They understand now that when someone says “I teach French literature” (Sartre Rabelais!), Becomes a full float (‘s good for the museum) and, especially, how they want to put all these works on the same shelf? It’s absurd! On the other hand, we see that the texts continue to call “literary” are collected from a mass of determinism. That’s what you blame the teachers of literature in my time, instead of breaking down the text, taking it globally (that was the famous “explanation text”), although it must be different specialists who had been treated with different methods: in fact, there’s one in the text of literary work for the sociologist, psychoanalyst, historian, linguist, etc.. In a single literary text, whatever it is, is how to devote an entire year would be more instructive than the test, more or less intuitive, a series of set pieces. ” But it is true that such knowledge required of the professor of French literature, a sum of ideas and a capacity of synthesis too weird! Believe me, is what I tried to practice during my studies (above its true). But believe me, I do not regret, I have the vanity to think, to have passion to my students of BA to explain … “The hare and the tortoise?” I never finished teaching them to read, but getting other lenses (Now) . That’s why I always thought and still think that the question of programs and schedules has no interest (in where food is prepared.) The contents, in general, have only a little understanding with the formation of the spirit. .
