The Hector Hypothesis: Disciplines, Difficulty, and Democracy
- PDF / 235,691 Bytes
- 18 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 94 Downloads / 186 Views
The Hector Hypothesis: Disciplines, Difficulty, and Democracy Susan Bruce
Received: 4 October 2012 / Accepted: 15 October 2012 # Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012
Abstract Through an interrogation of the nature and value of encounters with “difficulty” in Humanities Higher Education, this essay aims to articulate some of the ways in which Humanities education itself, even in its least canonical and least prestigious manifestations, is of value. Beginning with a brief reading of a scene from Shakespeare’s Troilus and Cressida, which models for readers unfamiliar with Humanities scholarship the kinds of questions a Humanities perspective on a text might raise, the essay argues that distinctions established in that play regarding conceptions of the nature of value underlie debates in literary studies over what should be studied, and why. It goes on to claim that an analogous distinction underlies approaches to the question of “difficulty” in Humanities education, and it then places this discussion in the context of an examination of a real moment from a real university seminar in which a student expresses frustration with the material he is studying. Chosen because it concerns disagreement prompted by texts which are neither canonical nor, on the face of it, difficult, this moment is used to exemplify a fundamental value of Humanities education, which offers a space wherein can be pursued and practiced an argumentational method whose fostering is fundamental to the health of liberal democracy. Keywords Argument . English . Humanities . Troilus and Cressida . English literary studies . Difficulty
Value, Difficulty and Educational Elites: A Theoretical Introduction In act 1, scene 2 of Shakespeare’s Troilus and Cressida, Cressida and her uncle Pandarus stand on a platform on the stage and watch as the warriors pass below them, returning home to Ilium. For almost 100 lines Cressida observes this parade, each soldier being identified by Pandarus, who “tell[s] them all by their names as they pass S. Bruce (*) School of Humanities, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, UK e-mail: [email protected] URL: http://www.keele.ac.uk/english/people/brucesusan/
J Knowl Econ
by” (Shakespeare 1988a: 1.2.180), offering a running commentary on their virtues even while he encourages Cressida to “mark Troilus above the rest”. “That’s Aeneas,” says Pandarus first: “is that not a brave man?” Next we meet Antenor of “shrewd wit” (“who’s that?” inquires Cressida); and then Hector, of “brave” countenance and many “hacks upon his helmet”. Paris follows, “gallant” and “brave”; then Helenus: “who’s that?” says Cressida again; “that’s Helenus,” says Pandarus, clearly distracted, “I marvel where Troilus is. That’s Helenus. I think he went not forth today. That’s Helenus. … I marvel where Troilus is. Hark, do you not hear the people cry ‘Troilus’?” (1.2.214–220). A stage direction tells us that Troilus enters at this point, and now we encounter the first difficulty of interpretation in this extract. “What sneaking fell
Data Loading...
