Philadelphia, Pa.—In a way, the largest collection of English professors in the country—the Modern Language Association (MLA)—is true to at least the first part of its name. What many laymen think of as the classics—British literature up to the 20th Century—is the focus of about one-tenth of the hundreds of panel discussions at the MLA annual meeting.
To be sure, Shakespeare, Milton, Marlowe and even D. H. Lawrence pop up in other seminars not exclusively devoted to their work. On the other hand, even the discussions solely centered on their life and times often focus on aspects of the development of the English language that some of us may not consider milestones such as:
• “Chaucer: Fifty Years of Feminist Scholarship.
• “Did the English Renaissance Have Sex?
• “Early Modern Women’s Manuscripts
• “Advocacy for Women in Pre-Enlightenment Thought
• “British Women Writers
• “The Celebrity Culture of British Romanticism
• “Morris and Gender
• “D. H. Lawrence and the Body” and
• “Conrad and Class”
Certainly, part of the rationale of such topic offerings is the age-old effort of English teachers to make the past come alive for their students and themselves. But these presentations reflect mirror-image college courses and often represent the only effort institutions of higher learning make to incorporate traditional literature in their course selections.
Thus, the attention that the MLA devotes to this field of study at its yearly show and that its members give it for their daily bread only serves to prove the point made by groups such as the National Association of Scholars (NAS), the Independent Women’s Forum (IWF) and the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA).
The NAS, the IWF and ACTA have found classic literature to be an endangered species on American college and university campuses. Back at the MLA, job seekers looking for an academic berth show no inclination to buck this trend, virtually ensuring more of the same catalogue entries for future generations of students.
Moreover, these Ph.D. holders and candidates have been fully immersed in an educational system that emphasizes the exotic over the essential. One of the oddest forums that this correspondent attended at the December MLA meeting here—and there is a lot of competition for that honor—was the one on in which two Ph.D. candidates presented their feminist studies theses to an audience of one—me: My heart went out to them.
We were joined in progress by four other attendees who may or may not have been there for the convention. Although most events at the MLA draw audiences of 20-50, “Present Day English” events such as this one attract smaller crowds, the moderator informed me.
One of the panelists, Yolanda Chavez-Cappellini, squeezed her presentation into a jam-packed schedule while in our nation’s birthplace. She had at least six job interviews.
It should be noted that her ratemyprofessor.com ratings are outstanding. For what it’s worth, I found them to be accurate. She teaches Spanish at Arizona State University at Tempe.
Her presentation hit all the feminist hot buttons. She was “going back several centuries to look at how women were legally represented” when accused of witchcraft in 16th and 17th Century Peru. “In legal actions the interpreter was usually a priest,” Chavez-Cappellini said.
“There were only two paths for women—marriage or the convent,” Chavez-Cappellini asserts. “Some women would marginalize themselves.”
“Widows and spinsters were a weak link.” They would sometimes practice witchcraft to pick up some extra cash.
The interpreter/priests did not always provide the most accurate interpretation of the defendants’ defense, Chavez-Cappellini alleges, leading to fatal consequences for the accused.
“Witchcraft is still practiced in the rural areas but women are not punished for it,” Chavez-Cappellini told me. “Around Lake Titicaca there is a community of witches who are all men.”
“They do not admit women.” Their failure to do so may be addressed in an MLA symposium next year and, of course, a cutting-edge college course.
“Chavez-Cappellini’s co-panelist, Sarah Dean, also of ASU-Tempe, spoke on the topic, “Performing Repression, Reclaiming the Erotic: Discourses on Black Female Heterosexuality.” FYI: Sarah is blonde and white.
A bright, earnest, personable young woman, Dean, nevertheless, may have spent too much time in Women’s Studies courses. “The radical feminists question the definition of rape legally,” she points out, and observes that “A definition of rape that focuses on the sexual is very limiting.”
But the number of niche subjects such as the above is virtually unlimited. Meanwhile, basic literary skills and historical knowledge continue to erode.
Malcolm A. Kline is the executive director of Accuracy in Academia.
