Snobbish... Me?
Oct. 26th, 2005 02:49 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
novin_haI discovered that I'm much more snobbish than I'd think. That is, in my naivety, I believe that there is such a thing as basic humanistic knowledge a person that wants to call themselves a philology student should have.
For example, I used to think that:
- anyone intelligent knows the basics of arthurian canon. I don't mean, has read or something. No. Just... has heard of it. Recognises the name of 'Sir Gawain' or 'Lancelot'. Or 'Nimue'. I was disillusioned during last Literature Class, when half my group had to check how to spell 'Gawain'.
- most people have read, or at least seen, 'Three Muskeeters'. Ditto.
And several others. I'm also alone in my belief that introducing forms that used to be considered incorrect to the language (as proper) is not necessarily a good thing. (It's like it was suddenly decided it's OK to use 'it ain't no good' in formal English).
People are specialised. Nothing bad with that. But why does it mean that they no longer care for the culture that created them?!
I'm not a true 'erudite', but in comparison to most nineteen-year-olds I could preted to be one and no one would be any wiser. That makes me sad.
And snobbish, in the meaning of holding on to old-fashioned standards.
For example, I used to think that:
- anyone intelligent knows the basics of arthurian canon. I don't mean, has read or something. No. Just... has heard of it. Recognises the name of 'Sir Gawain' or 'Lancelot'. Or 'Nimue'. I was disillusioned during last Literature Class, when half my group had to check how to spell 'Gawain'.
- most people have read, or at least seen, 'Three Muskeeters'. Ditto.
And several others. I'm also alone in my belief that introducing forms that used to be considered incorrect to the language (as proper) is not necessarily a good thing. (It's like it was suddenly decided it's OK to use 'it ain't no good' in formal English).
People are specialised. Nothing bad with that. But why does it mean that they no longer care for the culture that created them?!
I'm not a true 'erudite', but in comparison to most nineteen-year-olds I could preted to be one and no one would be any wiser. That makes me sad.
And snobbish, in the meaning of holding on to old-fashioned standards.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2005-10-27 02:52 am (UTC)However I definitely have to say I know what you mean. Last spring in my Elizabethan Lit class, I constantly was the only one who knew really basic classical mythology... like who Perseus was.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-10-27 07:35 am (UTC)Perseus... now, wasn't that a guy in a boysband? ;)
Yeah.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-10-27 03:33 pm (UTC)These people honestly...
The worst part is that at my college everyone has to take this course "Greek Thought" their first semester. So these people really SHOULD know.
Example: the other day in my "Ethnic American Autobiography" class we were discussing a Richard Rodriguez essay in which he say that California is comic and Mexico tragic but that California's comedy crushes people are that funerals are more beautiful and the food better in Mexico because it's tragic. So we were trying to analyze this passage and I suggested that he was using the "classic" senses of the words. Yes we were supposed to have read Poetics but I was pretty sure a lot of people skipped it so I decided to use Oedipus Rex and Lysistrata instead (thinking people might actually have paid a tiny bit of attention to the plays). I was saying that the difference that Rodriguez was talking about is the hopefullness, the possiblity for self determination and change, whereas tragedy is already determined and all people can do is react to what is inevitable. Anyways... everyone looked at me like they had no idea what I was talking about.
Think it will be any better in grad school?
(no subject)
Date: 2005-11-02 02:00 pm (UTC)