Category: Uncategorized

In this day and age, there are many social issues such as feminism, like abortion and same-sex marriage, that we as a society are becoming accustomed to hearing in the news. Feminism, however, has been one plaguing the human race throughout history. It dates back to gender roles and responsibilities in ancient times. Unfortunately, women are still fighting for complete and equal rights to those of the male sex.

In Joe Moran’s Interdisciplinarity, it is said that “the experience of women is devalued or excluded” (92). That is why the Brontë sisters published their works under the names of Ellis, Currer, and Acton Bell, so as not to slight the possibility of success.

The question now, though, is whether or not this statement still relates. While it is known that female athletes are still fighting to make the same salary as male players (for example, in tennis female players make significantly less than male players although the earnings from winning a major is now equal), female workers in arts and entertainment are achieving as much acclaim as men. Take, for example, J.K. Rowling who is now one of the most famed authors of our time; however, she chose to write under a pen name for the same reasons as Charlotte, Emily, and Anne Brontë. Her identity was revealed, though, and she experiences continued success with her novels and the Harry Potter franchise. Society is changing.

As a woman in the modern world, I am more confident than my predecessors may have been. Philosopher Julia Kristeva stated that “women are defined by their bodies…in ways that men are not” (96). In some ways this is still relevant, as there are still those that argue against the feminist theory –that a woman’s role is not interdisciplinary, that she should remain in the home with the family. However, as a species we now have means of controlling the functions of our bodies. Women have as much power over themselves and their bodies as men do. As a result, women can attend and pursue schooling without struggle, excel in their careers and climb to the top of the social ladder, and earn respect and acclaim as much as those of the male sex. I am not concerned about my future success as a writer and woman in society because of the advances in the direction toward equality. As a society, we are headed in the right direction. Continue reading “Feminism in “Interdisciplinarity””

Upon entering Cane, we are struck by the blunt sexuality of the opening vignette/story/passage, “Karintha.” We meet the exuberant titular character, and although only twelve, we are informed that she is a “wild flash” and that “men had always wanted her.” Karintha discovers the world of sex: “perhaps she had felt her parents loving,” and with this knowledge she plays ‘home’ with a boy. After this discovery, old men no longer ride “her hobby-horse upon their knees.”

“Karintha” almost immediately evokes the image of Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita, which came decades later and mirrors its intimate sexuality. In Lolita, we meet another titular character, a 12 year-old girl that emanates enthusiasm and desirability. Lolita becomes the center of the affections of Humbert Humbert, a writer that lives in her home (and later marries her mother, Charlotte, to stay close to her). Humbert dreams of touching Lolita, dreads time spent alone with her mother and survives coitus with Charlotte by dreaming Lolita shares the bed with him. However, throughout the novel, Humbert Humbert stresses that he could not imagine tarnishing the purity of his lovely “nymphet,” and while he hungers for Lolita, he does not allow himself to touch her. Continue reading “Toomer’s Cane and Nabokov’s Lolita”

Personally, I have always been “scientifically challenged.” Meaning, I have always struggled academically and conceptually with subjects of scientific nature. Chemistry, physics, earth science… they have all tripped me up in some way or another. Often times, when staring in a blank daze at a, or any, science textbook, I have attempted to comfort myself by silently declaring, “I’m an English person. Naturally, science just isn’t my thing.”

I had made it so that I was always able to put up a sturdy wall between my beautiful, subjective, lyrical English world and the cold, hard, seemingly intimidating world of science. While time is beginning to teach me that my struggles with the sciences do not necessarily lie in the idea that I have married myself to English Lit, it was my reading of Joe Moran’s Interdisciplinarity which helped me, in many ways, gradually disassemble my dividing wall. Continue reading “Darwin the Wordsmith”

I feel as if the subject of Charles Darwin and his work has been the most controversial issue, especially in the classrooms, because people do not believe his theories to be probable. Also the subject of religion comes into the subject as well. Darwin had an idea that everything had to evolve over time and therefore everything is connected in a way. Darwin is considered a scientist and all scientists theories started out as a metaphor (pg 146).

Darwin was able to prove his theory of natural selection to be true and then came up the issue of Darwin avoiding talking about the humans and how they are related to other species and therefore came to the theory of ‘Social Darwinism.’ This also brought him to discover the theory of the ‘missing link’ or as we know ‘Big Foot.’ That is most likely unreal so maybe that’s why people are so controversial over his theories.

Darwin was a brilliant man and had a lot of logical theories in science but became a part of literary and cultural texts by influencing them by using his theories (pg 147).  So why is his theories so criticized and controversial today if he made such a difference in not only science but literary subjects as well?

I want to focus on a particular area of interest within Chapter Five of Interdisciplinarity, “Science, Space and Nature” that brings up the quality of intuition within science. Now generally, the use of intuition is not necessarily encouraged by the ‘hard’ sciences, but I found an important section by scholar Henri Lefebvre that opens up a space for this connection. His interpretation of space is defined as an “Empty area…absolute, infinite res extensa {extended thing}, a divine property which may be grasped in a single act of intuition” (Moran 150). Lefebvre proposes that space is a concept to be ‘grasped in a single act of intuition,’ rather than defining space as a subjective thing. Basically he means that you just have to “get” the phenomena of space, understanding that it’s not just thoughts or words or subjects, but that space also connotes a feeling of some kind, a sense of something. Leaving room for interpretation of feelings and inner senses versus physical observation and recordings is not typical of the scientific world, which is why I wanted to point it out.

First of all, let me define intuition, so that we may continue on about how this observation relates to interdisciplinarity. According to Webster’s dictionary, intuition is “A natural ability or power that makes it possible to know something without any proof or evidence,” and “A feeling that guides a person to act a certain way without fully understanding why” (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intuition). It is an understanding that does not need to be understood, rather it is just “known.” Intuition is similar to space in this aspect, because intuition too has to be grasped, though ironically we must use intuition as a tool in order to grasp the meaning of itself. I would like to propose that using one’s intuition is an act of interdisciplinarity, drawing upon all inner energies to come to a particular conclusion about the external world.

Interdisciplinarity is an attempt to break down the walls of the separate disciplines within education, and instead, create a free-flow, on-going conversation between them. Joe Moran, author of Interdisciplinarity, tells us, “Within the broadest possible sense of the term, I take interdisciplinarity to mean any form of dialogue or interaction between two or more disciplines,” although “Level, type, purpose and effect of this interaction remain to be examined” (14). I’d like to point out here that he uses the term ‘sense’ in his broad definition, implying some form of faculty, and therefore a connection with intuition. It is my opinion that intuition is also a discussion between disciplines or even all subjects, though it is an immediate, inner dialogue between all previous knowledge, experiences and sensory data that transcends into one “knowing.”

To conclude, the act of using one’s intuition can be understood as an act of interdisciplinarity, combining all inner knowledge of separate subjects and experiences into a more whole response. In this way, it may be possible to discover the underlying language between disciplines, as well as strengthen any disparate bonds between them. Intuition may be accessed by anyone at any time, and no one needs to go out looking for it. It is an inherent tool to help make sense of the contrasting experiences we cling to, as well as a source of wisdom to draw upon in times of confusion. My hope is that intuition will not be buried deeper into the self in the desire to seek out connecting information.

Intertextuality and Interdisciplinarity are closely linked in my opinion.  Intertextuality claims that all text comes from text that previously was in existence(Martinez Alforo). Interdisciplinarity is the mixture of separate subjects, thus making intertextuality interdisciplinary in that the concept of intertextuality sounds very much like the scientific concept of conservation of mass, which states that matter can neither be created nor destroyed (Antoine Lavoisier, 1789).

That being said, I believe that English is the most interdisciplinary subject. English covers material from many different subjects and is used every single day in every subject. You might read a book about science or history in English, and then you use English when you read and write for other classes. English is perhaps the most useful subject.

So why are people so confused as to why someone would choose an English major? To be honest, I’m not really an English major. I am an education major with a love of and concentration in English. When the time came to choose a concentration, English was the obvious choice for me. It covers the most bases and is the most useful, besides the fact that I absolutely love to read and write. Having English in my toolbox makes the most sense to me, as I can use it to learn about other subjects which i may have to teach. Why concentrate in science when I might need to teach history, or vice versa? English is the most logical choice for me.

I have always truly enjoyed learning, and taken every opportunity I could to learn something new. No fact is too obscure or too seemingly unimportant. Take, for instance, what I found myself doing the other day in the Milne library after my brain was feeling a bit fried from my schoolwork: researching, and compiling a list of, strange units of measurement. Voluntarily. For my own amusement. Human beings are naturally curious, and learning satisfies this curiosity. Learning is a kind of growing which enables us to move forward as individuals and communities. It is a powerful tool, and helps people transcend both literal and figurative boundaries. And a lot of the time, it can actually be fun.

I often ask myself what the purpose of education is. Is it to satisfy that human curiosity, expand the mind, enrich students’ lives and prepare them for the responsibilities of citizens of modern democracy, promote higher thinking, and inspire lifelong learning? Or is it to tirelessly drill facts into their heads and get them ready for specific jobs, in the process deterring them from seeking knowledge outside of what is absolutely necessary? In other words, what is the value of earning a degree, for example, that ends up having no hand in the earner getting a job post-graduation?

I believe there should be a lot more to getting an education than just memorizing pieces of information necessary for your future career. A “liberal” education should satisfy both meanings of the term: it should be concerned with a general broadening of knowledge and opening of the mind, while also being an education applied generously, and in copious amounts. Aristotle, who was the first to organize knowledge into disciplines, believed that “there is a kind of education in which parents should have their sons trained not because it is necessary, or because it is useful, but simply because it is liberal and something good in itself” (Aristotle 1961: 337, as cited by Moran 4). In Aristotle’s time, education was about breeding scholars and thinkers. But as Moran points out, “the [classical divisions of knowledge] were eventually transformed by market forces and institutional changes” (Moran 4). As the world grew more complex and advanced, there came about “a perceived need to relate education to specific economic, political and ecclesiastical ends” (Klein 1990: 20, as cited by Moran 4). With this, it seems, the “liberal” in “liberal arts” has been lost, and the learning has been removed from education. I am curious to see if Moran will address the modern day issues of the educational system and link interdisciplinary study to these problems as a possible solution.

I’ve given up trying to read Maria Alfaro’s “Intertextuality”. The language is thick and academic and the allusions to literary theorist after literary theorist are formidable. But it hasn’t escaped my notice that half of our class’s name (Cane Intertext) is derived from this text and that it will probably play a significant role in classwork and discussion over the next semester, so I decided to apply an online filter to the information in Alfaro’s analysis. I decided to do what teachers have discouraged me from doing since the sixth grade.

I decided to go to Wikipedia.

For anyone else who struggled through the explanation of intertextuality, I recommend opening up a web browser and simply googling the term. Wikipedia, which is the first link, provides more or less all of the information that is provided by the reading and it provides at least enough to give anyone a comprehensive understanding of what the term means and where it came from. The main difference between the online and offline resources, which makes Wikipedia a more efficient medium for the information, is that whereas Alfaro provides lengthy digressions Wikipedia is able to include a svelte link to another article, and whereas Alfaro includes reference after reference to related texts Wikipedia is able to include its own related readings at the bottom of the page and leave you unimpeded.  Continue reading “Cane and Walden”

When I first read Martinez Alfaro’s “Intertextuality,” the concept of all texts arising from previous texts immediately reminded me of the cell theory; all cells arise from preexisting cells. Then, discovering the title of this week’s chapter of Interdisciplinarity, “Science, Space and Nature,” I was intrigued by what Moran could possibly say regarding this topic. Moran extensively discusses the concept of empiricism: the theory that all knowledge is  derived from the sense experience. He opens his discussion by explaining that “Science’s self confidence has traditionally stemmed from its self-limitations…” (pg 137) From what I understand, scientific concepts are only as valid as the evidence that supports it. Science is taught as a “universal truth” according to Paul Feyerabend and he argues that there is no freedom to dissent from scientific knowledge. (pg 140) Although Moran depicts the separation between the sciences and literature, I believe they are inherently the same.

Science in its rawest form is “framed, discussed, and solved” (pg 141) Is literature not framed, discussed and solved as well? In science there is an existing problem or question, and as the scientist you formulate a hypothesis one may either challenge or agree with. Literature is the same. During the age of Enlightenment, Martin Luther challenged the Catholic Church with his experimental The Ninety-Five Thesis. Harriet Beecher Stowe challenged the concept of slavery with her novel Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Each work of literature at the time seemed blasphemous, and yet didn’t each new scientific concept introduced to society seem just as ludicrous also? By reading this chapter, I have a fuller understanding of how the disciplines actually intertwine.

 

di·ver·si·ty noun \də-ˈvər-sə-tē, dī-\

The quality or state of having many different forms, types, ideas, etc. (Merriam-Webster Dictionary Online)

Contemporarily, the concept of diversity seems to be a buzzword. Although usually referring to diversity of race, culture, religion, etc., it is also used to refer to diversity of ideas or viewpoints. While reading chapter one of Moran’s “Interdisciplinarity,” I came across a small segment that caught my attention, causing me to re-read and re-read and really chew on what Moran was arguing. It stuck with me, as this is a topic that I feel very passionate about.

Moran references the work of Immanuel Kant, titled The Conflict of the Faculties, and further, Jacques Derrida’s response to Kant’s assertions. Kant looks at the discipline of philosophy, claiming that it should be “free of the influence of government and other material concerns” (Moran 32). He imagines an almost Utopian version of the university, which exists in essentially its own neutral bubble, taking no stance on worldly subjects. As Derrida then argues, Kant’s view is unrealistic, “due simply to the fact that the university is founded” (Moran 32). A pure university free of corruption would be ideal, but because a university is founded on a set of principles and values, it inherently develops a position on world topics. That position then leaks into the university’s teachings, sometimes forcing certain viewpoints upon students.

While I disagree that Kant’s assertions of a neutral university are feasible, I agree that, in theory, this is how a university should function (but, maybe not in as extreme a manner as Kant is suggesting). It may be impossible for a university to be completely void of an opinion regarding political or social issues, but it is possible for each class, professor, and student to be introduced to all sides of an argument or topic. This allows for students to formulate informed opinions for themselves instead of uninformed opinions that are skewed and one-sided.

It is important to gather news from multiple sources in order to act as an informed citizen, and this concept flows over into academia, too. But is it really possible to reach neutrality? According to a study, 72 % of American university professors are liberal and 15 % are conservative (Kurtz, Washington Post Online). However, I believe it is possible to teach from all sides, no matter where the professor’s views fall on the political spectrum. The key is for the professors to make an honest effort to present all sides of any situation, use varying sources for information, and allow students to develop their own thoughts. If professors realize that no opinion is bad, that some students may think differently than they do, and that information presentation and grading of work should be done in a neutral way, we may reach a day where the university hovers near Kant’s ideals.