The entire time I was reading about African American criticism, I was wondering how Tyson was going to apply this lens to Great Gatsby, and I was pleasantly surprised that reading with the perspective that the story laks African American characters and culture is using this lens in and of itself. Normally, I would have approached this text and dismissed an African American lens… am I the only one who was naïve and thinking this way? I found this chapter very insightful and it will come in useful this coming summer when I take ENG 529, which will focus on African American literature.
Further, it is good to know that all the psychology classes I took as an undergraduate are finally good for something!! I find it particularly interesting that most high school students don’t take a psychology course until at least freshman year of college, so much like Structuralist critical theory, I am also worried about using a psychoanalytic lens in my classroom. Many of the concepts related to this theory would really do require sufficient background information from the field of psychology, which I know make this theory much more coherent for me, such as descriptions of Freud and all his theories. Does anyone else feel the same? I am left wondering how difficult it would be to use this lens in a classroom setting, despite the fact that I really do like it and find it useful. I suppose some aspects of it could be used rather easily, such as the study of sibling rivalries, inferiority, defense mechanisms, and family dynamics, but what about the id, the ego and the superego? Or the meaning of sexuality? Perhaps some aspects of this lens could be left out, but considering how important this theory is, does omitting information do it justice?! However, after reviewing the questions on page 38, there are some questions that I think could be used with students it they are phrased in a very straightforward fashion with no vague or unknown terms.