Hi,
I just finished teaching my summer course on women writers -- I focused
on women writing speculative fiction. The books we read were:
Frankenstein, Herland, The Female Man, Slow River and He, She, and It.
All in all, it was a fabulous course. I had fun, responsive students who
talked up a storm. (Nicola, they LOVED Slow River, btw, and the best
presentations of the course were on that book).
Although I didn't bill the course as "feminist" -- of course it was :-)
Here are a couple of things from the course that
bothered/challenged/provoked me.
1. The assumption that in terms of gender equity -- "it's all getting
better." My students had a very difficult time dealing with Russ's anger
and the violence of some of her characters. Their way of handling it was
to historically compartmentalize this as a "70's thing." While I could
get them to admit/see current, specific, inequities and the constraints
of gender roles -- nothing seemed to be able to make a dent in their
cheery assessment and in the myth of "progress" (things are ALWAYS
getting better). Does anyone have any idea how to deal with this issue
in a responsible manner? Not even my rereading Russ's passage on "THE
DOCTORINE of GRADUAL CHANGE" seemed to make lightbulbs go off.
2. Their surprising puritan streak. I thought it would be the lesbian sex
that would provoke outrage and I was ready to deal with that. But they
objected to all the depictions of graphic sex (geez, I use to *take*
courses based on the steamy sex scenes in the novels). They just didn't
want explicit anyone rubbing on anyone. They took a position of -- what I
believe to be) psuedo-tolerance, articulated something like this, "I
don't care what anyone does in their bedroom, just don't make me read
about it." I found it difficult to challenge (and I did try) that "don't
ask, don't tell" philosophy.
3. How to teach in a manner that respects "difference" without letting
that shut down all discussion. For instance, one student claimed that he
was Morman and that, in his religious view, that homosexuality was wrong
and a sin against God. Since it was his religious view -- the students
in his small group thought they couldn't take this up as a topic of
conversation. I came to work with them and they were deep on a
tangent... when I steered them back to the topic at hand (the sexual
economy in Slow River) they were given to vague "well, everyone has their
opinion" statements and to collective "I'll respect your beliefs and
you'll respect mine" that couldn't get to the heart of the questions
asked.
Anyway, enough from me. I just wonder if anyone has comments,
suggestions, discussions. My class was mainly returning students, most
in their mid 20 - 30s... although I had two grandmothers and two 19 year
olds.
Thanks! Michelle
_______________________________________________________________
Michelle R. Kendrick
Assistant Professor of English
Washington State University
14204 NE Salmon Creek Avenue
Vancouver, Washington 98686
(360)546-9645
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 25 2000 - 19:06:17 PDT