ENGLISH 325:

AMERICAN FICTION 1945 TO THE PRESENT

Jeff Pence
Office: Rice 26
Office hours: T, 1:00-2:30 & W, 10:30-12:00, or by appt.
Phone: x8586
email: fpence
.
Fall, 1997
MWF, 2:30-3:20
.
Texts:
Cassil, The Norton Anthology of Contemporary Fiction
Ellison, Invisible Man
O'Connor, A Good Man is Hard to Find
Nabokov, Lolita
Pynchon, V
Reed, Mumbo Jumbo
Robinson, Housekeeping
Acker, Great Expectations
Alexie, The Lone Ranger and Tonto Fistfight in Heaven
Powers, Galatea 2.2

In the early 1960's, Norman Mailer described American fiction as an unresolved war between "Cannibals and Christians," a distinction which referred to competing authorial traditions. He linked the former, in a line beginning with Theodore Dreiser, to authors from insurgent social groups (immigrants, minorities) whose work sought to grasp and influence a complex society through a broadly defined realism. Mailer tied the latter tradition, typified by Edith Wharton, to authors who turned their attention to a relatively refined distillation of experience in the novel of manners.

Behind Mailer's analysis are presumptions about two different conflicts. The first might be seen as social, the second as literary, if only in isolation. As we shall see, in actual practice matters get far less delineated. One conflict is a struggle over the definition of the term American. How have the questions over who or what is included or excluded, ennobled or denigrated by this word been revised by the domestic and international political upheavals which followed World War II? Note, for example, the explicit division of American fiction along gender lines in Mailer's construction, a division which echoes a long tradition which was most famously enunciated by Hawthorne in his dismissal of "damn scribbling women." Regardless of its evaluative freight, are such dualisms useful templates for discussing the relationship of social experience and identity to literature in the contemporary scene? My choices of readings are intended to confound such ready-to-hand generalizations, but only so that each of us might begin to formulate our own notions about these topics.

The second struggle is over the definition of the realist aesthetic which undergirds the distinctions Mailer draws. What possibilities are precluded when a variety of realism--whether social or psychological, political or domestic--is taken as the baseline for understanding American fiction? How have and might writers and readers figure and respond to the complexities of post-war American culture in ways that do not readily correspond to the either-or realism which Mailer implies? In this respect, the reading list is probably taking an even stronger stance. I am interested in making this course a space for critical self-reflection, for questioning the assumptions and implications of reading and writing habits we normally take for granted. To this end, the syllabus maps out a border space between realist narrative and strong experimentation, coming at times much nearer to one than the other. It seems to me that the skills and perspectives we examine and refine in this gray area will have the most relevance to other reading and writing practices we take up. So, many important inheritors of the traditions of realism (Updike, say, or Baldwin) are waiting to one side here, as are many interesting experimentalists (Burroughs and Cooper, for example). Instead, we will focus mainly on hybrid texts, texts whose narratives are manifestly influenced by surrealism, near-mystical religious belief, linguistic games and conceits, satire, and the systems of meaning which circulate in pop, high and technological culture.

We will be exploring this terrain. Our method will be to examine selected works individually and as part of a larger cultural history--that of contemporary America--whose definition is still a work in progress. With this in mind, we will attend especially to the challenging diversity of styles, subjects, authors and contexts of these narratives, as well as interrogating the critical values with which we appreciate them.

This class will be centered on discussion. On Mondays, we will meet as a single group; at these times, I may take time to recap previous discussions and/or introduce works and questions they may provoke in their own right and in relation to other texts. You will be split into two discussion sections for the Wednesday and Friday meetings. On the day you are not required to attend class discussion, I will ask you to meet as a smaller group for discussion outside of class. I suggest you use the scheduled class time for this meeting, but you may choose to schedule another time.

Please feel free to use my office hours, or to make an appointment, to see me at any time in the semester concerning your progress or plans in the course. Simple questions can be dealt with over the electronic network. In my experience, more complex discussions are best done face to face.

The following written work will be required:

(1) Six "prep" essays of 1-2 pages, or about 300-500 words, on the weekly reading, to be due the day we begin to discuss a particular work. Three are required before Fall Break; three are required after. These essays are neither meant to be summaries nor miniature critical works; rather, use them to speculate on problems with particular narratives, your own formulation of connections and contradictions between works, and to reflect critically on the nature and motives of your responses to readings. I will respond to your essays with my own questions and comments. At the end of the course, you will resubmit a portfolio of these essays and receive a single grade for them. Grading will be based upon the quality, range and semester-long development of the essays.

(2) A 4-5 page essay in response to either Ellison, O'Connor or Nabokov. Five copies of your drafts are due Monday, October 6; one I shall read and return, the others are for peer review groups which will meet outside of class to offer feedback and suggestionsfor revision. Final drafts are due Friday, October 17.

(3) A 10-12 page essay on a topic of your choice. This project should incorporate outside reading and research. A 1-2 page prospectus is due on Monday, November 17. Peer review drafts are due on Friday, December 5. Finals are due Monday, December 15.

The following policies will govern course procedures:

(1) Attendance at classes and any conferences we might schedule. No more than two absences are allowed without an acceptable excuse.

(2) Papers are due in class.

(3) Late papers will be penalized one-third of a grade per day, beginning at the class period they are due.

(4) Class participation, which is vital to the success of this course, is required. Peer reviews are an important feature of participation.

(5) First and final drafts must be typed or word-processed, double-spaced and have one-inch margins.

Week 1:

Week 2:

Week 3:

Week 4:

Week 5:

Week 6:

Week 7:

FALL BREAK

Week 8:

Week 9:

Week 10:

Week 11:

Week 12:

Week 13:

Week 14:

Back | Top of Page | Home

The English Department welcomes your Questions or Comments regarding this site--
e-mail The English Department Web Master