Ashley Zizich

Senior Seminar

Dr. Weilgos

Response 2

September 2, 2017

            While reading the assigned articles, I especially enjoyed those of Stanley Fish. Fish maintains that, yes, the humanities are important, but that people will still remain to see its importance. He leads his article, The Uses of the Humanities, Part Two with an analyzation of a few poem lines. With analyzing these lines, Fish’s point is not that it’s important to do so, but rather the fact that he can do it and gains satisfaction in doing so.  He does go on to say that it while in teaching his students, he often marvels in how amazing it is to be able to unpack literary texts because it leads to a “cognitive awareness”.  The question he poses in this article is whether the “academic analysis of works of literature, philosophy and history have instrumental value.”  Fish is not afraid to point out that when it comes to funding in the humanities departments, it is hard to justify “poems and philosophical arguments have changed lives and started movements.” I enjoy his real look at the situation. I feel, that we as English students, do see the overall picture of the importance of the matter. We learn it, we live it, we study it. We chose this because of a specific reason, or many reasons. We, as members of the arts of humanities, understand the broader picture of what being able to analyze a text means for us or our future work. Fish goes on to say that the value of humanities cannot be measured in the means of economic productivity etc., like other areas of study can be.

            Often, I have felt as Fish so expertly puts into words. I am questioned in my motives for choosing the English studies as a major. The perception of what the English major entails is skewed, and in my opinion, always has been and probably, unfortunately, always will be. I laughed when Fish related a story of a fellow committee member and his support of the English department because his wife enjoys plays. When Fish tried to further the conversation, and explain what else the department does, the committee member grew confused. That is my life. Every family member, every friend, even my husband question, at times, what use this will all be to me, and to what extent can I use it in a job. I laughed again reading Will the Humanities Save Us?, when Fish put into print the responses for the reason behind the arts and humanities being the last to receive funding. While some comments are extremely harsh, others were purely ignorant. I laughed not because of the harshness, but because of the ignorance. I also laughed because I can see the double standard in the situation. Even though I know the importance of the humanities and why they must remain, I can also see why people feel they are a waste. While I agree with Kronman that there are things that those versed in humanities can express that others cannot, I can also see why people do not see the importance in doing so. In society today, there is such focus on careers and technology, and little focus on the individual thought and expression that goes behind these institutions.

            While Fish knows there is no clear answer to his questions, he realizes that the questions must continue to be posed. There is such a stigma against the humanities, and while Fish’s articles do not propose an answer, they still relate the fact that the stigma needs to be changed.