We all have our histories for “The Department of English,” and mine pre-dates that of Georgia Institute of Technology’s Richard Utz. Utz thinks English as a formal discipline of study begins in mid-nineteenth-century continental Europe. I am persuaded by Gauri Viswanathan’s finding, in Masks of Conquest, that English Studies began in British India in the 1830s. This quibble over the past is only part of why I question Utz’s prognostication for our future. Utz divides English teachers into two camps: those who do “literature and theory,” on the one hand, and those who work with “blogs, video essays, Web comics, digital archives, [and] data visualization,” on the other. The first, he predicts, are “bound to become monument of bygone glory, remembered only as a ‘wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command.’” Am I alone in thinking that our formal object of study doesn’t matter nearly as much our critical methods of engagement?
Read Utz’s short essay on “The Trouble with English” here:
Categories: English Matters
Leave a Reply