abolition.

I chose for my first blog of this week to discuss further the issue of a “Christian” English department. While this may be “beating a dead horse” to borrow the colloquialism, I find it so fascinating the concept of faith and literature.
I would venture so far as to say that I would agree with Abby Nye in the placement of Christianity in the “oppressed” literature category. I do not believe that Christian writers and critiques are victimized, but we face the same problem of trying to be affirmed in our writing. Many perceive Christian writing as a joke (based on a generalization) and the fact that we even had such a discussion as the one we had in class. Many were quick to deem the idea of a Christian English Department as bogus and definitely a bad idea. We, as potentials for the job market would be faced with a mountain of red tape based on our “religious” curriculum that we would implement. We want, again, to be taken seriously.
I would take a step further and substitute certain words into Ngugi’s quote on page 2093 in our textbooks. For the sake if this essay I will use this quote to expound on a point, “Just because for reasons of political expediency we have kept English as our official language, there is no need to substitute a study of English culture for our own”. I feel that the Christian aspect of this debate would describe what “own” is trying to signify. We have kept this Christian aspect out of site for the sake of “political expediency” or “political rightness”. There is no need to substitute our faith for something else that will be more marketable and “better” because faith is taboo (in the way that I believe many of us think about it).
I believe that within the realm of faith there are a lot of different and exciting topics and questions writers and readers can glean from. Perhaps this is where most “Christian” writing is heading, towards a more creative or versatile approach.
Based on the three questions Ngugi brings up on page 2093, of value, direction and orientation…we, as students at a Christian school, already have this idea of religious narrow-mindedness hanging over our heads. The question of value should be addressed in a manner that assures students will not value based strictly on their Biblical convictions. If this were the case, they should maybe switch majors because they as Christian English majors will face the issue of what is value? Is it within the text? How doctrine plays a role? Are we talking about personal conviction? Or is it a generally recognized criterion that is referred to.
Orientation does not exclude previous experiences as a child, young adult or growing human being. There will always be orientation. Should English students ignore it? It is their heritage? While I cannot flesh this out further in my own mind, I still feel the orientation of my background when it comes to being an English student, yet have managed to let it “breath” in order to let my knowledge and understanding of writing, reading and literature expand. Jori said something in class during our “Christian English Department” talk about not being able to experience our own agency if we simply read Christian literature. It is from this sentiment that I tend to look at literature and the English department. Perhaps I am wrong, but I haven’t reached a final say on anything yet.