In Response to Krystal (“History”)
Although the
title of Krystal’s blogpost is “History”, the post centers on the discussion
that we had in class regarding the bias in literature. Krystal takes this idea
an applies with the domain of history. According to Krystal, the history that
we are all taught it very biased according to the people writing it. For example,
many of our greatest heroes often had major flaws, but we rarely hear about
them. The way in which history is portrayed is essentially manufactured
according to a set of values.
Likewise, I think
that this concept can be applied to literature in another interesting way: the
way in which we ultimately describe the others of these so-called great works
of literature. For example, as a result of a piece of literature being defined
as great, we may, when interpreting the piece, give the author credit where
credit should not be due. If the author wrote a line that, based on in-text
evidence, does not hold any significance, interpreters may state that there was
underlying significance simply because of the author’s merit.
The possible
occurrence of this bias is something that I think could be valuable to add to
the ongoing discussion of literature evaluation.
0 comments:
Post a Comment