“Packaging Theory” by Jeffrey Williams discusses the “flood of anthologies regarding literary theory in the 1990s. He claims that theory became the primary function at this time, replacing criticism as the primary focus of English studies. By publishing these anthologies the field is validating the once widely debated importance of theory and creating a new realm for study which secures the necessity of this department. In addition, marketing theory like this is a big time money-maker.
Williams takes issue with the two main ways in which these anthologies are composed: the hall-of-fame model and the movement model. The former organizes the anthology with lists of the all-stars of theory in the table of content, yet it fails to capture the real depth, growth, and development of theory over the years. The movement theory organizes the various subtopics within theory, but still fails to capture the interaction between subcategories and also neglects to acknowledge the minor contributing voices in the theoretical discourse.
Who’s to say who should be anthologized? Is it whoever gets published or cited the most? Everyone in academics is aligning themselves to prosper; they all attempt to validate and valorize themselves. Just like with literature, who has the privilege of composing the canon of theory? The flaw with having theory at the center of the field is that it is all based on speculation. What should be the focus of “English”?
It’s interesting that Williams claims to have “some ambivalence in the entrenchment of theory” because he has no problem throwing together an anthology of his own.
So true. Last semester, I read an interview with Joyce Johnson (Minor Characters) in which she really slammed Master's Degree programs in English. She said all they have accomplished is creating people who read a lot and buy a lot of books. She said there has not been any "real" (my word) scholarship going on. When I read that I thought that these programs (including the one we're in) have also brought a lot of money into colleges. On the good side of that, they have created jobs and advanced people's careers - both students and faculty. I guess there's a bottom line to everything.
ReplyDelete