How did the famous website changed how English Literature students read (or don't read), study and write essays? Does it promote more intellectual laziness than it is beneficial for general understanding of studied texts? Talk about how studying literature is different now than it used to be, before the democratization of internet.
Perhaps it did not revolutionized English Majors' lives, but it certainly did change something. Not having to buy cheat-sheets, or even to be able to download them on pirate sites, made it much easier not only for students but also for providers. Maybe it can be included in your similar article. – Léandre Larouche8 years ago
I agree that it is possible that Sparknotes might have made a fundamental change. I think a more likely candidate, though, would be Wikipedia. I remember a professor of mine arguing that, despite popular understanding, people today were considerably less intellectually free than people were during the 19th century in Britain. For a lot of us, wikipedia is the primary, go-to source for a great span of information, which means that we're absorbing the same details with the same slant, in the same tone, as everyone else, and bumping into as little information along the way. Sparknotes, obviously, has certain precedents in print form, but I do agree that the momentary accessibility of the entirety of Sparknotes makes it possible to pretend to know how a piece of literature goes with basically zero meaningful experience whatever. – TKing8 years ago
It has completely changed for the better in my view because now students have to consider how they interpret the texts. – Munjeera8 years ago
The online implications of Sparknotes have had tremendous repercussions. Students no longer have to figure out traditional themes themselves. It forces students to write from a post-modern view. – Munjeera8 years ago
As a teacher, I'm kind of torn on the idea of SparksNotes. I would rather students learn to analyze a text on their own, but sometimes when a student is struggling to understand what is happening in a text and getting too frustrated I think that having a quick overview is a good thing, because they can then discuss it in more detail. That being said, I have noticed a lot more plagiarism in schools now with the availability of sites like SparksNotes. (I'm talking cut and pasted right from the site).
Great topic! – Lauren Mead8 years ago
Sparknotes can facilitate plagiarism if not used properly. Sparknotes and the like should be used to help the student clarify as Lauren has pointed out. It is the first step in analysis and should be developed into the students' own ideas and how they further analyze the themes, symbolism and other rhetorical devices on their own. If used as a tool, any type of notes on the internet can be helpful to springboard original ideas. Anything used to cut and paste from the internet is intellectual theft if not properly credited. If a student does not remember where in virtual reality he/she got his or her source from then that should be noted as well. The internet has made the accessibility of such notes almost without barriers. Also, let's not forget that most authors are willing to include an email address where they can be contacted. In the past, communiqué with authors was relegated to once in a lifetime screenings at a university campus. I think more students should try contacting authors directly for their papers. I have found this to be a surprisingly effective tool when teaching Grade 11 and 12 English. Most authors respond and many have a question and answer page where some other students has posted a similar question. Accessibility to interacting with authors is for me the second most important advantage to online research. – Munjeera8 years ago
Here's what can happen if one relies too much on Sparknotes: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sXJ8tKRlW3E – Tigey8 years ago
Sparknotes and other similar websites have bumped up the policing of plagiarism as plagiarism itself has become more accessible due to these websites. There are programs in place now to help avoid and detect plagiarism before a student submits a paper, that's how bad lazy students have gotten. Should the blame for this issue be put on websites like Sparknotes that were created with nothing but good intentions of helping students? – rowenachandler8 years ago
Sparknote effect not only exists in English Majors but in history and other social sciences majors. I read Sparknotes for studying Political Science since I'm not native. It's as helpful as wikipedia, to know some background information. I know there's another website named quizlet, which also helps students to learn. The phenomenon can also trace back to the advancement of technology and the insistence of E-learning.
It's an extremely broad issue. – moonyuet8 years ago
E-learning would be a deserving topic. – Munjeera8 years ago
As an English major, I find this to be a very interesting topic, and I agree that there are definitely pros and cons of sparknotes-the pros being that students can use these notes to help them analyze something they miss or don't understand. The cons of course would be that they people can easily plagarize them and be so reliant it discourages them from actually reading the text and drawing their own conclusions. – enizzari8 years ago
I was an English major and pretty much stayed away from Sparknotes. Yet some of the texts I was assigned were so old, or so complicated, that I found the site really helped. (I never would've gotten through James Joyce's Ulysses without it). I also wonder if teachers and professors shouldn't embrace Sparknotes more. Sparknotes explains complicated literature in an easy-to-understand and sometimes fun way, which can be hard to do in a classroom when it's 8 AM and you're talking to 20-something people who'd rather still be in bed. What would happen to English if Sparknotes were embraced; would it become a "friendlier" subject? – Stephanie M.8 years ago
The Harry Potter Generation is still as enthralled with the series as they ever were. With many moral messages included in the book, could you make the argument that they really taught their readers something? Consider the backlash when "The Cursed Child" cast a black actress to play Hermione. Can any connections be made between Death Eaters and Extremist Right-Wing political groups? Are there links between the Harry Potter Generation and the left-leaning Millennial generation?
This is a very interesting topic, and one that seems especially big in its scope. It might prove to be quite difficult to show the connections between "Harry Potter" and the political attitudes of the majority of its readers. I'm not sure whether you could find any surveys related to such, but this would certainly require a lot of background research.
In addition to finding research to support your claims, you would have to point to the presence of such ideas within the literature itself.
Another thing to consider would be whether "Harry Potter" had a hand in creating the progressive generation or whether its success was merely symptomatic of the generation's already-present political attitudes. – Farrow9 years ago
I wonder if J.K. Rowling would even answer something like that on Twitter. It would certainly be an intriguing question to ask. Maybe it would help the writer of this topic to look at her life and education and try to connect not just the plot and characters to our life, but her life, as well. – Jaye Freeland9 years ago
There's many topic possibilites here. Focusing on the Harry Potter Generation could be a good foundation. As far as paralleling or contrasting it with the left-leaning Millennial generation, consider at least 3 specific topics or points to express the ramifications. Examples could include faithfulness in friendships, culture of British teens in HP and those of America, forced vs. independent interest in school (using Hermoine's passion, or Harry's interest in potion from "Half Blood Prince" or even Lovegood and the dead), civil rights interests, sacrifice, etc.) The examples are endless. – margorose9 years ago
I think Rowling said at one point some comparison between Death Eaters and Nazis, so maybe pointing to that may help the point when going for moral compass of Harry Potter. – SpectreWriter9 years ago
Can you be more specific about what generation is the "Harry Potter generation"? Do you mean the first generation that grew up with the books? (as an example - someone who was around HP's age when the books were published would be people in their early 30s now?) – Katheryn9 years ago
Analyzing the concepts of the popular site, Fanfiction, and use of self inserts while examining one of the most prolific of 14th century poetry by Dante's Divine Comedy, from Inferno to Paradiso. This essay will also examine the use of self inserts in modern literature, such as Slaughterhouse Five, and other novels that use this concept as a way to commentate on the events that occur in the story.
It seems to me that the topic you are referring to will make for an interesting experience if handled well. There had been a movie which used the whole concept of Dante's "Divine Comedy" (mostly Inferno) although the only ones (fan fiction) which I've come across are on deviantART rather than on fanfiction.net http://kiwikiwi3.deviantart.com/gallery/33711392/Seventh-Circle
http://nazaru.deviantart.com/art/9-Circles-of-the-Shadow-Realm-152335095
http://www.deviantart.com/browse/all/literature/fanfiction/d65ityw With that said, seems like an interesting topic to work on, and I look forward to any results which pop up in fanfiction.net (good and bad) on such a concept – shehrozeameen9 years ago
Very interesting topic. Obviously the practice has changed from respected to less respected, and there's a lot of history to deal with. I'd also recommend looking at Thomas More's Utopia for this, as he uses a self-insert to argue against the controversial "Utopia" the main character describes for the majority of the work. – IndiLeigh9 years ago
I would also recommend exploring Paradise Lost by John Milton, the ultimate biblical epic aka fanfiction. He doesn't self-insert himself as a character per se, but he is ostensibly the third-person omniscient narrator and his voice does come across through a variety of figures. – txl9 years ago
I think that calling it fanfiction is, although somewhat accurate, best reserved for jokes. Self-insert? Definitely, fanfiction... not so much. It's important to remember the primary purpose of the Divine Comedy was to spread Dante's grievances with the Pope and the way the Church held control over the religious lives of the people at the time. – JTastic3 years ago
In all reality, it would seem that the best literary diet would consist of both old and newer literature. However, I've noticed that some people hold vehemently to one or the other, myself notwithstanding. It'd be interesting to see if anyone could turn this into an interesting discussion.
I feel that to make this topic effective, you would have to establish what counts as contemporary vs. what counts as classic. What decade establishes something as "new." It could be argued that Lord of the Rings is reaching the point of "Classic" as it came out in 1954. But it is still beloved as a contemporary piece of literature (due, in part, to the films). – Jemarc Axinto9 years ago
Who are the "some people?" Academics? Why does this matter who holds on to what? A potential author will have to include this. – Cmandra9 years ago
I also agree with Jemarc. I am very interested in seeing how someone takes this topic, great idea! – emilyinmannyc9 years ago
If by old you mean: "classic" and by new you mean: "modern" this could be a very interesting topic! Something else to consider is that different generations could lean more towards one or the other; it all depends on the target reading audience in question. On a side note: verses in the topic title needs an "s". But the title itself is a little confusing, I would consider rewording it to maybe something shorter. – Megan Finsel9 years ago
"Classic" is a very arbitrary term, and can often be problematic. This idea of separation between classic literature and modern literature oftentimes fails to acknowledge the value of modern writers and what they do for the future of writing and literature. To make this topic work, I would agree with Jemarc in saying that you would have to establish clear boundaries between what is classic and what is modern, and you'd have to do this in a more concrete manner than taste. The generational aspect is also important to consider, but I think the most important thing to note would be what inherently separates the "classics" from modern literature as a body. For instance, what does "The Great Gatsby" have as far as qualities that "The Hunger Games" does not? Beyond time period and subject matter, is there something inherently different in the quality or form of the writing? Just my thoughts on the subject. It's a good topic, and one that I've certainly heard and thought a lot about. – Farrow9 years ago
I think there is also an implication that "classic" literature carries weight and MEANING where "modern" literature may be thought of as entertaining and for consumption. – MELSEY9 years ago
Analyze Humanities' future as a discipline in our current economy. It would be beneficial to have some cross-cultural analysis as well. However, I'm concerned with what entering this discipline means for our futures, especially those of us who are working on Masters or PhDs. Does time, money, and effort sufficiently contribute to a future career? Or, is our unsure future after Humanities worth the experience?
I think when it comes to college, the thing everyone needs to consider is "Will this get me a job." That is the point of college. Especially in this day and age where skills are necessary and information is so available. I'm not saying give up on your hobbies. I'm not saying don't take an interest in humanities. Do it, but don't spend college amounts of money on it. A lot of college classes are filmed and on the internet. A lot of info in general is on the internet. Learn it for free as a hobby and apply it to your life where you can. Go to college with a job and end goal in mind and pick a major that suits it. – Tatijana9 years ago
Although I would encourage individuals to take Humanities courses and even degrees, I agree with the revision that says this is not an appropriate topic for the film category. It's the wrong venue for an important issue. – awestcot9 years ago
I think this is a worthwhile topic to explore. I would note that in your research of this topic, I think you will find, at least in the United States, that you will delve into political and economic circumstances and realities. This may become a distraction if you focus on it too much. Just make sure that you keep the eye on the ball, and you should be fine. – JDJankowski9 years ago
Take a specific case, such as Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice: one of the most popular of the classic novels, it has been subject to various reinterpretations which of course include the occasional modernization. But updating such a novel comes with a hefty set of challenges, not the least being this: is there anything Lydia could do in our time which would ruin her sisters prospects as completely? That is, the social norms and stigmas from Austen's time to ours are so different, is it possible to construct a modern analog for this novel? Is it worth it?
I think this topic could also be written contrary to your title, as one could make the argument that there is always a way to update the classics, maybe even essential to update the classics in order to make them accessible. I LOVE the way the new BBC Sherlock Holmes updates Sir Arthur Canon Doyle's stories. I think the change from pipe to nicotine patches and the updates to Dr Watson being a soldier in Afghanistan in the 21st century instead of in the 19th century are some examples of great updates that lead audiences to want to revisit the classics while still enjoying the new interpretations. – Kevin8 years ago
The Lizzie Bennett Diaries (youtube series) did a good job of updating the story, including Lydia's story line. I think as long as people feel like women should be shamed for their sexuality, people will use it against them. – chrischan8 years ago
This is a very interesting topic. If I was to write it, though, more time would be spent probably on the "why things shouldn't be 'modernized'" in the first place. I've seen Much Ado about Nothing set in 1940s Argentina performed in the West End of London- even David Tennant and Katherine Tate couldn't save that one. Even locally here, we've had Cabaret set in a Kabuki Theatre because Nazi Germany is too offensive, and not to forget the all-white version of The Wiz. I believe great art, whether movie, TV, theatre, or what have you, should be left alone. There's a reason it's known as great art, or classics. Sorry for the rant, but as you can see this is something near and dear to my heart. Cheers! – NoDakJack8 years ago
Many people say that they've "read" Tolstoy or Camus (or any host of other writers). But if the reader in question is a monolingual anglophone, how can they have "read" a Russian author? or a French-speaking one? When someone has "seen the movie" of something (like one of the Harry Potter series), they don't generally get credited with also having "read the book" even though the one is adapted from the other much as a translation is worked from the original. What's the difference? Why do popular ideas about translation allow for almost seamless "knowledge" of the "original work" while ideas about adaptation do not?
That is a really interesting question. Personally I find a great difference between the original text and its translation (I know English,Bulgarian,French and a bit of German and Russian). Reading the original Les Misérables or Ана Каренина (Anna Karenina) can't be compared to anything else, simply because however good a translation may be, the author precisely chose which words and phrases to use and sometimes they can't be translated in any other language with the same effect and meaning. That doesn't mean we must first learn another language in order to read a book, but the experiences may be different. – Kaya8 years ago
The point of an adaptation is to allow people who do not speak that language to enjoy it equally. Not all words translate perfectly into other languages but the reader is still able to read the story and picture it in their head almost the same as a person of another language. Comparing this to books and their movies may not be the best comparison. Often times a movie will simply base its plot around a book and not follow the whole story. Movies often must skip chunks of a story so as not to have a ridiculously long movie. A translated story does not tear out chunks or just base itself around the plot and steal the title. A translation is meant to be equally written for people who speak another language. I enjoy this topic very much. It would be very interesting to read the opinion of others on this. – SoodleSavvy8 years ago
SoodleSavvy, the reason I make the comparison is because translation often DO tear out chunks, add others, and rearrange things—but present themselves as if they don't. – pjoshualaskey8 years ago
pjoshualaskey, I think that would be another wonderful topic asking why some translators choose to tear out chunks and rearrange things. In this case, however, I feel that a true translation or adaptation is not meant to be changed and people who rearrange works from how they are written have not done their job correctly. This may also be a question that has no right answer because of how many ways opinions may vary. – SoodleSavvy8 years ago
To me, the question is both tricky and simple at the same time. I agree that movies based on books and translations of books are two quite different ways of 'remaking' a book. A movie director sometimes wants to develop a book plot into something new, to extend it or make it shorter just so the main idea could be conveyed, or even change the genre - options are infinite here. Also, the obvious difference between books and movies is that while reading, you direct your own movie in your head, and it doesn't work vice versa. A translation of a book is still the book. The mechanism through which your mind perceives it is not like the one you use to perceive movies. However, the relationship between a book and its translation may be pretty much like the relationship between that book and the movie based on it in regards of the unavoidable alterations that happen in the process of both translating and turning the book into a script with further filming. The result will always differ from the original act of reading the original book, no matter if the director wants to keep the plot just as it was written or not, and no matter how hard the translator tries to stick to the original. Well, if the translator transforms the words and expressions way too much and clads the book in their own style, then it's an entirely different book, of course. The fact is that it's impossible to make the translation accurate enough; after all, we're talking about pieces of art here, not scientific articles or medical documentation - translating novels and translating that kind of stuff are too drastically different fields of work, we know that. Each language obviously has its own semantic colouring to one and the same notion, especially in the realm of epithets, metaphors, idioms, leave alone puns and culturally motivated lexis.
So, in both cases - with a translation and a movie - the book cannot really be interpreted to remain as it originally was, in my opinion. And the difference and the similarity of a translation or filmmaking in relation to a book are viewed through disparate aspects: the mechanism of perception, the impossibility of conveying the unique nuances of one language by the means of the other, the way a director or a translator wants to transform the original story etc.
But the main similarity may be in keeping the originally desired effect, the purpose, the atmosphere. And that, I think, is the most important thing when the question is if you know what the story is about. – funkyfay8 years ago
There are a lot of issues with this topic, many of which have been very well-stated by those above me. I just found it interesting that you happened to choose Tolstoy and Camus as your two examples, given that the both wrote in very clear-cut, didactic, realist prose that left very little up to interpretation of the translator. I could maybe get behind this topic if it were strictly about poetry (and you had used authors like Pushkin and Baudelaire as your examples). The art of poetry is, after all, much more contingent on the specificity of words and the music they make when placed together in a certain way, making it arguably immune to direct translation. With regards to Tolstoy specifically, if you read his works in the Maude translations, you're reading versions that were made under his own watchful supervision at utmost appreciation. He's quoted saying of them, "Better translators, both for knowledge of the two languages and for penetration into the very meaning of the matter translated could not be invented." He even want as far as to say for some of his essays that the Maude versions were presenting the works "for the first time in its true form" given that the Russian censors would not allow him to publish the works without numerous edits that distorted his meaning. That being the case, it would be fair to say that reading such versions would give you access to the true Tolstoy. Yes, obviously there are bad translations out there (https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/the-pevearsion-of-russian-literature/), but the onus is on the reader to do their research and pick the one that best suits their needs. – ProtoCanon8 years ago
Would this mean that literary translator's work is useless and their profession does not matter? – T. Palomino2 years ago
With so many books out there, why do many people keep going back to the same books and rereading them? Did they simply enjoy the book that much during their first reading, or is there more to it? Perhaps the book is being adapted into a film, and people want to jog their memory and reacquaint themselves with the story and characters. Maybe people love the world so much that they feel a great comfort and familiarity escaping to it when they reread the book. It might be a tradition to reread a particular story at a certain time of year, like Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol. It is also possible that the readers did not fully appreciate or understand the book the first time through, or, quite oppositely, fully understood it and want to experience the book again now that they know all the twists and turns the author has to throw at them.
Why do you think people reread books? What value does rereading the same books have when there are so many other new stories out there waiting to be uncovered?
I mean in addition to what you already have. – Tigey8 years ago
I find re-reading book exceptionally beneficial from an academic standpoint. I have NEVER re-read a book and not found a piece of "evidence" or a new idea for a paper or thesis I was working on. As for reading for pleasure..there have only been 3 books I have re-read because they absolutely enraptured me: "Mrs. Dalloway," "The Crying of Lot 49," "The Waves." Regarding the works of Woolf, I just couldn't get over the beauty of her prose, and The Waves became a type of puzzle I was figuring out with all of the different voices. The Crying of Lot 49 was an absolute trip!! It is a complete departure from my genre of study--Medieval Literature, with a concentration of readings in Middle English--but that may be why it fascinated me; the book toys with language and you have to be alert to be "in," on the jokes Pynchon throws at the reader. Sorry for the ramble. – danielle5778 years ago
No need to apologize, Danielle! I agree wholeheartedly. I find it extremely helpful to reread books when I'm approaching them from an academic standpoint. For example, I've read Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury three times, and each time I pick out something new. – KennethC8 years ago
Danielle, good call. I had to reread Mrs. Dalloway to understand it, and then when I unlocked the code, I was "enraptured" and astounded. I'm not afraid of Virginia Woolf, but she does make me feel very wee. The necessity of rereading complex works is a necessary aspect of this topic. – Tigey8 years ago
I like to re-read books that I loved partly because I know what to expect, but also because I like to analyze what exactly I liked about the book as a way to inform myself as a writer. – Lauren Mead8 years ago
Much like re-listening to a song over and over for a span of a month when it's new, and then having it find your ears months or years later, it might be that the reader is trying to recapture what they felt when they read it first. For me, this was "Paper Towns" by John Green. The main point of the novel, which isn't a spoiler, is that not everyone is as they seem, and people are more complex than you think. John Green, at one point in his vlogbrothers YouTube channel career, said the quote, "Imagine others complexly." That novel can be summed up like that. For me, it pushed me out of my previously egocentric philosophy of looking at the world. It made me realize, and actually think in words, "That person might be having a bad day. They aren't out to get you. They didn't hold the door open for you because they were thinking about how their cat just died." Etc., etc, etc, you get the idea. So for me, a few years ago, soon after it first was published in paperback, in a short span of a few months, I read "Paper Towns" over and over. Maybe in disbelief that I never realized the complexity of humanity in that way before. Maybe in shock about how words on a page could change my whole view of the world. Much like a meaning that you find in a song and its lyrics, you find yourself wanting to relive the experience of the first time you read it, and what you first thought of the novel. – MaryWright8 years ago
Some books are designed to be read multiple times and in multiple fashions. Prime examples of this are the productions of Vladimir Nabokov, especially his later works. Pale Fire requires multiple readings (or at least a circuitous, repetitious romp throughout the novel's pages) in order to glean a full(er) understanding of the story presented within the interplay of the poem and commentary. Transparent Things initially appears to be a rather convoluted narrative about a book editor's life and death, but opens up so much further once one has reached the conclusion and begins to reread the novel. A good book can open our eyes to so much and alter our understanding of the world, as noted by MaryWright above, thereby making a new reading of a novel as rewarding (if not more so) than the first reading. One should also consider that we are always changing. When we finish a book we are a different person in some ways than when we started the book: We have lived our lives, interacted with others, events have taken place in the world around us, and we have read a new book. When I first read Look at the Harlequins! I was unaware of the rancor between Nabokov and his first biographer, Andrew Field. After reading Field's books on Nabokov and reading Look at the Harlequins! in this new light the novel transformed from a fictitious autobiography of an author with some slight resemblances to Nabokov into a doppelganger of Field's works, revealing fictional counterparts to Field's very real scholarly errors and oversights. Nabokov's final, incomplete novel The Original of Laura has been widely dismissed as a recycled pastiche of elements from his previous works, most notably Lolita. But critical consensus has shifted as the work has been reread and re-evaluated (including the reversal of the most noted Nabokov scholar, Brian Boyd).
However Nabokov's works are certainly not the only example of this. Some others that jump to mind are: John Barth's Lost in the Funhouse, Danielewski's House of Leaves, Dick's VALIS, Faulkner's Absalom, Absalom, Moby-Dick, and many others. Heck, some works require multiple readings and considerations before we're even sure what we've read, like Blake's Marriage of Heaven and Hell. – echarlberg8 years ago
