Introduction

For this thesis, I ask about the goals and methods of teaching literary theory at the
University of Central Florida. Literary theory promotes values such as critical thinking and the
examination of an item through multiple perspectives. It encourages students to avoid passive
acceptance, instead inviting fruitful discussion of the many ways in which literature and other
mediums! can be read, interpreted, and "uestioned. #heory$s values are noble and to be admired%
however the actual behaviors and practices that are a part of theory education do not allow for
the maximum fulfillment of its goals.
&t the heart of the matter is censorship. 'hen the sub(ect of censorship is brought up,
one may immediately con(ure images of akin to those of )eorge *rwell$s 1984 or some other
such dystopia that features an oppressive, +ig +rother,es"ue government and silenced,
downtrodden citi-ens. *ne may even think of the public school system or libraries, and how they
have repeatedly censored or banned controversial texts that outspoken members of the local
community have taken issue with. #he truth is, censorship is more than the black lines striking
out sensitive information in a confidential document. It$s more than the FCC bleeping curse
words on television. It$s even more than books such as Naked Lunch by 'illiam .. +urroughs
being taken to court for obscenity. 'hat is commonly known about censorship is only the tip of
the iceberg. #he true nature of censorship is much more subtle, buried, and insidious. It is "uiet
in its machinations, and if it is truly effective, it will have served its purpose without its victim
even knowing it. #his kind of censorship goes beyond the ideas of produced, distributed, and
received content, or dictatorial governmental oppression. Instead, it is about thought and
behaviors. Censorship today isn$t imposed upon us as it was in the /cCarthy era. Censorship
today is imposed upon us by ourselves to satisfy social or institutional re"uirements. #he horrific
part of this idea is that we may not even know that we are censoring ourselves.
.elf,censorship is about thought and behavior. 'e become so ingrained in our thought
processes and our practices that we become reluctant to change them. &ccording &ndre +reton,
we 0forbid any kind of search for truth which is not in conformance with accepted practices1 2!.
&fter all, what we$re doing already is working, isn$t it3 'hy would we even need to change3
'ith this manner of thinking, we are censoring ourselves to alternatives. 'e eschew possible
practices or ideas that may prove beneficial, believing that our present processes are sufficient.
'ith self,censorship, we fail to critici-e ourselves and improve our present behaviors.
+y censoring ourselves we are reproducing, over and over again, current issues. If we
don$t change, we simply repeat. #his practice can be especially harmful in the educational
institution. 'ith this thesis, I don$t expect to radically change the practices of 4nglish professors.
Instead, the purpose of this pro(ect is to, hopefully, lift the veil of self censorship and invite
educators to critically examine their behaviors, as well as how they may or may not be
practically enforcing their teaching values and beliefs.
I think the important issue to stress is that educators have to satisfy conflicting desires 5
not only to produce active citi-ens who are critical thinkers, but to turn out loyal workers, to
keep the funders of the school the corporations and businesses! satisfied, etc. 'e speak of
academic freedom as a cherished goal but we are limited in our abilities to enact it in practice.
#here is an active movement to defund the 6umanities and to delegitimi-e its methods and
conclusions. 6ow are educators standing up to these pressures3

Literature Review
It is important to understand what form of censorship I will be discussing, and how it relates to
the education of literature theory at UCF. #o accomplish this, I$ve compiled research that details
the following7 one of the specific roles of the educational institution and its faculty, the role of
literature and the conse"uential emergence of theory, the role of and debate about theory in
education today, and how censorship is prevalent in all of these areas. Finally, I$ve researched
several alternative education behaviors and practices that can challenge censorship, and be
applied to the teaching of theory.
Censorship and Repression
Censorship has been defined in several different ways, but .igmund Freud saw it as a
means of repressing thoughts that we would function better without thinking of. #his idea is seen
in his analysis of dreams, where he believes that dreams censor repressed thoughts through
displacement and substitution Freud 89!. In our dreams, information that our mind has repressed
are expressed in a subtle form that re"uires extensive analysis to properly interpret, unveiling the
censored thoughts beneath Freud :;!. <epressed events or ideas are substituted for other events
and ideas, allowing them to be expressed as need be, but also preventing them from
psychologically harming us Freud =:!. #his form of censorship is concealed and subtle, with us
waking up without even reali-ing that something is wrong.
The Educational Institution
&ccording to /arxist theorist Louis &lthusser, such censorship can also be seen outside
of dreams, in the school system. &ccording to &lthusser, schools are a part of the ideological
state apparatus I.&! , which, overall, functions to produce and distribute the dominant class$s
ideas, so that they may eventually be reproduced and not changed 8;!. #he I.& is contrasted
with the repressive state apparatus <.&!, which is more violent in its actions 89!. For the <.&,
censorship is more violent, and more on the level of distribution and reception. For the I.&,
censorship is more subtle, indirect, and concealed :>!. &lthusser claims that one means in which
schools use censorship is by appearing to be a neutral learning environment, absent of bias or
bigotry :>!. *n the contrary, schools censor the fact that they act as a means of reproducing and
maintaining dominant ideologies. &lthusser argues that schools are a primary means of dominant
ideologies being instilled upon young students, who adhere to them later in life 8;!.#hrough this
institution, those in power are able to stay in power, as those whom they oppress are conditioned
to think according to dominant ideologies.
?ohn )uillory agrees that overall, schools reproduce social order, which is itself une"ual
ix!. 6owever, university faculty can also disrupt this une"ual social order 'atkins @!. 4ven
though the educational plays a strong role in the reproduction of abusive social relations, it$s also
where this system of reproduction can be disrupted. 4van 'atkins believes educators,
specifically 4nglish educators, have the ability to change social relations 9!. #he 4nglish faculty
is ideologically integral to the sociali-ation of expectations generally accomplished by education
'atkins =!. +ecause 4nglish is one of the general re"uirements of education, it acts as a sort of
0gatekeeper1 'atkins, 2!. 4nglish faculty therefore prepare students for reading and writing in
college, teaching them the expectations that they$ll have when moving on to more advanced
classes. #he expectations that faculty sociali-e conform to the end of a dominant formation. In
education, this dominant formation takes the form of a grade. )rades are what are circulated
systematically, not the classroom processes and learning 'atkins, =!. )rades are also what show
economic opportunity, because they are the "uantifiable evidence that gets pushed through the
system and shows students were successful. +ut the 4nglish faculty can challenge and disrupt
educational expectations such as grades, since reading and writing is more open to critical
analysis and interpretation. Unfortunately, in the end, 0it matters less how you$re taught what
counter!sociali-ation of expectations took place!, and more the grade you get1 'atkins, =!.
)rades are a way for professors to censor student thought processes, and are also a way for
students to censor themselves in order to obtain the grade they desire.
Censorship in Literature
Censorship is prevalent in 4nglish Literature itself as well, and not (ust in its education.
Literature censors in a manner similar to how Freud believes dreams are censored, in that it
substitutes real life problems for fictional ones. For this reason, among others, literature is
another way of reproducing dominant ideologies, which is distributed to the masses and
consumed. 4tienne +alibar and Aierre /acherey argue that literature is produced because it is the
result of an ideological contradiction that cannot be solved within the present ideology of a
society 8B=!. In literature, these contradictions and the ideologies that spawn them are
substituted with fictional, narrative characteristics, similar to how Freud believes dreams use
substitution Freud 89!. /any literary works substitute real life social contradictions and issues
for something else, like how the mob in )odfather can be read as a substitute for &merican big
business ?ameson BB!. Literature makes these substitutions in order to fictionally solve the
ideological contradictions that are the source of the literature$s production.
+ecause the contradiction cannot be resolved, literature presents an imaginary, utopian
solution that distracts readers with the ?ameson, :=!. Fredric ?ameson argues that In reading
literature, we suspend our real lives and immediate preoccupations to focus on imaginary
problems. In this way, the actual, real life problem is censored, and re"uires analysis to reveal
possible, underlying causes for the text$s production. &s readers, we chose to ignore the
ideological cause of the text$s production, focusing instead on the imaginary issue at hand in the
fictional story, and how it is resolved. #he utopian solutions in literature are imaginary
resolutions, and present 0the optical illusion of social harmony1 ?ameson :=!. &s such, we are
distracted from searching for a real solution.. Literature gives us resolutions to social
contradictions that satisfy the reader, which is similar to Freud$s concept of the repressed wish
Freud :8!. Literature is the symbolic fulfillment of the repressed wish, resulting in the
achievement of symbolic satisfaction ?ameson :9!. 'hile feeling satisfied with the fictional
resolution, the reader is, in reality, excluded from the resolution. 6e or she will revel in the
character$s success, or the triumph of good over evil, and will put the book down satisfied% but in
reality, such contradictions that have been resolved in the fiction are still present and ignored.
.atisfaction in literature$s resolutions are much easier than resolution in real life, which can
re"uire social revolution ?ameson B:!. Literature$s censorship of actual ideological problems,
and the symbolic resolution of them, keeps readers distracted, and therefore allowing of present
and dysfunctional dominant ideologies. +alibar and /acherey agree that literature reproduces
dominant and dysfunctional social relations, rather than works to actually resolve them. #hey
claim that because the reader connects with literature$s heroes, he or she gains a false idea that
literature produces individuality 8B;!. In actuality, the reader becomes a sub(ect of the ideology
that the literature is discussing +alibar and /acherey 82>!. #he reader therefore connects with
the ideology that the work of fiction$s character is struggling to resolve, and not exactly the hero
his or herself. #herefore, when the hero resolves the ideological conflict that the reader identifies
with, the reader feels satisfied ?ameson!. #he reader censors the idea of the real ideological
conflict in reality in favor of the fictional resolution and subse"uent feeling of satisfaction. ?ohn
/. 4llis bluntly agrees by arguing that books can close our minds and can make us conform to
the ideas of the privileged class 9!. +ooks could censor ideologies that lie outside of the
dysfunctional ones they subtly discuss, causing readers to conform to the dominant ones present
in fiction.
Censorship in English Education and the Emergence of Theory
#his kind of censorship is seen in 4nglish education when certain works of literature are
represented as being higher than others, therefore preserving these works and making them the
standard for all bodies of literature by 0contributing to the maintenance of a common language1
+alibar and /acherey 8B9!. ?ohn )uillory agrees that schools work to preserve, reproduce and
disseminate works, therefore regulating access to cultural capital vii!. 'ith this model of
preservation,,an 0ivory tower1 of literature,,the debate arises as to which bodies of work are to
be a part of this high literature canon. 6owever, according to ?ohn )uillory, the debate of what
should be included in the literary canon is not important, but it is a sign of the crisis of literature
education x!. .tuart 6all agrees that there has recently been a crisis in the humanities as a whole
8;!. In the humanities, those who are in the margins of society are given a voice and a means of
achieving representation and cultural power 6all, :8!. #his is a problem to those currently in
power, because if those whom they oppress are given cultural power, their positions will become
unstable. )uillory also states that literature education now appears institutionally dysfunctional
because of the emergence of the new, technical class x!. Literature education is a form of
cultural capital that$s become marginal to the social function of the present education system,
which favors the professional,managerial class )uillory xi!. In other words, literature education
cannot function as well as those in power desire it to. 4llis claims that humanities are becoming
more politically active, and as a result are becoming the ire of those in power C!. *ne way in
which the humanities challenges dominant ideologies is literature theory, which )uillory asserts
is a result of the canon debate xi!, which itself is a result of the defunctioning of the literature
curriculum, and is a reaction to the 0new1 education system that favors the speciali-ed,
vocational class )uillory xi!. &nother problem with a humanities education that #homas Frank
points out is that it$s difficult to "uantify. .cience, technology, engineering and mathematics
ma(ors are seen as more valuable because they are able to yield tangible results, which is much
more difficult for literature students to do Frank 8B!. #heory is a way of trying to make
literature education relevant again, as it is a confirmation that a pure literary syllabus is
inade"uate for study )uillory xiii!. In other words, simply examining the literature itself is not
enough. #here$s more to it that needs to be analy-ed, and that$s where theory comes in. )uillory
also argues that theory is more values by the technical 0new class1 because it incorporates the
0technical1 "uality of lit study.
The Role of Literature Theory
In literature theory, the ideological contradictions that are the bases of literature are
unearthed and examined. +alibar and /acherey believe that one of the ways in which literature
may displace a contradictory ideological position is by substituting for it an imaginary
contradiction that falls in the ideological positions of religion, politics, morality, psychology, or
aesthetics 8B=!. #his is the desperate search for an imaginary, utopian solution, and is the
substitution for the real thought process that could occur outside of the fiction, which is referred
to as the 0primary material1 of a text +alibar and /acherey 82>!. 4van 'atkins agrees that
there is a 0complex of conditions that permits the work in the first place1 2!. +ecause of this
substitution, literature provokes other ideological discourses that are aesthetic, moral, political,
religious, etc. +alibar and /acherey 8B;. #heory may discuss the discourses that are clear in
literature, but it also goes beyond those on the surface to examine the primary ideological bases
of a text$s production. )uillory states that literature theory works as a 0vector of ideological
notions that aren$t exactly in the actual work but are in the context of the institutional
presentation1 )uillory, ix!. #hat is to say that it$s the institution that ultimately decides how to
interpret literature in theory education. 4llis disagrees with theory education. 6e argues that the
main "uestions of theory are ones of oppression, based on gender, class, race, etc. C!. 6e thinks
that the problem with theory is that it focuses on power dynamics, and not being a better human
;!, which goes against cultural critic /atthew &rnold$s idea of the purpose of a humanities
education Logan!. In fact, &rnold was hopeful that the humanities would be a ways of closing
class divisions Logan!, but 4llis claims that the humanities now, especially theory, doesn$t
encourage open thought but constricts it ;!.
Alternative Practices
#hough there is much that can be discussed about the actual curriculum of theory, what I
hope to examine are the actual practices and behaviors of the teaching of it. 'atkins claims that
4nglish departments do not do a good (ob of articulating whatDhow classroom skills will be used
beyond the classroom C!. 6e further argues that 0while a great deal of individual control can be
had over how lit is taught or read, the effects of the work done in class are not contingent on the
characteristics of the work itself1 'atkins 9!. Classrooms may teach about how to apply a
specific theory to a specific text, but the actual effects of this learning process are not as apparent
in the classroom, such as the improvement of writing and critical thinking. Aaulo Freire believes
education has the ability to encourage students to gain a new awareness of their present reality
@9!. From there, educators can provide students with the tools and perhaps even practices to
exorcise change in their realities. &n educational problem is that students are taught as though
they are passive observers,,they learn about the outside world, without gaining the knowledge
that they have the ability to change it Freire @=!. Freire proposes a method of education called
0problem,posing education,1 which transforms students to student,teachers, and teachers to
teacher,students C>!. 'ith this method, truths are not set in stone, but are open to interpretation
and analysis by both teachers and students. +oth parties teach and learn from each other, rather
than students merely being 0containers1 to be 0filled1 by the teacher Freire @B!. #he teacher,
student contradiction is therefore resolved through dialogue, where each speaks back and forth
and teaches each other, with the world mediating the conversation Freire C>!. In the case of
theory, it is literature and theory that would mediate the conversation between teachers and
students. #his method of education encourages conscious thinking instead of passive observation
Freire C>!. #he constant changing of the students$ and professor$s ideas would reflect how the
world itself changes, rather than remaining a static reality of certain ideologies that those in
power would desire students to think. /ax 6orkheimer agrees that theory should be used to
examine present realities with his concept of critical theory. .antiago Castro,)ome- writes of
6orkheimer$s concept7 0#he fundamental task of critical theory is to reflect upon the structures
from which both social reality as well as the theories that seek to account for it are constructed,,
including critical theory itself1 9>B!. 'hen studying theory, teachers and students censor
themselves by accepting the theory as historical truth, instead of critically examining the theory
itself. 'here did it come from3 'hat social relations at the time caused its emergence3 6ow
does that relate to today3
Critical theory$s ideas align well with Foucault$s concept of the episteme, which are the
unconscious structures that underlie the production of scientific knowledge in a historical setting
)utting n. pag.!. #hese structures of so fundamental and basic that they are largely ignored,,
censored,,by those who operate within the episteme )utting n. pag.!. If theory classes examined
these underlying structures and discussed the reason for the emergence of these particular
theories in their particular time and place, then students will be able to examine them more
critically, rather than accept them as pure truth. 6owever, these structures are censored from our
minds. &ndre +reton agrees that there is information inside our minds that has been censored. 6e
credits Freud with 0bringing back to light1 the 0part of our mental world which we pretend not to
be concerned with any longer1 2!. +reton agrees with Freud$s idea that our mind censors
repressed information, which +reton believes is a fountain of knowledge. +reton believes that
this censored knowledge should be explored, since 0the depths of our mind contain within it
strange forces capable of augmenting those on the surface...1 2!. +y examining information that
our minds have censored,,the fundamental structures that make up our present knowledge,,then
our current truths can be critically analy-ed and possibly altered to fit with our present reality.
+reton states that a way we can examine this censored knowledge is with our imagination 2!.
#heory education is concerned with the scientific truths of theories, and how they can be applied
to literature, without any critical examination of the theories themselves, or the creative
exploration of new theories or alteration of present ones. Eew practices and behaviors are
censored in favor of those that are presently accepted in the belief that they are sufficient.
Methodology
#he general methodology of this thesis is a "ualitative review of secondary literature surrounding
the sub(ect of censorship and educational roles and practices. Arimary research consists of the
analysis syllabi for the University of Central Florida course 4E) B>827 #heory and #echni"ues
of Literary .tudy. &dditional primary research will consist of face to face interviews with
professors who teach this course, where I$ll ask them about their values and goals of their class,
as well as their educational behaviors. #hrough my primary research, I aim to find patterns of
discrepancies between the courses$ values and goals, and its practices and behaviors. I will
compare these patterns with the types of censorship I have researched, in order to see if such
censorship is occurring.
Wors Cited
1
&lthusser, Louis. Lenin And Philosophy, And Other Essays / Louis Althusser ; ntroduction !y
"rederic #a$eson ; %ranslated "ro$ %he "rench !y !en !re&ster. n.p.7 Eew Fork 7 /onthly
<eview Aress, :>>8, c8;@8., :>>8. '(" Li)raries (atalo*. 'eb. 82 Eov. :>8B.
G&ndre +retonHs /anifesto *f .urrealism.G (onnaissance +es Arts ==> n.d.!7 8>C,888. Arts ,
-u$anities (itation nde.. 'eb. 82 Eov. :>8B.
&ngeli, Charoula8, cangeliIucy.ac.cy, Eicos8, nichriIucy.ac.cy Jalanides, and /arianna8,
edmariIucy.ac.cy Aapastephanou. G#he <ole *f #he &uthority *f #he #ext *n Critical
1This list includes texts that were not cited in this proposal, but will be used in the construction of the
thesis.
#hinking.G nterchan*e 2:.B :>88!7 B>@,B:C. Education "ull %e.t /-010 1ilson2. 'eb. :@ ?an.
:>82.
&ngley, Aatricia. 04E) B>82 .yllabus.1 Fall :>88. 3icrosoft 1ord file.
+alibar, 4tienne and Aierre /acherey. GLiterature &s &n Ideological Form7 .ome /arxist
Aropositions In &rt &nd Ideology Aart I. 4nglish!.G Pra.is0 A #ournal Of 4adical (riticis$
5anta 3onica (al 9 >>>8!7 2B,9C. "4AN(5. 'eb. 89 .ept. :>8B.
+eck, Christian. 04E) B>82 .yllabus.1 Fall :>8B. Ado)e AKF file.
+ecker, 6oward .. G#eacher In #he &uthority .ystem *f #he Aublic .chool.G #ournal Of
Educational 5ociolo*y :@.8;9B!7 8:C,828. Education nde. 4etrospecti6e7 19899198: /-010
1ilson2. 'eb. :@ ?an. :>82.
Campbell, ?ames. 04E) B>82 .yllabus.1 .ummer :>8B. 3icrosoft 1ord file.
Claubaugh, )ary L. G4ducation *r Indoctrination7 Is #here & Kifference3.G Educational
-ori;ons C=.8 :>>@!7 =,;. Education "ull %e.t /-010 1ilson2. 'eb. :@ ?an. :>82.
4llis, ?ohn /. Literature Lost 7 5ocial A*endas And %he (orruption Of %he -u$anities / #ohn
30 Ellis. n.p.7 Eew 6aven MConn.N 7 Fale University Aress, c8;;@., 8;;@. '(" Li)raries
(atalo*. 'eb. 9 Eov. :>8B.
Frank, #homas. 04asy Chair7 Course Corrections.1 -arper<s 3a*a;ine *ct. :>8B7 8>,8B. Arint.
Freire, Aaulo. Peda*o*y Of %he Oppressed / Paulo "reire ; %ranslated !y 3yra !er*$an
4a$os; 1ith An ntroduction !y +onald 3acedo. n.p.7 Eew Fork 7 Continuum, c:>>>., :>>>.
'(" Li)raries (atalo*. 'eb. 82 Eov. :>8B.
Freud, .igmund. On +rea$s. Eew Fork7 '. '. Eorton O Company, Inc, 8;9:. Arint.
)ra(eda, &nthony. 04E) B>82 .yllabus.1 Fall :>8B. 3icrosoft 1ord file.
)uillory, ?ohn. (ultural (apital 7 %he Pro)le$ Of Literary (anon "or$ation / #ohn =uillory.
n.p.7 Chicago 7 University of Chicago Aress, 8;;B., 8;;B. '(" Li)raries (atalo*. 'eb. 82 Eov.
:>8B.
)utting, )ary, G/ichel Foucault.G %he 5tanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy0 4d. 4dward E.
Palta. .anford, :>8B. 'eb. 8: Eovember :>8B.
6all, .tuart. G#he 4mergence *f Cultural .tudies &nd #he Crisis *f #he 6umanities.G Octo)er
8;;>!7 88. #5%O4 Arts , 5ciences . 'eb. 82 Eov. :>8B.
6orkheimer, /ax. 0#raditional and Critical #heory.1 (ritical %heory7 5elected Essays0 Eew
Fork7 #he Continuum Aublishing Company, :>>:. 8CC,:22. Arint.
?ameson, Fredric. 0<eification and Utopia in /ass Culture.1 5i*natures of the >isi)le. Eew Fork7
<outledge, 8;;:. ;,B2. Arint.
Lamiya, )ary. 0Ira"7 'hy the /edia Failed.1 5alon0 .alon /edia )roup, Inc., 8> &pr. :>>@.
'eb. 9 .ept. :>8B.
?ones, &nna. 04E) B>82 .yllabus.1 .pring :>8B. Ado)e AKF file.
Levi, &lbert 'illiam. %he -u$anities %oday. n.p.7 +loomington, Indiana University Aress
M8;@>N, 8;@>. '(" Li)raries (atalo*. 'eb. 82 Eov. :>8B.
Logan, Aeter /elville. 0*n Culture7 /atthew &rnold$s (ulture and Anarchy, 8C=;.1 !4AN(-7
!ritain, 4epresentation and Nineteenth9(entury -istory. 4d. Kino Franco Felluga. 4xtension of
4o$anticis$ and >ictorianis$ on the Net. 'eb. :B *ct. :>8B.
/acEeil, 6eather. G'hat Finding &ids Ko7 &rchival Kescription &s <hetorical )enre In
#raditional &nd 'eb,+ased 4nvironments.G Archi6al 5cience 8:.2 :>8:!7 2C9,9>>. Li)rary,
nfor$ation 5cience , %echnolo*y A)stracts. 'eb. :C *ct. :>8B.
/arlin, <andal. Propa*anda the Ethics of Persuasion0 Eew Fork7 +roadview Aress, :>8B. Arint.
/auer, +arry. 04E) B>82 .yllabus.1 .pring :>8B. 3icrosoft 1ord file.
Aace, ?udith L., and &nnette 6emmings. GUnderstanding &uthority In Classrooms7 & <eview *f
#heory, Ideology, &nd <esearch.G 4e6ie& Of Educational 4esearch @@.8 :>>@!7 2,:@. E4(.
'eb. :@ ?an. :>82.
Aeltason, #imothy. G#he Function *f /atthew &rnold &t #he Aresent #ime.G (olle*e En*lish @
8;;2!7 @2;. #5%O4 Arts , 5ciences . 'eb. C *ct. :>8B.
.humaker, 'ayne. 0/atthew &rnoldHs 6umanism7 Literature as a Criticism of Life. 1
5tudies in En*lish Literature, 1?@@919@@ , Jol. :, Eo. 2, Eineteenth Century &utumn, 8;=:!, pp.
BC9,2>:. 'eb. :B *ct. :>8B.
'atkins, 4van. 1ork %i$e7 En*lish +epart$ents And %he (irculation Of (ultural >alue. n.p.7
.tanford University Aress, 8;C;. !ook 4e6ie& +i*est Plus /-010 1ilson2. 'eb. 82 Eov. :>8B