For clarity, our discussion started when I took the pedagogy I've encountered to task for its inflexibility and certainty of perspective. You responded to say, in essence, that you don't teach that way and neither does anyone you know.

My answer was basically "that's fine, but that's all I encountered." Your response was basically "that's fine, but I teach like this."

My answer was "No, listen. The way you think you're teaching? It fucking drove me away from literature." Now your answer is basically "well, sure. That was high school. Here in college we don't do that."

Here's the thing: by the time you're teaching literature in college? You're getting the kids that agree with you. Your audience has self-selected to your worldview. You will never encounter anyone like me because those lesser teachers have already fucked us up.

I am here to denigrate and dismiss books. That's what the entire point of this thread is about. In every other form of art critique, it's acceptable and encouraged to say "this work is fucking bullshit, chapter and verse." In literature there's a consensus view. Disagree with that consensus view and you're an infidel.

I haven't taken your courses. I never will. I commend you for your commitment to excellence and open-mindedness. But you have not made a compelling argument that my criticisms of literature and its instruction are unfounded. More than that, you've reinforced my suspicion that people who are part of the problem think they're part of the solution.