Why We Read

Better Essays

According to “Why We Read: The University, the Humanities, and the Province of Literature," Richter illustrates why literature should be studied in the first place. David Richter is an English professor who was very dedicated to his job. In this article, he had five section: English Literature as an Object of Study, The Era of Grand Theory and Cultural Wars, Reading Liberation; Teaching as a Propaganda, The Function of English at the Present Time and After the Culture Wars: The Problem of Disciplinary. The founder of English Adam Smith was not English at all but a Scottish polymath who taught English lectures in 1748 and 1751. The author goes on to explain all the knowledge about how literature became so important. He used those reference …show more content…

According to “The Demise of Disciplinary Authority” by Louis Menand academic literary studies is more important than one may think. Menand claims that there is two background categories condition for the academic. The first one is “that knowledge accumulates brick by brick.” The second is the discipline of literary studies. The author goes on to say that the literacy studies have existed since 1960. There was a time in society when literature was not known as its own genre. The author wants the readers to learn and understand that literature is itself genre. Literature studies can be understood as an independent discipline. An author named Levine argues in this article that the future does lie in interdisciplinary work. There was a research done that showed that academic literacy studies became disconnected from the institutional structure it inhabited. The American university was covering up and enjoying a pergola of rapid expansion. The challenge of literacy studies was that it could have simply been put in the existing system.
There were authors who will write about literature and their work would be looked as if it had an influence on science. Derrida and Kuhn’s were a big influence on English professor because they open one mind that literature does not have essence and that literary criticism is not science. The author also believes that people outside the profession are not interested in literature and

Get Access