I Am Not a Lumberjack

After I read all of Group 4's blogposts, I noticed two common themes - a dislike for this week's readings and a far greater interest in the works being used as examples or commentaries instead of the articles themselves.

Singing Celara and shidaipe both lament "Birds Singing Other Birds Songs," and I can understand. It seemed nonsensical to me, and it still does. I considered a recent conversation about modernism and postmodernism, and it seemed highly applicable to the reactions to this weeks readings.

In my recent conversation, my colleagues and I complained about the lack of accessibility to the majority of Joyce's writings- especially Ulysses. My mother used to joke that her copy of Allusions in Ulysses was twice the size of the actual book (and it actually is!). However, as a writer and English major, I wonder if this kind of literature has the desired effect that the author intends.

Is Joyce trying to confuse us? What is the point of "Birds Singing Other Birds Songs"? What's the deal with all the blue? All of these questions were raised at some point this week, and I wonder if the deconstructed and non-linear nature of some literature (cyberpunk, electronic lit, Beatniks) is too much? Has it gotten to the point where the point of the piece of work is lost? To borrow a commonly used phrase, can we not see the forest for the trees?

For many of us, it feels like we have to be lumberjacks, cutting away pieces of the text, to understand its meaning. However, I think the opposite is true: we should be conservationists, preserving the integrity of these complicated creations (even those with annoying bird sounds), because they lend to the overall understanding of the piece. Instead of reconstructing the piece, we should reconstruct the way we think.

I enjoy thinking critically about literature, and I enjoy dense and complex plots. However, I can definitely understand (and agree) with a lot of the issues raised with the dryness, complexity, and oddity of this weeks assigned readings/texts. I would argue that most of our confusion and hesitancy with these particular texts arises from a lack of experience with non-traditional texts due to a narrow canonical education in our primary, secondary, and college-level education. For most of us, this is the first time we've been exposed to any of these texts or electronic literature. I don't think it should be this way.

I would propose that integrating more non-linear, deconstructed, and unorthodox texts earlier in curriculum could create a generation that has a broader and deeper understanding of reading, writing, and creating.