[As the Spring
2017 semester comes to a conclusion, a series of classroom reflections,
this time focused on new things I tried in my courses. I’d love to hear your
Spring reflections in comments!]
On what didn’t
work and what did when I used a short story collection in my American Novel
course.
Compared to the
relatively stable reading lists for many of my recurring courses, the texts for
my American
Novel to 1950 class have changed a good bit over its handful of iterations.
That’s been especially true for the two works in my middle category, Realism
(preceded by Romanticism and followed by Modernism): when I first taught the
course, I put Adventures of Huckleberry
Finn and The Marrow of Tradition there;
subsequently shifted Huck into the
Romanticism category (replacing The
Morgeons as a second Romantic novel after The House of the Seven Gables) and added The Rise of David Levinsky into Realism; and then (hard as it is to
leave
Charles Chesnutt out of any class I teach) replaced Marrow with The Awakening.
That was where the class stood as of the last time I taught it, a couple years
ago; but for this spring’s section, I decided to take out Levinsky (which was by far the longest novel on the syllabus) and
replace it with a particularly unusual choice for a novel class: Sui
Sin Far’s short story collection Mrs.
Spring Fragrance (1912), a book that includes not only the dozen or so separate
stories under that title, but also another twenty or so in the section “Tales
of Chinese Children.”
I’ve written
here before (in an
entire week’s series, in fact) about the complex genre known as the short
story cycle: books like The
House on Mango Street (1984) and Love
Medicine (1993), in which distinct individual stories are clearly also
linked together into an overarching, unified whole that could indeed be called
a novel. But while there certainly were 19th
century versions of that genre, I don’t think we could describe Far’s book
as an example; individual characters recur in a couple of the stories, and many
are set within the same setting of San Francisco’s Chinatown during the Chinese
Exclusion Act era, but compared to the books highlighted above the stories in Mrs. Spring Fragrance exist separately
from one another. Including Far’s book in this course was thus a bit of an
experiment, and not one that necessarily worked: many of our discussions across
the four class meetings dedicated to Fragrance
understandably focused on individual stories, and we thus didn’t quite get to
the same kinds of continued, evolving analytical threads that we’re usually
able to carry across a series of conversations. I believe that difficulty also
made it harder for students to analyze Far’s text as a whole in Papers 2 and 3,
and so only a handful worked with the book in either of those assignments (even
though it and The Awakening were the
two main options for Paper 2, for example).
So I’m not sure
I would include Mrs. Spring Fragrance
on this syllabus again. But at the same time, there were a couple significant
benefits to having done so this semester; one was more expected, and the second
more of a surprise. The expected benefit stemmed from the reason I added Far’s
book in the first place: it’s one of the most multi-layered and compelling
literary representations I’ve encountered of themes like immigration and
assimilation, culture and community, multi-cultural and –racial identities and
perspectives, language, and more, and our discussions of individual stories
allowed us to engage in depth with how Far depicts those crucial American
issues and histories through her fictional characters, settings, and plots. Moreover,
the division of Far’s book into more “adult” short stories and the children’s
stories in “Tales” opened up an expected and interesting conversation about
genre and audience, about the similarities and differences across those two
sections and forms, and about how authors use young characters in works of
fiction (a topic that could then be applied to many of our other texts, from
Edna’s sons in The Awakening to the
depictions of childhood in The Sound and
the Fury, to name just two examples). If including Far’s book in a novel
course was thus in some ways a mistake, it was, at the very least, a
provocative and productive mistake.
Next Spring
reflection tomorrow,
Ben
PS. What do you
think? Spring semester reflections you’d share?
No comments:
Post a Comment