In Rosenblatt’s article The
Transactional Theory of Reading and Writing, he tries to illustrate how a
reader should take all the choices, aspirations, and values out of literature
and weave his/her own personal philosophy.
It is the job of the reader to see beyond the bounds of literary value
with the works urged upon them, they
must also gain some approach to life, images of fate or assertion, or even
certain kinds of experiences or modes of feeling; all of which holding rich
value. Literature, to me and what I’ve
gained from articles like Rosenblatt’s, must be used as potentially subversive
forces that invite serious encounters with the people we are and think we want
to be, with the people we know and don’t.
It’s all about rich encounters and real experiences.
Coming back to Burke’s Illuminating
Texts, he brings up a valid point of literature also encompassing many
different things such as movies (videos), poems, and even art (images). So with that and what was stated above in
short I think we as teachers should help students transcend the boundaries
imposed by pages or screens to allow for conversations to happen between
authors, characters, teachers and students.
If that can only be achieved through simple exercises of improvisations
or role playing so be it, but I’m sure we can easily come up with cohesive exercises
to achieve this.
Burke shows us in this portion that literature is another
form of text that students must read and once again has many strategic elements
that we must consider to refine, understand and apply to become “better readers”. However I feel that literature can serve as a
great tool to teaching the points of critically reading, because literature
across the board (for the most part) is the most favored piece of text among
young readers. I think it easy to hold
long discussions and visit different perspectives when analyzing this type of
text. Don’t you think? It’s easy to ask “So
what does this text want us to talk about?” a question that can be taken in so
many different directions and still be considered productive and valuable. And because
it is so easy to discuss it makes reducing complex literary text to essential
elements much simpler and meaningful than that of the internet or textbooks. It promotes what Burke repeats throughout
this book, being “textual intelligence”, or the ability to critically read.
Of course to achieve these impactful conversation students
must know elements like metaphors, tone, and language, but that is why
literature, to me, serves as a great starting point to delving deeper into the
essence of reading. That makes discussing how stories work and
what they are used for absolutely essential to developing their capacity as
readers and also extending their understanding of what we teach. It is
here where I hope to achieve this one simple fact by Robert Scholes, “It is not
what is covered that counts but what is learned. It is not what students have been told that
matters but what they remember and what they do.”
I forget sometimes to stand back and take a look at what I
write, so please do not confuse what I say about “textual intelligence”, I don’t think it’s only about being able to
read different types of texts. It has to
be both reading and producing different types of text, but in terms of the book
I am to discuss, such emphasis is placed upon the reading aspect of textual intelligence.
I believe that Burke figures to be able
to write students must and should be exposed to a vast array of different texts
in specific situations.
No comments:
Post a Comment