It wasn't too much of a ding; it was my favorite professor, and he sounded more amused than anything else. A good learning experience about knowing what sort of essays are expected at an undergrad level...
I think that it's sort of...both ways. On the one hand, it is necessary to acknowledge and understand context when analyzing a work on anything beyond a "This is how it reads to me in isolation" manner. (Which I still think is an interesting form of analysis, but it's generally not very...literary, I guess?) But on the other hand, it's way too easy for people to go "CONTEXT" to ignore all discussions of problematic aspects of a work, and that's way too reductionary too. Especially since that shout usually goes up based not on actual context, but on a vague sense that "Back in historical times it was acceptable to be sexist and racist and all the other -ists, dammit!" when it was usually a hell of a lot more complex than that.
no subject
I think that it's sort of...both ways. On the one hand, it is necessary to acknowledge and understand context when analyzing a work on anything beyond a "This is how it reads to me in isolation" manner. (Which I still think is an interesting form of analysis, but it's generally not very...literary, I guess?) But on the other hand, it's way too easy for people to go "CONTEXT" to ignore all discussions of problematic aspects of a work, and that's way too reductionary too. Especially since that shout usually goes up based not on actual context, but on a vague sense that "Back in historical times it was acceptable to be sexist and racist and all the other -ists, dammit!" when it was usually a hell of a lot more complex than that.
Anyway. I ramble.