The Fringe (pertaining to Composition-not the FOX show)

Our conversation in class on Tuesday left my mind moving in many different directions.  I think within this blog I am going to have to be a little schizophrenic and play my own devil's advocate, because I am going to begin by why I like the fringe and why I think it is useful and then go to the other side of the argument.  For this I will be referring to this handy .jpg I made just for  you...

Example of Critical/Scholarly Movement: or a heart monitor w/ irregular beat 

The fringe is important because I think that is the work in which people are allowed to bring in their under life and let it effect the literature.  For example, I have been working on some articles that focus on graphic novels' impact on film.  So, through the film classes that I've taken here I was able (and encouraged to) bring my comic-book-nerd-under-life into my writing.  I think that this is not only a subject that is important to film today, but it also makes me excited as hell to be able to be bringing in V for Vendetta, From Hell, 300, Watchmen, Batman(I have tons but specific to the Nolan movies), etc.  This has not only made me ecstatic, but also I think I produced some of my best writing to date.  The black line from "A" to "B" is so boring, because it doesn't allow the caveats that I think can broaden and expand ideas and learning.  It seems too formalist to me, "here is your text and the premier scholar... You there! No thinking outside the box!".  Ugh, sends chills down my spine, because I've been through those types of classes and I hated them.  The fringe is better because it allows for the students to branch out from the literature/composition/core concept and apply it to something else to see how it fits.  Let them try to jam the block shaped like a star into the the side of the box with the circle shaped hole cut out of it until they figure out it fits much better w/ the star shaped hole cut out.  Through this process I think it creates better students in the end, because they can figure things out things for themselves.

On the other hand, I do realize that the quickest route between two points is a straight line.  For progress's sake (not only in composition & literature classrooms, but medical advancement, scientific findings, all forms of research, etc.) it is best to find a more direct way to get to point "A" to point "B".  The faster we can achieve that, the faster we can move on to the next leap from "B" to "C", and so on, and so on.  What about all the time wasted by the red line's wasted movement?  What could we achieved already if we weren't wasting time arguing all these points (some of which are bound to be more asinine than others)?  These are just digressions that could be keeping us from the larger truth.  This approach would create better students because they would know more from having less digressions.  These students would leave having gotten to point "D" where as those red students barely made it to "B".

I went a little bipolar there on purpose, because I feel both have valid arguments.  how can we include both?  Do I have to become the classroom Czar and rule on what is and is not valid digressions? "Good point Timmy, let's expand on that..." or "Fred, stick to the text"  I think it is a hard line to find the acceptable amount of digression that allows the benefits of the fringe, but not to take away from what the goals of the class actually are.  I think my own under life would still influence my own outlook of what is valid.

And now for a digression.  This is Jon Stewart's speech at last Saturday's rally for sanity/fear.  This is at the very end of everything-the one semi serious moment.  I think it relates our discussion of only A & B being heard if the fringe isn't there, and too much fringe creates chaos.  It's about 12min long and relates to his perception of the media, not composition. Regardless, it relates (kinda).