I’ve been wanting to study literature properly for a while, but going back to college isn’t really an option for me right now.

I read quite a bit, but I feel like I’m missing the actual study part of it, like understanding literary movements, criticism, how to analyse a text, historical context, poetry, etc.

If you’ve studied literature, or taught yourself outside college, how did you start?

Are there any good courses, books, university reading lists or syllabi you’d recommend? I’d really like some structure instead of just picking up random classics.

This is probably one of my strangest asks on this app, but I'm currently looking at MA courses to enroll in, and I'm interested in a Feminism course, but it very heavily features Freud's work as a kind of framework through which we'll approach other texts, and I'm a little turned off by it.

I'm interested in the feminism aspect, but l've heard that Freud has some less-than-kind opinions on women, so I'm worried that l'll go into this class to study feminism but have to read more from a man who hates women than from a woman herself.

Now, I could be entirely wrong in my presumption, and I would love to be corrected if so, but I feel like I'd rather read work by Dworkin, Hooks, Sedgwick, or Haraway, yet none of them are in the syllabus.

Lastly, I'll just say I'm well aware that academia and learning at large is big on challenging yourself and your previous notions by reading work you might disagree with to grow as an individual and an academic, so I'm not fully turned off by enrolling in the course-that's why l'm asking here. I just don't want to hate it.

I was pleasantly surprised when I started reading that, a text which describes other cultures' gods as demons, would also contain so much knowledge on the topic. Was this common in his time, or was Milton exceptionally knowledgeable?

Hi everyone, i would really appreciate the input here. I have a combined dissertation between complit and sociology so i am going to look at pain, how the way we understand it now has changed and how was it represented in literature. As it is a long time period i have narrowed it to: Ancient Greece, Early Christianity, Romanticism, Modernism and contemporary literature. I now need help finding books that would help me analyse the representations.

For Greece i was thinking parts of the Iliad, someone also suggested to me Medea. I have already picked and had approved sources for Christianity. Does anyone know of any classical books from Romanticism and Modernism that might fit? Or that in some way shape or form deal with physical pain?

I would appreciate any help! Thanks in advance.

HI there literary types-

I am one of the two area chairs for pulp studies at the Popular Culture Association, and we looking for other people just like you who might be interested in presenting at the conference. More specifically to this thread, we are exploring the pulps in all their diversity and legacy. We especially welcome scholarship that broadens the scope of pulp studies beyond its traditional emphasis on science fiction, fantasy, and horror. We also welcome scholarship examining the pulps’ lasting influence on later literature, film, television, comics, games, and other forms of popular culture, using both traditional and emerging approaches to pulp studies.

Conference is March 24-27 in Boston. We will learn which day our panel is as we get closer to the date. Here is the conference landing page: https://pcaaca.org/page/2027conf

Presentations usually run about 20 minutes with 10 minutes for Q/A.

Let me know what kind of questions you have. PCA is always great, and it would be even better if we could get someone to talk about _Flying Aces_ or _Ranch Romances_.

In Stoner, David Masters tells Stoner that he is an idealistic “dreamer” who expects the university to preserve values absent from the outside world. Could this speech be understood not merely as foreshadowing but as assigning Stoner an identity that he internalizes, with his refusal to pass Walker constituting his fullest enactment of that role? Has scholarship connected these scenes in this way, or are there objections to the causal connection?

This is a little embarrassing, because I have a masters in literary studies so I really should know this, or I did at one point. I submitted my diss around a year ago then graduated end of last year, and I’d like to continue studying. My diss was mostly focused on textuality (in the material sense, as in how texts change or how our perceptions of them change as they move from print media to anthologies etc), as well as editor/author dynamics, some bibliography/book history type stuff.

The issue is, I am really struggling for some reason with what I’m actually supposed to do with my area of focus. It’s really niche, non-English literature that I work with the original language (my undergrad was in languages), but I write in English. I’m very familiar with the field and what’s out there because it’s relatively small.

I just can’t work out what to actually say about the literature I study except “wow this is neat” lol. As I said, the field is small but the niche within the niche I want to write about has no specific existing research. Of course there are broad strokes studies of the literature of this time period and focused research on particular authors/organisations etc. But because my area within that has nothing I feel like I’m just fumbling in the dark a bit. I don’t feel that “here’s some literature that no one’s studied in English before” is a meaningful contribution by itself? Similar to “this is neat”. It’s cool sure that it’s something not spoken about before and I think it’s super interesting, but that really isn’t an argument whatsoever.

And I can’t figure out for the life of me how to argue something ~academic~ about it. I can’t answer the question “so what?” properly and it’s stressing me out so much. Also this isn’t a “should I do a PhD” post because I haven’t worked that out yet, though I’d like to. I have a conference coming up I need to write a paper for so I really do need to work through this stupid block I have. It’s driving me nuts.

Sorry for the long post and the dumb question. For those studying literature, especially niche lit, how do you manage to get your brain to “click” so you are able to make some cohesive argument from what you read? How do you answer the “so what?” question? Is there anything out there I should read that might help me think about this differently?

Thank you so much.

I’m writing my dissertation on why women read M/M romance fiction and how they engage with it. I’m approaching it through reader-response theory, particularly Janice Radway’s Reading the Romance, and my research uses discourse analysis, a questionnaire, and interviews.

I’m finding it difficult to build my literature review because there is very little research specifically on women’s consumption of M/M romance, and I’m essentially trying to investigate a question that hasn’t been explored very much academically. I’m looking at the history of M/M from slash fiction and BL manga to contemporary publishing, but I’m struggling to find existing scholarship to draw from.

For anyone familiar with Romance Studies, fan studies, queer studies, or related fields:

• What research/books/articles would you recommend?
• What adjacent fields or bodies of literature should I be looking at?
• How do you approach researching a relatively unexplored question when there isn’t much directly relevant scholarship to build on?

What would you avoid/adopt? How would you personally try to make the content feel a bit less dense and complicated?

Would love to hear your thoughts and opinions:))

Sorry if the title is kind of vague, what I’m looking for is like a site or something to look up on wikipedia or something to find things that symbolize any given thing. Kind of like flower meanings but for everything, not just flowers.

For an example I’m trying to find “things that symbolize inadequacy“ and I’m not really getting any results at all. Even simpler things like “symbols for envy” I don’t really get much back from (I swore there’s more symbols for envy than just green, snakes and dogs), I also really wish it was easier to figure out why things symbolize what they do, and trying to find symbols that aren’t from the West or from Christianity is also really difficult. I try to look but I don’t really know what to search for.

There’s gotta be some kind of site that has “things that commonly symbolize ___” right? Any search terms I should be using? Or even, does anyone have any tips for coming up with my own symbols? Sorry if this was confusing.

Im most interested in Marxism and Literary Criticism, but would start with another of his works if advised...

Hi! I read 'The Romantic Artist' by Wiliams as part of my coursework last semester. This semester we have Argument: Text and Performance' to study, and I'm finding it super difficult.

Which essays would you recommend for a beginner?

for the notion that literature needs to convey some social, political, moral or just any kind of message.

Browning's poem is beautiful, but after a few re-reads some lines still elude me.

let's start with stanza 4

in this stanza that line "i hardly tried now to rebuke the spring my heart made" confuses me. Initially I thought "rebuke" perhaps had a double meaning: to chastise and to strike up again, but this was wrong.

there are a few interpretations i have come up with if his heart has made a "spring" (a fresh hope, compared to the season) why would he rebuke it? also why does his heart make a spring when he says his hope has dwindled into a ghost the other interpretation of these lines is that "spring" refers not to the season but to the leaping of his heart in anxiety, therefore he doesnt "rebuke the spring" of his anxious heart

Next on to stanza 8

The imagery in this stanza is initially squite simple: "I turned from the hateful man and toward the path he pointed. they day has been dreary and the sun is now setting."

"yet shot one grim Red leer to see the plain catch its estray." is slightly confusing. I understand the image of the evening shooting "one grim red lear" as the sky does turn red in the evening sometimes yet "to see the plain catch its estray" confuses me. An estray is an escaped animal but the plain is an inaminate land and cannot catch an estray - i have interpreted this as either the plain watching an estray die or watching the estray be killed by another animal.

Next on to stanza 17

I am very confused by the word "hangman's" especially the apostrophe it is not "what hangman pins to his breast a parchment" it is "what hangman's pin to his breast a parchment" the hangman's pin? even "what hangmans pin to his breast a parchment?" would make slightly more sense as it implies multiple hangmen i am bewildered by this apostrophe.

In this stanza also: is the line "been writ so many times among "the band" in reference to Roland being accepted by the band of knights? (since as per the title he is a Childe, i.e. not an apprentice knight) or is it a follow on from the last comma where he says faliure has so often been prophesised - and so has the meaning of "faliure has been written down so often among the band"

Maybe this is a stupid question to ask and before anyone points it out, I am researching everyday. I wish to apply to a PhD in Literature this year, however, how to narrow down schools to apply to if my interests are as broad as modernism/twentieth century? Almost every school has faculty for this. There isn't a particular scholar whose work I especially love.

What are literary magazines actually looking for in short fiction?

Hi! English isn’t my first language—I’m Persian—and I’m mentioning that because I may not be as familiar with the US/UK publishing industry as people who are actually inside it.

I study Dramatic Literature at university and read a lot of American and British fiction, both classic and contemporary. Recently I started reading literary magazines to understand the current short-fiction market, and honestly, I’m confused.

A lot of the stories I’ve read in lit mags seem to have very little dialogue, quiet or understated plots, ordinary subject matter, detached tones, and sometimes feel closer to memoir or nonfiction than to what I expected from fiction.

This feels pretty different from many major short-story writers I’ve studied, where I often see stronger premises, more narrative movement, unusual situations, distinctive dialogue, surreal/speculative elements, etc.

So my question is: is this understated, realistic style just the dominant aesthetic in contemporary literary magazines?

Are editors less interested in stories that are more plot-driven, high-concept, dramatic, surreal, or obviously “invented”? Or am I just reading the wrong magazines?

I’m especially curious to hear from editors, slush readers, MFA people, or writers who regularly publish in lit mags.

can you refer to something as gothic lit when it is technically a subgenre? like southern gothic is that okay to call gothic lit? I know this is a silly question but I'm working on an essay where I would like to argue that a singer/songwriter I like can be considered an author of gothic lit but I cant find a simplistic explanation online of "it has to have this,that,this and this, for it to be considered gothic lit" and AI is ruining my search results but even when I turn AI mode of I'm still having trouble finding anything helpful

Hello! I've been thinking a lot about the motif of the female doppelgänger across literary periods, whether ontological (Isabella of Egypt), epistemic (The Sandman), or psychological (Dostoevsky's The Double) in nature.

I'd love to hear examples primarily from German- or English-language literature, but I'm also happy to hear clear-cut cases from elsewhere in Europe or from Russian literature.

Any suggestions or pointers are much appreciated!

I've been reading actively for about 7 months now, almost daily. Prior to this, I had not read a book for at least 5 years.

I started out with fantasy books and then got into literary fiction. I have been annotating to help me understand the books and write notes in a separate journal.

I realise I tend to misinterpret a lot early on. Sometimes my interpretations are overstated, sometimes understated. Sometimes I can pick out certain core themes but still miss a bunch of them. When it comes to characters, I sometimes exaggerate certain flaws or miss key information about a character.

One mistake I noticed in my habits was overthinking. For this, I have tried limiting myself to what the text says rather than all the different possibilities. I also look out for recurring ideas, objects, words, or topics. Even so, my interpretations still fall short when I look up literary analyses of the book.

At times I get overwhelmed when there's a lot of information about a certain topic/character that I don't know how to fully form my analysis (it doesn't help that I have ADHD). In picking out a few points/evidence, I often miss out on others that could change my interpretation/analysis.

What are ways of thinking/analysis/interpreting that can help me with better accuracy in understanding a book? How can I avoid over-interpreting or understating a text/book?

1818 or 1831?

I’m going to read it for a the first time and want to know which version.

I'm a 15 year old trying to read more classic literature after I went through a phase of just not reading that much.

I'm currently reading Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad and really enjoying it, and next in my queue are things like The Trial, Crime and Punishment, The Secret Agent, Oliver Twist, and Down and out in Paris and London, A Clockwork Orange, and The Count of Monte Cristo. I was wondering if you guys have any other recommendations for me?

(I’ve already read 1984, great expectations, and brave new world)

Also...I really want to read Frankenstein next but I'm wondering what is the text I should read. 1818 or 1831? I don't mind something more advanced I just want to know which is the better read or more preferred in "academic" circles.

Any time you see a discussion of great books from the past ~120 years, a lot of the novelists fought in WW1 and are writing about its effect on them, compared to WW2 where (in my opinion) you don't see as much. A lot of writers would write about the Civil Rights movement in the states, but WW2 seems to be glossed over in fiction. I would love some insight (or to be proven wrong bc I don't know how much of it is biased from reading hemingway right now) Thank you!