Hello, all. Even though this week's topic is fantasy/sci fi, I noticed when looking at the packet that there are some articles dealing with "international children's/YA literature" in there. I guess I didn't know where to put them, and I thought we might address them as well this week!
So here are some questions to get you started. I encourage you to post about your projects and reply to other people's messages--let's try to get more of a dialogue going.
1. How does CS Lewis describe the value of fantasy (or fairy stories) and realistic YA lit, respectively? Which does he seem to prefer? Why? How does he describe the reasons why authors write for children? What do you think of his perspective, and how does it compare/contrast to the arguments of the contemporary scholars we have been reading?
2. Science fiction and fantasy often contain social/political commentary as a major theme. For example, novels might comment on the pervasiveness of government, what might happen if humans don't clean up the environment, or how we might be leading the human race to catastrophe through continual war and violence. Do you also see these kinds of themes in the fantasy/sci fi YA books you are reading? If no, what themes or issues do they seem to address?
3. Why do you think science fiction and fantasy (like graphic novels) are often said to be more attractive to male readers? Given that arguably the first science fiction novel was written by a woman (_Frankenstein_) this is an interesting idea. Any female sci fi lovers out there?
4. What is the difference between fantasy and sci fi literature? What is dystopian literature and how does it fit in? Did anybody read any dystopian YA novels and if so, how do you think adolescents might respond to them?
5. Discuss Ostry's idea of the "posthuman." Do you think books dealing with posthuman futuristic events should be incorporated into classrooms? Do you think English teachers have a role in promoting discussion of topics like genetic engineering, cloning, and the increasing role of technology in our lives, presumably through literature?
There are a few thoughts to get you thinking!
See you soon,
Janet
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I am posting early, as I will miss class next week due to a trip out of town.
1. I must say I enjoy C.S. Lewis as an author, but not so much as a scholarly writer. I found his message hard to follow, and one I mostly disagreed with. From what I could gather, he seemed to view fantasy as "up on a pedastool" so to spoke in comparison to other literature. He believes that fantasy is better because it doesn't deceive children as stories about the real world do. I disagree that stories about the real world, fiction or non, deceive children. Possibly sometimes, but mostly they help children work through the "real" world. And it's great to imagine oneself in an imaginary/fantasy world, while reading (but how can we assume some children may not take this to be a possible reality?) Also, he seems to differ from contemporary scholars in that he believes authors shouldn't write about what concerns children, but about what concerns them. I agree that an author can't write a good book, without firmly believing or relishing themselves in the topic. However, much is to be said for writing with one's audience in mind. Not sure if much of this made sense, but it will be interesting to read the other takes on Lewis.
2. I will talk about themes in Sci-Fi and fantasy when I blog about my book.
3. I must admit this is my least favorite week's topic, as I am not a sci-fi or fantasy reader. But, it certainly can be enjoyed by girls/women. I liked the quote by Janice Bogstad on page 422 concerning how sci-fi inspired her as a girl. "But it also let me know that there was a big world out there, more of a world and more of a universe than seemed available through family, school, church or even most other books. This is the lure of science fiction for young readers, with both similarities and difference for young girls and young boys." While girls can enjoy this genre, I think maybe the reason why so many more boys do (is this a generatlization?) is because it feels a need they have for action, adventure, agression (sometimes,) and science, mathmetical, hands-on learner. Maybe it is less about relationships and touchy feely and more about action etc. I could be wrong about this, this is what I see from my own sons.
4. No comment on this.
5. I found the chapter on "posthuman" young adult books very fascinating. In fact, although I don't usually read sci-fi I want to read some of these. I think it's because of what Ostry states about the "science fiction novel come to life." While fascinating and great for free or independant reading, like so many of the other controversarial topics we've discussed this posthuman topic would be hard to approach in a classroom. The idea of personal ethics and morals being involved etc. How would you approach some of these very difficult questions on identity and what it means to be human? The power to create and whose right it is, ethics, morals, religion's place in genetics and cloning, the question of humanity etc. etc.
See you in another week,
Staci
1. Lewis values fantasy over “realistic” YA lit, which he characterizes as “blameless stories of child life in which nothing at all alarming ever happens” (p. 1079). His assertion that “a children’s story which is enjoyed only by children is a bad children’s story” (p. 1076) sums up, pretty succinctly, the problem with “pure” genre fiction—if a SF or fantasy novel appeals only to SF/fantasy fans, if a romance novel appeals only to fans of romance (i.e., any Danielle Steel novel), if a techno-thriller (such as a Tom Clancy novel) appeals only to fans of techno-thrillers…well, then these are just examples of genre fiction with very limited aesthetic appeal. Their lifespan as art is ephemeral. As Gail mentioned during her presentation last week, categorizations can be misleading—perhaps they’re useful only to publishers. And perhaps the books that present us with genre “dilemmas”—like the Harry Potter books (YA? fantasy? series fiction? all of these?)—are just plain good works of literature.
2. The novel I read for this week, Peeps by Scott Westerfeld, addresses this issue, as well as the issue of classification. First, I’m not sure why it’s considered a YA novel, although it has been recognized as a “best book” by numerous organizations that compile annual lists of best books for young adults. The protagonist/narrator is a first-year college student, and no other characters in the book are adolescents. Perhaps this is one of those YA novels that is a “just plain good work of literature” (well, maybe not Literature, but at the very least a good story). Thematically, it focuses on the dangers of unhealthy living: the potential consequences of ill-advised drunken behavior, unprotected sex, and various unhygienic behaviors that could lead to bacterial and/or parasitic infections. The novel’s premise is that vampirism is caused by a parasite. All kinds of parallels can be drawn between vampirism (as depicted in this novel) and HIV infection (the narrator is infected by a woman he meets in a gay bar), but the vampires in this novel ultimately turn out to have the best interests of the human race in mind—they’re creating more vampires because vampires are necessary for the survival of the human race (I’ll omit the long, convoluted plot development that explains this). The short, even-numbered chapters in this book explain the transmission of various real parasites such as toxoplasma and wolbachia. It’s educational stuff, even if it is kind of creepy. Which leads to the book’s overarching theme/moral, which the author handles adeptly—all kinds of organisms must coexist symbiotically to maintain the “circle of life.”
3. At the risk of sounding terse and flip, I’ll offer the idea that it’s a control thing. SF/fantasy is heavy on issues of power, dominance, and the exploitation of others through the use of advanced knowledge or technology. However, the gender divide is narrowing, as female authors (and some male authors) develop science fiction to include what I call social science fiction, such as Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale.
4. If there is a real distinction between fantasy and SF, it might be determined by the degree to which the story relies on the real possibility that “hard science” (such as chemistry or physics) could actually provide a “true” basis for the fictional aspects of the story. In other words, how plausible is the science in the fiction? At the other end of the spectrum would be a story based almost on pure fantasy or mythology with practically no connection to “hard science.” Novels such as The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe and the Harry Potter books would fall into this latter category. I think it’s more of a continuum and less of an either/or. Dystopian literature would fit anywhere on this continuum, depending on how heavily it emphasizes science. For example, Brave New World would probably lie closer to the SF end of the continuum.
5. Literature dealing with the idea of the "posthuman" could easily be used in classrooms. I think it would be an excellent way to discuss ideas like diversity—witness the popularity of the X-Men comic books and movies. One could easily frame these stories as “diversity dramas,” with the “mutants” struggling for acceptance and understanding in mainstream society.
1. I agree with Jim and Staci's comments in reference to the CS Lewis article. One part that I found to be useful was the idea of development versus change. I think it's important to be able to incorporate new styles and genres in one's original preference.
2. This is definitely present in the book I read for this week, The Giver . While the main theme in this book revolves around memory and how "off" life can be without it, the community itself is completely controlled and manipulated to certain standards. Everything has specific roles, and very rarely is there change. Did I mention that nobody experiences real emotions? It's a very exciting, yet scary book. I also watched a movie this past Friday that was based on a Ray Bradbury story. The movie was called Sound of Thunder . While there were many "holes" in the plot, the overall concept was interesting. The story focuses on a group that can travel back in time without affecting evolution. Rich people pay megabucks for "safaris" back in time. The main trip was going back 65 million years right before the natural death of a dinosaur and taking it down with nitrous guns. It was a real rush, and because the dino was about to die anyway, evolution was never affected...until one time, a butterfly was accidentally stepped on. This sent a whirlwind of "time waves" that would fast forward the series of evolution that this butterfly death caused over the past 65 million years. In short, one butterfly caused monster plants and bats the size of horses....along with other weird creatures. The goal was to try to jump back in time to stop the butterfly's death; and I won't give it away. I was on the edge of my seat, though.
3. I enjoy Sci-fi quite a bit sometimes, but I would rather watch it than read it. I never catch any of my female students reading Sci-fi, but I'm always seeing my male students reading it, especially during class when they're not interested in what I'm teaching LOL. I agree with Staci's reasoning for this, including the math and hands-on aspects. Many women I talk to enjoy Sci-fi movies more than books as well (this is just from my small group of friends).
4. When I teach Sci-fi, we specifically talk about the difference between this and fantasy. Generally, the way we view it is Sci-fi could have a chance of happening at some point, while fantasy (wizards and magic) is not possible of happening. We would view Harry Potter as fantasy, and something like The X Files as sci-fi. Dystopian literature focuses on an environment that is chaotic, while a utopia is "perfect." I have not read this style lately, but many times readers find it interesting because it is not what they are used to seeing everyday.
5. I thought the posthuman idea was interesting and could easily be taught in the classroom. Students could relate to the concept of identity on different levels. One aspect that I wasn't particularly fond of was comparing the disgust of finding out that you're a clone to the reaction of finding out you're adopted. I don't feel that adopted kids feel disgusted and like they don't know who they are in this same way. I have several adopted friends, including a boyfriend, who feel lucky to have parents that chose to have them. Those are just my feelings on it.
1. I got the impression the C.S. Lewis was defending children's literature, and I wonder what sort of dismissive criticism he was getting at the time. The tone of the article felt like a counter-argument in some ways, and that might explain his impulses to place children's literature on a pedestal like Staci mentioned. I thought his description of 'watching a story happen' to describe the creative process was right on. I think I dream like that.
2. Lisa, I can't be 100% sure, but I think that Bradbury movie is based off a short story from either the Martian Chronicles or his Illustrated Man collection. I know I"ve read it before.
3. I've often heard of the social science fiction that Jim mentioned as 'soft S.F.' Ursula LeGuin is a fairly popular author that comes to mind, working in that science fiction atmosphere, but not feeling a need to work out of all the scientific reasoning and theory behnd the warp drive, phasers, cloning, etc. I've got some theories about what Freud would have to say about the differences between hard and soft science fiction, but I'll just keep those to myself. ;)
4. I talked a little about this in my post.
5. We have got to give credit to Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley's invention of Frankenstein's monster. All of these YA authors are building on her foundation. Several of the ideas that Ostry presents, especially questions about what it means to be human, were present in the center of the Shelley's novel where we hear the monster's side of the story. The regret about 'playing God' is definitely presented with the doctor's narrative, similar to some of the scientist and parents in the YA books. What about pairing up 'Frankie' with one of these interesting books that Ostry mentions in a high school class? I can't see how that wouldn't work just splendid with boys or girls.
I’m getting started later than usual this week – sorry for the delay in my post.
3. Charlie and I have been surveying a number of eight and ninth grade students on their YA reading preferences. One of the sections of the survey asks students what their favorite YA topic or genre is. Surprisingly, both male and female freshman enjoy the fantasy genre. When asked why they ranked this topic higher than other possible choices, most responded that they like mythical creatures or reading about a place that doesn’t exist, which echoes Staci’s citation of Janice Bogstad’s quote on page 422. With this new information in mind, it is difficult for me to hypothesize why it is said that males tend to enjoy this type of literature more than females because in my own classroom I’m seeing that the females like it just as much.
I myself am not interested in SF or fantasy. Mythical creatures, far off places, and fake wars, etc. aren’t my cup of tea. I do however LOVE Harry Potter, which complicates things a tad, considering that HP is full of mythical creatures, far off places, and fake world wars… What I enjoy most about HP (which is what I read for this week; brushing up for the seventh release) is the epic journey. While reading it this week, I began to draw parallels between Harry and Odysseus (which, although is considered a classic, could be considered fantasy...maybe). I found that students did not enjoy the adventures of Odysseus very much and wonder if linking Odysseus to Harry is some way would peak their interest… I don’t know, something to continue to think about.
Post a Comment