LogFAQs > #946070283

scar the 1 posted...

My very vague understanding of this is that literature is a little bit "ahead" of music theory in this regard. But there's still a long way to go. Like I alluded to earlier, what's considered the literary canon is quite centered in Europe and eventually the US. Heck, look at the Nobel Prize and you'll see that it's still heavily favoring western authors.

yes, I didn't mean to suggest that it was perfect; only that it was relatively ahead of music theory in that regard.

another thing is that the basic language of literary devices that get used to describe literature (metaphor, synecdoche, imagery, foreshadowing, etc) is much more broadly applicable than things like counterpoint and voice leading. and, again, as far as I know, those devices were not named for the explicit purpose of elevating the "greatness of the white race"

Phynaster posted...

Your experience is wrong.

It varies very much by state to state, and whether or not it's an honors class. Also I thought you studied music in uni?

that does make sense.

and yeah, most of my classes were music. but I also studied quite a lot of english literature.

but regardless, going back to the response to theiwantsong that started this exchange: it does seem reasonable to call the study of english literature racist based on the results (though again, I don't know the history of how it came to be studied in this way).

it also seems that, though of course there's a bias in favour of writing in English (and there's the question of which works are getting translated into English), white supremacy is less... inherent (?) in the way english literature is taught, and that fixing it is relatively simple compared to the complete overhaul that has to be done with music theory.

---

peanut butter and dick