As we discussed in class, canonical conventions have made a gradual shift over the years and now entails more contemporary literature, including women and minorites. With this shift, the emphasis on historical literature has lessened, a change prevalent in the university as well. Film is gaining popularity as a major and minor across campusus, and it's not uncommon to take an entire class devoted to modern fiction such as C.S. Lewis or Tolkien. Likewise, femanist literature is changing to include more contemporary texts. A course such as "Women in Literary Imagination" seems like it would explore the strengths of women writers in both historical and popular culture. And while the writer of the article refers to it as "chick lit" and only discusses one text taught in the class, I'm sure the teacher offers a more insightful approach to the topics, even if it is Bridget Jones's Diary.

I really like this idea of a class. You could really learn a lot about the view of self in society, as well as the reasoning behind why people think that way of themselves. The author of the article is, of course, assuming that people only read canonized books considered "intellectual," or "serious" in classes and then try and decipher the true meanings behind the stories. However, Baron, by teaching this class, is offering an alternate solution - Read literature made probably/mostly for entertainment purposes and THEN delve into the deeper meanings behind them. I, too, would definitely take this class.

I dont see a problem with having a course as described. There are many issues to talk about regarding female or "chick" lit. Its unfortunate that women writers dont have enough of a substantial voice/opportunity to compete in all english courses. Offering courses in chick lit seems to be the first step in serious integration of this literature into the classroom. Hopefully in the future with the changing canon we will continue to see more literature with broader diversity both in sex and culture.

I love it. When we dig into the depth of meaning of books like "In the Skin of a Lion" we are hampered by our lack of knowledge of the history that makes up so much of the story. Not so for women (maybe men too) who read "Bridget Jones' Diary". We know all about self image issues and workplace issues and sex issues, so we are able, not only to relate, but to examine the character's issues more closely. I especially like the comparison with Jane Austen's books. It gives the "chicklit" genre a little canonicity!

While I think referring to it as "Chick Lit" could cause some waves for whatever reason, I don't see whats wrong with teaching a course with this kind of a reading list. It should be more about the structure of the course, shouldn't it? Surely they don't read the novels and then discuss how dissapointed they were when they too gained an extra five pounds. Using novels that deal with real life, might make it easier for students to make a (gasp) connection with the text and further reflect on what it actually means, not only to the individual, but to society as a whole.

I think that I would take the class if it were offered at UVM. If you think about it, the typical university offers so many classes- many of which are other people's personal interest: The class here "Tolkien's Cosmo's" is no doubt attractive to Lord of the Rings buffs. I think every student should have the opportunity to take a class they absolutely love. Chick Lit would be popular and successful, because as said in the article, the class deals with serious feminist issues. How is that not academic? The writer of the article seemed to assume English classes at universities are not supposed to be loved by all or something; that all classes should be academic and not always appealing to the student body. Maybe the writer was just pleasantly surprised that a class such as Chick Lit can be offered- and he likes the idea of making many female students really satisfied with what's offered at their school. -kari iverson

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)