »

Hopefully if I learn the formula for doing well and getting A standard essays I will be able to keep it up. I know in college the formula will be much different but in secondary school thats how I learned to go from F essays and jump straight to A standard's. I also won't be relying on rote learning in the long run because I know a degree is all about independent learning and I will realise that.

The formula is: there is no formula. Read closely, read widely, read secondary texts, read incessantly. Then formulate your own thoughts. There is no formula. English isn't like Physics.

Kinski

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Ignore that Saussurean death of the author stuff. It might be some time since Penny was a student; that stuff is very dated nowadays.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this, but it's worth noting that NUIM has what may well be the most theory-intensive English course in the country.

Cavehill Red

Kinski wrote: »

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this, but it's worth noting that NUIM has what may well be the most theory-intensive English course in the country.

TCD would likely disagree.
Barthes's essay was almost half a century ago. Saussure further back again. This is not remotely, as Penny suggested, "contemporary academic research."

Kinski

Cavehill Red wrote: »

TCD would likely disagree.

I don't know about that, but I'm not willing to go and make a comparison of the two depts' respective undergrad courses and recent research output. Yet.

Barthes's essay was almost half a century ago. Saussure further back again. This is not remotely, as Penny suggested, "contemporary academic research."

Undergrads in Maynooth's English course can expect to hear about both at some point, and will probably be assigned readings from Barthes at least.

No, they are not contemporary, but some knowledge of their work is required to understand the history and development of literary theory.

karaokeman

Cavehill Red wrote: »

The formula is: there is no formula. Read closely, read widely, read secondary texts, read incessantly. Then formulate your own thoughts. There is no formula. English isn't like Physics.

I stand corrected, that is a good point.

karaokeman

Kinski wrote: »

some knowledge of their work is required to understand the history and development of literary theory.

This is why my chronological sheet of literary history is important.

I'm using it so that I can learn to grasp putting everything in that context, as I know this is essential to do well.

Cavehill Red

Kinski wrote: »

I don't know about that, but I'm not willing to go and make a comparison of the two depts' respective undergrad courses and recent research output. Yet.

TCD's undergrad course has been theory heavy for some two decades or so now.

Kinski wrote: »

Undergrads in Maynooth's English course can expect to hear about both at some point, and will probably be assigned readings from Barthes at least.

They can expect to hear about a lot of things, from Medieval poetry to film studies. Post-structuralism is neither contemporary nor central.

Kinski wrote: »

No, they are not contemporary, but some knowledge of their work is required to understand the history and development of literary theory.

Some knowledge of Aristotle is required to understand that too. And Freud. And Marx. And so on, and so on. French post-structuralism is very dated and no longer in fashion, though it clearly still has its adherents, I see.

Kinski

Cavehill Red wrote: »

TCD's undergrad course has been theory heavy for some two decades or so now.

I'm sure it's theory heavy now, but if what you say is true then it must have undergone a dramatic transformation circa 1990. I know someone who studied English there in the late '80s and the only theory module he ever took was an elective in his final year.

Some knowledge of Aristotle is required to understand that too. And Freud. And Marx. And so on, and so on. French post-structuralism is very dated and no longer in fashion, though it clearly still has its adherents, I see.

And they'll be lectured on Aristotle, Freud, Marx, and a host of other theorists too, including some not yet in their graves.

Post-structuralism is neither contemporary nor central.

I never claimed it was.

They can expect to hear about a lot of things, from Medieval poetry to film studies.

Actually, they won't be doing any Medieval poetry. Like a lot of English depts, they decided to drop their modules in that area a few years back.

Since you're making assumptions about what's on the course, I'm going to assume that you either did not study here, or did not do so recently. But don't let that stop you from telling a current student of Maynooth's English Dept what is and isn't on the course.

CaoimH_in

He is a first year and you are talking out of your arse, Cavehill Red. You cannot expect him to attack the course with an instant fluency. His knowledge of Literary Theory will of course develop and I assume Penny makes reference to Barthes because it's the first essay taught for English; though he isn't contemporary. Some of your other points are helpful though.

To be honest, the chronological history would be very helpful for someone not well read in literature. The canon perhaps a sign of enthusiasm but, nevertheless, still might come in handy - just don't spend too long making out those notes, Karaokeman.

Try to continue being as enthusiastic, read a lot and be conscious of your writing-style. Try to write everyday and if you wanted to join Lit and Deb; that's a bit of fun too.

I'm sure with work you'll do fine, I mean, I did ordinary level English for my Leaving Cert and I've managed firsts (mind, I got an A1 in ordinary). Channel your enthusiasm into a good work ethic and like I said, you'll do wondrously.

Cannot recommend a good grammar book though.

P.S. We did a bit of Post-Structuralism in relation to Judith Butler's critique of gender.

P.P.S To my mind we didn't do anything prior to Renaissance (if we did, we did so to a very small degree) and we have an entire module dedicated to film, so it's not just mentioned in passing.

Cavehill Red

Kinski wrote: »

I'm sure it's theory heavy now, but if what you say is true then it must have undergone a dramatic transformation circa 1990. I know someone who studied English there in the late '80s and the only theory module he ever took was an elective in his final year.

It came in with the appointment of the theorist Thomas Docherty to head of Department around 1991 or so. His replacement of a core Shakespeare module with a course on Raymond Williams and the Frankfurt School caused ructions at the time, it seems. Docherty didn't stay long, and is now at Warwick writing primarily on politics and alterity. However, the theory has remained.

Kinski wrote: »

And they'll be lectured on Aristotle, Freud, Marx, and a host of other theorists too, including some not yet in their graves.

Indeed. Not that being dead means being non-influential, of course.

Kinski wrote: »

I never claimed it was.

I didn't say you did. Penny did.

Kinski wrote: »

Actually, they won't be doing any Medieval poetry. Like a lot of English depts, they decided to drop their modules in that area a few years back.

Not even in EN252?

Kinski wrote: »

Since you're making assumptions about what's on the course, I'm going to assume that you have either did not study here, or did not do so recently. But don't let that stop you from telling a current student of Maynooth's English Dept what is and isn't on the course.

Actually I did study English at NUIM back in the Nineties. I'm not current or central either, though perhaps a little more current than Roland Barthes!

Kinski

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Not even in EN252?

In "Renaissance to Restoration"? No.

Cavehill Red

Kinski wrote: »

In "Renaissance to Restoration"? No.

I'm not looking to argue with you, but I'd be almost certain that they will hear about medieval poetry during that course at some point.

Kinski

Cavehill Red wrote: »

I'm not looking to argue with you, but I'd be almost certain that they will hear about medieval poetry during that course at some point.

Depends what you mean by "hear about." I should mention that I never took that course, as it didn't exist at the time. From the module description:

The module begins by considering ideas of writing that developed in England from the late sixteenth century, before examining the poetry and drama of Shakespeare and his contemporaries in relation to evolving questions of self-fashioning, political power, cultural difference, gender and also class.

But all the old courses in Middle English literature are now gone.

Cavehill Red

Kinski wrote: »

Depends what you mean by "hear about." I should mention that I never took that course, as it didn't exist at the time.

I mean hear about in the same way I suggested the students will hear about film studies and post-structuralism too. There is no course on post-structuralism either to my knowledge, but they will be made aware of it as they progress through other courses wherein it will be mentioned. Similarly, I suspect that the medieval poetry out of which the early modern literature developed will be mentioned during a course covering the Renaissance.

Kinski wrote: »

But all the old courses in Middle English literature are now gone.

What a terrible shame. It's as short-sighted as the former Oxford English Lit course which refused to consider literature after 1820.

Kinski

Cavehill Red wrote: »

I mean hear about in the same way I suggested the students will hear about film studies and post-structuralism too. There is no course on post-structuralism either to my knowledge, but they will be made aware of it as they progress through other courses wherein it will be mentioned. Similarly, I suspect that the medieval poetry out of which the early modern literature developed will be mentioned during a course covering the Renaissance.

Oh sure, but mentioning something is not the same as asking students to actually go and read it. While a lecturer on a theory module might choose, in any given year, to devote several lectures to, say, Mythologies, or to volume one of Capital, nobody will be devoting even one to The Cantebury Tales.

What a terrible shame. It's as short-sighted as the former Oxford English Lit course which refused to consider literature after 1820.

It is a shame, but that seems to be the way things are going in British and Irish English Departments.

I get the impression that the design of Oxford's English courses can be quite arbitrary. Their Masters courses all bear titles like "English: 1800-1900." Not sure where that leaves a student who wants to work on a writer whose output spans two centuries.

Cavehill Red

Kinski wrote: »

Oh sure, but mentioning something is not the same as asking students to actually go and read it. While a lecturer on a theory module might choose, in any given year, to devote several lectures to, say, Mythologies, or to volume one of Capital, nobody will be devoting even one to The Cantebury Tales.

Despite the fact that the Canterbury Tales are arguably more important and influential in English Literature than Marx (and indisputably moreso than Barthes.) As I said, short-sighted.

Kinski wrote: »

It is a shame, but that seems to be the way things are going in British and Irish English Departments.

Value judgement here, but I'd say: not in the best ones.

Kinski wrote: »

I get the impression that the design of Oxford's English courses can be quite arbitrary. Their Masters courses all bear titles like "English: 1800-1900." Not sure where that leaves a student who wants to work on a writer whose output spans two centuries.

If you were doing someone like Hardy on one of those courses, they'll not mark you down for referring to post 1900 work. The idea would be perhaps that you wouldn't do such a course and expect to then write on TS Eliot, just because he was born in 1888. But I agree, they can be somewhat arbitrary in their chosen perameters. Still, they're ranked no. 1 in the world for Arts and Humanities, so I don't feel qualified to question their methods.

Kinski

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Despite the fact that the Canterbury Tales are arguably more important and influential in English Literature than Marx (and indisputably moreso than Barthes.) As I said, short-sighted.

Well, you need to have people who can teach these things too.

If you were doing someone like Hardy on one of those courses, they'll not mark you down for referring to post 1900 work.

I'm sure they would allow that; I wasn't being entirely serious with that last comment.

Still, they're ranked no. 1 in the world for Arts and Humanities, so I don't feel qualified to question their methods.

I'm certainly not qualified to question their methods, but I would question the methods of the people ranking them. I'm weary of all these debates about rankings. I mean if you want to do a PhD, then you go wherever is best for your specialism, not wherever this or that body says is "No. 1".

Value judgement here, but I'd say: not in the best ones.

A value judgement which I suspect is not based on a whole lot. You might consider TCD to have the best English Dept in the country, but I've heard plenty of complaints about it. Their PhD students often seem to have quite bad experiences, and I heard a story recently, which I won't repeat here, about the manner in which they filled a vacancy, which, if true, casts them in a very bad light.

Cavehill Red

Kinski wrote: »

Well, you need to have people who can teach these things too.

And the desire to teach them too. I'm not aware of a worldwide shortage of Medievalists.

Kinski wrote: »

I'm certainly not qualified to question their methods, but I would question the methods of the people ranking them. I'm weary of all these debates about rankings. I mean if you want to do a PhD, then you go wherever is best for your specialism, not wherever this or that body says is "No. 1".

Each ranking has their own variant methodology, all of which is in the public domain. Oxford always come out top or close to top worldwide for the Arts. I'd put a lot of it down to teaching ratios, tutorial practice, and the ability to attract top academics.

On your point about doing a doctorate, of course, one should go wherever one can get the best advisor in that specialist area.

Kinski wrote: »

A value judgement which I suspect is not based on a whole lot.

Based on my admittedly subjective viewpoint that a degree in English literature should encompass the entirety of literature in English, as best is possible. That certainly precludes courses which kick off hundreds of years after the language and literature came into being.

Kinski wrote: »

You might consider TCD to have the best English Dept in the country

Back to the ranking thing, on that basis, they do, no dispute. On my personal subjective basis of giving the broadest and deepest course in English lit, again, it would be TCD. For one thing, their course is 4 years long. Hard to compete with that if you offer a 3 year course.

Kinski wrote: »

but I've heard plenty of complaints about it. Their PhD students often seem to have quite bad experiences, and I heard a story recently, which I won't repeat here, about the manner in which they filled a vacancy, which, if true, casts them in a very bad light.

I've no idea what you're referring to. I imagine there are postgraduates everywhere prepared to complain about their experience. It is after all an isolating thing to write a PhD, and the negativity of that can psychologically spill over into external blaming mechanisms.
When the most recent vacancy in the department that I'm aware of was filled, students were invited to attend (as spectators) the actual interviews. I'm not aware of such openness and transparency elsewhere.

Kinski

Cavehill Red wrote: »

And the desire to teach them too. I'm not aware of a worldwide shortage of Medievalists.

And the money to pay the lecturers. There is a shortage of funding. While we might be disappointed, we shouldn't be surprised to see unfashionable areas of study being cut.

Each ranking has their own variant methodology, all of which is in the public domain. Oxford always come out top or close to top worldwide for the Arts. I'd put a lot of it down to teaching ratios, tutorial practice, and the ability to attract top academics.

I know, I've looked at them before. I recall I didn't think much of them.

Back to the ranking thing, on that basis, they do, no dispute. On my personal subjective basis of giving the broadest and deepest course in English lit, again, it would be TCD. For one thing, their course is 4 years long. Hard to compete with that if you offer a 3 year course.

Well, the Times Higher Education Supplement ranked University College London the 10th best place in the world to study Arts & Humanities in 2010/11. Trinity is nowhere to be found in the top 50. The QS World University Rankings rated it the 24th best place to study English this year, eight places ahead of TCD. UCL offers only a 3 year programme in English, yet they outperform TCD in these rankings which you place so much stock in.

I imagine there are postgraduates everywhere prepared to complain about their experience. It is after all an isolating thing to write a PhD, and the negativity of that can psychologically spill over into external blaming mechanisms.

I'm talking about very specific complaints about lack of support for career development, and for attendance at conferences. It was even highlighted in an external report assessing the dept done in recent years.

When the most recent vacancy in the department that I'm aware of was filled, students were invited to attend (as spectators) the actual interviews. I'm not aware of such openness and transparency elsewhere.

So what? Students aren't in a position to judge who the best candidate is. And why do they feel the need to do that? Do they not trust themselves to award the position fairly unless there's an audience watching over them?

Cavehill Red

Kinski wrote: »

And the money to pay the lecturers. There is a shortage of funding. While we might be disappointed, we shouldn't be surprised to see unfashionable areas of study being cut.

As you say, it comes down to being fashionable rather than rigorous.

Kinski wrote: »

Well, the Times Higher Education Supplement ranked University College London the 10th best place in the world to study Arts & Humanities in 2010/11. Trinity is nowhere to be found in the top 50. The QS World University Rankings rated it the 24th best place to study English this year, eight places ahead of TCD. UCL offers only a 3 year programme in English, yet they outperform TCD in these rankings which you place so much stock in.

I don't place 'so much stock' in them. However, they are the only objective measurements available, and the fact that there are three competing methodologies which all agree that TCD's English dept is the best in Ireland is not without meaning. (We have, of course, already agreed that for an individual seeking postgraduate study, individual circumstances take priority over such generalisations.)

Kinski wrote: »

I'm talking about very specific complaints about lack of support for career development, and for attendance at conferences. It was even highlighted in an external report assessing the dept done in recent years.

I'm intrigued - which report was this?

Kinski wrote: »

So what? Students aren't in a position to judge who the best candidate is. And why do they feel the need to do that? Do they not trust themselves to award the position fairly unless there's an audience watching over them?

I'm sure they do. It was done in the spirit of transparency, not dissimilar to how a doctoral viva is open to inspection too.

Kinski

Cavehill Red wrote: »

I'm intrigued - which report was this?

It's here somewhere.

Madison Lee

Huckleberry Finn was one my favorite books all-time. Did you enjoy reading it? It’s been years since I graduated but I still read Huck Finn (the unedited version) at annually. This is one of my favorite quotes because it shows courage and goodness,
"I mean every word I SAY, Aunt Sally, and if somebody don't go, I'LL go. I've knowed him all his life, and so has Tom, there. Old Miss Watson died two months ago, and she was ashamed she ever was going to sell him down the river, and SAID so; and she set him free in her will."

pennypocket

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Ignore that Saussurean death of the author stuff. It might be some time since Penny was a student; that stuff is very dated nowadays.



I'm not sure how useful that would be as an exercise. Context is useful, but definitions of what the English canon contains differ widely.



This is crucial - in a sense the purpose of the course is to help you learn to think for yourself and generate your own perspectives.



The formula is: there is no formula. Read closely, read widely, read secondary texts, read incessantly. Then formulate your own thoughts. There is no formula. English isn't like Physics.

I'm pretty sure I was a student in Maynooth when you were, my incessant lurking on this forum tells me as much. Anyway, my inclusion of all that 'death of the author' stuff was to illustrate the fact that all our readings are situational; whether of Chaucer or Conrad, we cannot extrapolate ourselves from our own contextual bind. It is somewhat akin to Theodore Adorno's understanding that aprés the Holocaust, poetry is impossible. Or indeed, in the case of physics, after quantum theory. You cannot wish away the twentieth century and this realisation no matter how much you want to.

In any case, my motivation in replying to this thread was to engage with a very eager first year's interest in his/her work. My initial response was the same as yours - read closely, read widely - and that holds for any course of study, regardless of the 'theoretical' perspective. You should have listened more closely in Conrad's class for the aprille shoures.

wonton

penny is a bitchin' name.







just saying

pennypocket

wonton wrote: »

penny is a bitchin' name.







just saying

Ha, the inspiration came from the Russell library. Just sayin'.