Snapshots of a Modest Life

Thoughts on Literary Criticism

Many English classes today spend a lot of time analyzing literary works through various lenses; post-modernism, new historicism, feminism, gender theory, new criticism...you get the picture. My Critical Issues in Literature Studies class deals with this aspect of modern English studies. We recently read an article applying similar principles to Disneyland (California). The writer discussed the elements of time in Disneyland (Frontierland/Adventureland=past; Tomorrowland=future; Mainstreet USA=adulthood/real life; Fantasyland=childhood/fantasy...fancy that). While reading the article, I wondered: "Did the designers of Disneyland really intend for it to be analyzed in this manner?" Reading that article, one would think that when the designers created Disneyland they thought these very things, and it was an intentional design choice. I personally, don't think so.

It seems more likely that they thought about children and children's entertainment of the time. Is it more likely that they created Frontierland because it was symbolic of the past, or because children's literature and entertainment of the time dealt with the old west? The same applies for the other lands of Disney (note: this is a cop out because I really don't feeling like drawing the same parallel with all the other places). Perhaps it is a product of hating the class, but I find many of the things we discuss absurd. Was Bram Stoker really making statements about gender issues when he wrote Dracula, or was he just writing a fun story? Granted, there are some books where it seems obvious that the author was making a political/social statement; Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness for example. Whatever the case, by making statements about the literature, it seems like putting words in the author's mouth that he did not necessarily intend.