I’ve recently been exploring various theoretical frameworks as I prepare to write my senior thesis. In my theory class we’ve been going over psychoanalytic criticism and we just studied Lacan, but I’m still a bit confused on how his theories could actually be applied to literary studies.
In thinking about the Symbolic and the Real, I was wondering if an epiphany (in the modernist sense) could be considered an encounter with the Real. For example, at the end of Mansfield’s “The Garden Party,” Laura is overwhelmed by emotion and the realization of mortality, saying “isn’t life…” but she can’t quite find how to describe it. Could this be considered an encounter with the Real or breakdown of Symbolic since language seems to fail?
Sorry if this was a bad example, but please correct me if I’m applying the concept incorrectly. It would also be great if anyone could point me towards a concrete application of Lacanian theory on a literary text (such as an article etc.) Thanks!

I’m about three quarters of the way through reading Mark Fisher’s THE WEIRD AND THE EERIE. I was interested in reading this because I like a lot of the sort of media that is discussed in this book. But so, so, so much of this is going over my head. After every essay I think I could only give you the most general, bare minimum summary of the point he is trying to make and the ideas explored. How on earth do people read this stuff? Am I SOL as someone without an advanced degree in literature or philosophy? Or do I just have to keep reading and get used to it? Reading this stuff makes me feel like an idiot.

English is my third language, and I studied in my native language before my bachelor's degree. I managed to get through that transition and enter an MA programme, but it's only recently, as I've started exploring the subject independently, that I've realised how much I still have to learn.

My gaps feel like they cover almost everything.

I sometimes struggle to understand what I'm reading. Even when I grasp the central argument, I find it difficult to articulate it in my own words or develop it into a coherent argument. My academic English and writing skills are nowhere near where I want them to be.

I'm currently struggling with literary theory. I somehow managed to understand structuralism, but now I'm stuck at poststructuralism. I often find myself going back and forth between unrelated topics because I don't know what to study first or how different areas connect. The vastness of the subject leaves me overwhelmed and confused.

I know my command of English is part of the problem, but I also need to build my knowledge and critical thinking skills.

I hope to pursue a PhD in literature eventually, and I have roughly a year to work seriously on these gaps. I'm willing to put in the effort; I just need a clear, structured path to follow.

I'd especially appreciate advice from literature professors, PhD scholars and experienced students of English literature.

Where should I begin? What should I study, in what order, and how can I improve my reading comprehension and academic writing?

I'd also appreciate honest advice about whether pursuing a PhD is a realistic goal for someone in my position. Please be candid, even if the answer is uncomfortable. I'm looking for constructive guidance, not reassurance.

Thank you!

I’m a Master’s student in English literature and i reached a critical point where i really need to settle on a topic for my thesis. My supervisor advised me to look into topics that interest me, but when it comes to literary works, i love exploring everything and everything sounds interesting to me. That fact has been weighing on me since i enrolled in the program. I don’t know where to start, and I always feel like I do not know enough, which is true. I mean the vastness of the field is scary. I just need some guidance and i can’t find it anywhere.

I’m interested in all kinds of literature. And that is a problem.

Hi, I have a question! Is there a specific subfield of criticism that examines defense writing? What I mean by that is fictional writing that sort of anticipates the critical response it will get and preemtively defends itself against it in the text? Two contemporary examples that come to my mind are yellowface by R.F. Kuang and A Little Life by Hanya Yanagihara.

A lot of people who read yellowface felt like she put the criticism that gets leveled at her in the mouth of characters that are clearly meant to be disliked. (I personally think there is more nuance to that but it's that kind of defensive writing that I'm referring to.

A Little Life does something similar where it seems to be constantly commenting on itself in the language of culture criticism. A lot of its metafictional elements like Willem's movies or plays or JB's art often feel like Yanagihara using characters or metafiction as her mouthpiece to be like "THIS is what this story is about and idc what sensitive readers who care too much about identity-politics will say bc I'm doing it in the name of Art" lol. In other words, a lot of her writing feels like it is addressing some kind of imagined critical reader.

And so my question is have you come across papers, literature, fields that deals with exactly this phenomenon? I'm planning to look more into reading response theory and reception theory since hypothetical readers seem to touch on some of this, but maybe someone has heard of something more specific.

Hi everyone, hopefully this will be allowed

I recently picked up Modern Women’s writing by Paul Salzman

I am trying to slowly read through the first poem by Isabella Whitney - To her unconstant lover

Full poem: https://rpo.library.utoronto.ca/content/i-w-her-unconstant-lover

I am trying to understand what “kindred stain” means here

So shall the promises be kept
that you so firmly made:
Now choose whether ye will be true,
or be of Sinon's trade.
Whose trade if that you long shall use,
it shall your kindred stain:
Example take by many a one
whose falsehood now is plain.

My understanding is that the phrase kindred stain here means that if you don’t keep your promises to your wife than you and Sinon will share a “kindred stain” - implying that you and him are kin and you share the same sin of being deceitful ?

Would this be a correct understanding?

Thank you in advance :)

Interested in pieces of literature that show bog standard lives of outwardly uninteresting people. Think janitors, and service workers, and insurance salesmen, and general menial people. I'm interested to see how these supposedly unremarkable and even unimportant (comparatively) lives are shown in literature, contemporary or not.

I’m currently read Afterlife by Julia Alvarez, in which she does not include quotation marks for the dialogue in the story. I’m curious about what people’s thoughts are on why some authors choose to do this, and sometimes even omit other punctuation as well.
What could be the literary function? Is there meaning behind it?

I’m currently investing a lot of time and effort into learning English. I’ve recently started reviewing grammar again, while building my vocabulary through dictionaries, books, listening, and everyday exposure. I’m also studying for professional qualifications, so I have to be realistic about how much time I can devote to learning additional languages.

Because of that, I want English to become my main gateway to world literature.

I’m interested in both fiction and non-fiction, but especially literature that allows me to understand different peoples, cultures, traditions, ways of thinking, and everyday life. I’m also very interested in ethnography and cultural history. One of my dreams is to travel to places such as the Pacific islands, including Polynesia. Even before I can physically travel there, I would love to experience those cultures through their literature.

This is where I’ve encountered a problem.

I have read several works from a 150-volume Azerbaijani “World Literature” series, and unfortunately the quality of the translations is often disappointing. Some readers who have read more of the collection have pointed out that there are numerous serious translation problems, and in some cases the translations are reportedly quite poor. I’ve personally had the experience of reading a passage and feeling that I understood the individual sentences but somehow missed the meaning, atmosphere, or cultural context of the original work.

I don’t want this to happen with English.

So I’m looking for recommendations from people who have made a similar journey:

• Which English-language publishers are particularly reliable for translated world literature?
• Which publishers are known for producing translations that are not only accurate, but also literary, beautiful, and enjoyable to read?
• Are there particular publishers or translators you would recommend for African, Asian, Latin American, Middle Eastern, Central Asian, indigenous, Polynesian and Pacific literature?
• Are there specific translators whose work you consider exceptional?
• Are there YouTube channels, audiobook narrators, lecturers, or other speakers with particularly beautiful and clear English who could help me experience literature through listening as well as reading?
• Are there free, high-quality resources where I can listen to readings, lectures, discussions, or complete works in English?
• For someone using English as the main bridge to world literature, which authors, publishers, translators, and collections would you recommend following?

I’m not saying English can perfectly replace the original languages. Obviously, reading a work in its original language gives access to things that translation cannot completely reproduce. But realistically, I cannot learn Spanish, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Vietnamese, several African languages, Polynesian languages, etc. all at the same time.

My goal is therefore to make English + Azerbaijani + Turkish my three main languages for exploring world literature.

I want to use English not simply as a professional skill, but as a way of travelling through the world intellectually — learning how different people have lived, thought, imagined, loved, suffered, created traditions, and understood their place in the world.

I’m also trying to improve my English through literature itself. Sometimes I use AI to help me express complicated thoughts in English because I tend to construct long and complex sentences when speaking or writing. I hope people won’t judge me too harshly for that. 😄 My reasoning is that reading good English literature, listening to excellent speakers, and studying high-quality translations will gradually improve both my language and my ability to think and express myself.

So if you were starting this kind of “literary journey through the world” with English as your main language, what would you recommend?

Which publishers, translators, authors, audiobooks, YouTube channels, lecturers, narrators, or free resources should I know about?

I’d especially appreciate recommendations based on actual reading experience, rather than just general theory.

My masters’ thesis has progressed slower than I’ve hoped and I’m still in the middle of writing. I have a very, very rough draft of what I would hope to submit as a writing sample in 6 weeks.

As rough as I think it is, I think the idea is strong. However, hearing about other people’s’ writing samples have lowkey freaked me out - I have peers that submitted chapters that were published as articles who didn’t get in anywhere.

I know everything is incredibly school and cohort-dependent, where each schools seeks out different things, every applicant pool leads to different intakes, and personal statements/SOPs are a huge factor.

As I’m trying to finalize my writing sample, I’m just really struggling with feeling like it’s futile. I know it’s not perfect; my writing definitely needs some polishing but I think my idea is good. I’m just not sure if it’s enough after seeing more qualified, skilled people around me (which I’m fine with, it’s not a dig at myself) get rejected makes me wonder if it’s even worth applying with this at all.

I know this might sound juvenile, and I apologize if it is. I know we all struggle with this - I think the question I’m asking is that if having a writing sample with a good idea (along with reference letters, SOP, etc) is enough to make my application strong even if it’s not as polished as it could be.

It just feels laughable to kill myself over this writing sample only for it to have been pointless from the beginning. I don’t want to waste a cycle, but I also don’t want to waste energy on a cycle that won’t get me anywhere.

By "Scooby-Doo plot" I mean a story where supposed Supernatural occurrences are revealed to be a hoax. The oldest I can think of are Phantom of the Opera and Hound of the Baskervilles.

What is the oldest example of this we have? Is this a relatively modern idea or does it have ancient roots?

I think this would be considered on-topic for a literary studies chat(?)

I don't know how to actually read critically, like in a way where I'm really analyzing and understanding the depth and complexity of what I'm reading. I'm asking this for all forms of literature (not just novels and whatnot but things like comics too), how do I read critically? This might sound dumb, but I feel disappointed in myself after reading something and failing to actually recognize simple changes in a character just because I was too focused on the cool action I saw. I often end up just seeing what other people say about a character I like and see how they explain the character's depth, complexity, dynamics, and other things. I just wish I could understand these things on my own but whenever I'm reading I just never pay any attention to things like that. In short, I only take in the words that I see on the page, but I want to be able to see the words between each line of text, to understand the message the author was trying to convey. I feel so dumb

Recently I have been studying English Romantic poetry for fun. I find the philosophical underpinnings of the movement to be quite fascinating: from Keats' "Beauty is truth, truth beauty,—that is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know," to the lavish usage of Greek mythological references in such a way that the act of poetic vision itself seems to become mythological, to the intriguing use of nature as an ideal to which the corruption and limitation of human life is compared.

I've reflected on the historical role that the Romantic movement has played on human thought in the context of the Enlightenment, the Industrial Revolution, etc. In the midst of rapid historical change, I have seen the Romantic movement as exerting an important regulating influence on the negative effects of the relentless human drive towards technology. And I see echoes of Romantic complaints in modern discourse about how the digital world has transformed our lives.

The Romantic elevation of individual feeling and experience is one I find quite remarkable historically, and also deeply valuable. At the same time, I also wonder if some negative long-term effects may have come from the movement, in particular: I feel like popular misconceptions about the humanities often tend to center around a very individualistic and emotion-driven idea of what they are. Thus, detractors label the humanities as irrational, soft, etc.

Now I of course do not agree with these claims. However, looking back upon history I seem to find these modern misconceptions anomalous. While subsets of the arts (such as acting or music) have often been looked upon as cheap entertainment or indulgence, I have the impression that the humanities as a whole have generally been seen as serving quite vital and highly-regarded social roles. Examples: ancient Greek views on philosophical training as helping to develop character, Chinese imperial examinations in which knowledge of Confucian classics played a critical role, and religious education during the time in Europe when education mainly functioned to prepare clergy. In all these cases, humanities education were seen as equipping people for a clearly society-facing role, a tendency seeming to contrast sharply with the more individualistic and emotion-based portrayal of the humanities these days.

In conjunction with Romantic poetry I have been reflecting on T. S. Eliot's "Tradition and the Individual Talent." I would say I am a big fan of the (limited) Eliot I have read but am well aware that he wasn't a great fan of the Romantics haha. I have found it fascinating how Eliot, despite his aversion to what he felt were the flaws of the Romantics, proposed a theory so similar in certain respects to Keats' idea of the "chameleon poet". In general I definitely find some of his ideas very valuable and others quite questionable. What strikes me from a historical point of view, though, is how easily his ideas seem to lend themselves to an idea of the humanities as esoteric, inaccessible, and ivory-tower. Which I feel is one of the other main accusations leveled at them today. I don't mean to blame Eliot per se but I do rather hypothesize that some Modernist tendencies may also have lent themselves to lesser modern public consciousness of the ways the humanities contribute to society.

Would love to hear if others have ways to challenge or add onto my thoughts.

The title says it all. It guess it’s a rather niche branch of criticism, but it’s cool to see what those who have “proven themselves” think about their counterparts. But isn’t criticism something along the lines of Nabokov’s lectures on Russian literature, DH Lawrence’s analysis of American Literature, with the latter ask being exemplified by Franz Liszt’s book on Chopin, or Berlioz’ criticism/satire on the works of his time

Sorry, but after scouring for books like this, I feel like I’ve hit a plateau. it’s hard to find anything on these, even if it’s a collation of notes, rather than a large dictum.

Idk if it’s classified as “meta-criticism” but it’s cool to see how these guys write about their own.

Hola,tengo 17 años y aún no tengo claro qué estudiar. Me inclino hacia trabajo social o profe de literatura.
Pase gran parte de mi vida rodeada de libros y en el pueblo en donde vivo no hay muchas opciones.
Si quiero hacer trabajo social tengo que irme si o si a Salto o Montevideo y no me siento lista para dar ese paso,además de que mi situación económica no es muy buena.
¿Qué cosas debería considerar si quiero estudiar profesorado de literatura?
¿Cómo sé si de verdad la carrera es para mí o no va tanto con mis intereses?
¿Que pregunta me podría hacer para saber si verdaderamente me interesa la literatura?
Me gustaría que alguien me contara un poco más de la carrera,siento que sé muy poco…
Gracias desde ya!!!

I’m finally got around to reading Stoner by John Williams. Of course it’s a beautiful story, but I find the third person narrator’s matter-of-factness or objectivity compelling. It’s reminds me of JL Carr’s A month in the country or parts Diaz’ Trust or even Dürrenmatt or perhaps Michael Cunningham. It also makes me think of the understatedness of Snorre Sturlason’s prose. Does this type of narration have a name? Are the other examples of this? What is the function of this style? Why does it work?

What constitutes the literary epochs of neo-classicism, romanticism, and modernism?
I feel like online descriptions I find on this are sometimes lackluster or seem to be applicable to all sorts of literature.
So are they really that different from one another?

Idr where but somewhere I read that romanticism is connected to Kant's philosophy of the sublime. But in his philosophy, the awe from the sublime comes from reason. And somewhere else I read that romanticism favoured emotion over reason. How does that make sense?

I think what is more reasonable to me is that romantic literature focused on nature and tried to be accessible to everybody, whereas neo-classicism was elitist and modernism has shown more subjectivity (for example, we lack zero-focalization but instead encounter lots of unreliable internal narration).

Please educate me if I am wrong here

Did people in the 19th century use the word 'minute' the same way we did, to denote a period of 60 seconds? Quite often I'll read a sentence in an English 19th century literature book like "they stared at each other in disbelief for several minutes" (I made that one up as an example) and I'm like, there's no way they kept that up for several MINUTES!

I'm really at a loss as to what to do. I defend my MA thesis next month (on the last day allowed by the university), and I am struggling to get feedback or any guidance from my thesis chair and another committee member. I've submitted my first draft to them, and my second draft is due at the end of the month, but I haven't received their feedback. I've emailed them a few times, but they don't respond. I've bumped into them and asked them, and they say, "soon!" Even though they haven't sent me feedback according to the (already tight) schedule we agreed upon, they let me schedule my defense. How can I revise or defend my thesis, let alone graduate, without their feedback? I feel like I am going nuts. These are also two professors who have agreed to write letters of recommendation for me for PhD applications, and I was hoping to use a section of my thesis as my writing sample. Any advice?

Hello! I've found that I really love to read scholarship that works against clarity - stuff that sort of messes with language to make its point (I'm being sort of purposefully broad here).

I would love to hear about your favourite obtuse writing as well as any writing that exhorts us to consider writing against "clarity" as a metric of success!

My favourite is probably Adorno saying that a splinter in the eye is the best magnifying glass.

I like reading, annotate, making notes and ponder stuffs from books i read, although i am a slow reader. I also dont know if what i think about the books actually meet the demand of literature major. Does anyone have any insight about this?