Appleman, Chapter 5 - A Lens of One's Own

Appleman, Chapter 5, A Lens of One's Own: Of Yellow Wallpaper and Beautiful Little Fools

Like Marxist literary theory, there are a lot of negative misconceptions about feminism. Even some women fear calling themselves feminists because of the societal implications behind the word. Ignoring for this discussion the causes behind the vilification of feminists, it is important to be able to show why feminist theory is important and useful in language arts instruction. Appleman does a good job in this chapter of explaining not only how feminist theory can be used in the classroom, but rationalizing why it should be used. She has excellent answer to those who worry about teachers trying to “transform” their students to a certain political belief: “the point is to help adolescent readers read texts and worlds more carefully as they become aware of the ideologies within which both are inscribed” (76). Learning a literary theory is not about becoming indoctrinated in that theory. Instead, by learning a theory such as feminism, you are able to read the world differently. Most importantly, using feminism as a lens does not necessitate that everyone be of one mind. Two people can view a subject through a feminist lens and come to two different conclusion.

I liked how Appleman broke feminist theory into four dimensions: 1) the reading of female characters, 2) the gender of the author, 3) the text within a feminist framework, and 4) the reading of a gendered world (77). I think these dimensions could get garbled and confused without explicitly separating them. Appleman stresses that ultimately, what is most important is how student read the world (87), and I am on board with that opinion. If we are creating world citizens, than the ability to analyze a text is meaningless if it does not lead to being able to analyze the world as well.

I keep asking myself whether I am cynical or is Appleman naïve? I find students are incredibly astute when it comes to giving teachers the answers they want. In the student response examples in this chapter, the students were asked to give a “traditional” and a “feminist” response to certain literary characters (e.g. Daisy in the Great Gatsby and Ophelia in Hamlet) and real life events (e.g. The Miss America Pageant and media coverage of the U.S. women's Olympic hockey team). To me, the traditional responses sounded far more authentic than the feminist responses. The feminist responses were text book, complete with all the expected jargon. The classroom dialogue, on the other hand, sounded much more sincere, as if the students really believed what they were saying. If our goal is authentic student response and not role-playing, how do we frame our exercises to make them safe for honest response?