Junior economics and government and politics major
It’s no secret the arts and humanities departments across the nation have been at the forefront of a cultural and fiscal war. Budgetary issues have left departments malnourished of funds and suffering egregious harms from a culture quickly diminishing the value of certain programs. However, even more perversely, the
English major itself has been labeled as a joke. We’ve all heard the rallying call, “English is not a real major.” English, moreover, is the misunderstood major; one that has been ironically mocked and crucified maybe more than any other. The problem is, society does not understand the self-inflicted damages we will incur if we continually mitigate this department’s finances and dignity.
This university has constricted funding toward the department, forcing itself to become aggressively selective with the Ph.D. applicant pool — to the point of admission becoming damn near impossible. The master’s program no longer subsidizes the studies of candidates (buying books for research, etc.), which clearly discourages registration.
English professor Martha Nell Smith gives a fantastic analysis of why these cuts are unwarranted. The department is low-cost, because the provisions necessary to function efficiently span only textbooks, novels and possibly computers for research. The department essentially pays for itself, unlike engineering and natural sciences, which command an inordinate amount of wealth because of the necessity of lab equipment and high-tech gear.
The only thing worse than financially devaluing the worth of the department is degrading the integrity of the major. Students, faculty, politicians and parents have flogged English as “useless”; we hear anecdotal horror stories about, “English student from [insert prestigious university here] working at Outback Steakhouse.”
Professor Smith told me the story of her father attempting to scare her away from being an English major. What if he had succeeded? Losing such a brilliant mind would significantly deprive this university’s intellectual capacity.
Professor Smith, per usual, has disproved all the skeptics by asserting for years that English majors go beyond teaching; they dominate fields ranging from various business industries to law, to volunteer work and leadership fields, all because of their ability to analyze. The overall problem with school is it teaches one how to be a student, not a thinker. Students become accustomed to using “equation x” or “method y” in order to solve homework problems.
However, the problems of life are non-linear, and hold an inordinate amount of unpredictability, variability and nuanced, unforeseen consequences and externalities. The ability to carefully dissect and analyze every situation as unique is not only learned as an English major, but required.
Looking at a variety of texts in new and distinct ways allows the creative mind to flourish, and this application to the real world keeps businesses maximizing profits, interpretation of law and legal precedence evolving and our country strong. China, the country that has become the quintessential example of STEM emphasis, is beginning to highlight the humanities, realizing the imperative of creativity to success of a nation. STEM and humanities are not polarized nemeses; they need each other.
English serves a purpose beyond employment or prestige — it gives our lives subjective value. I recognize business, economics, science and engineering are important to make life more comfortable, but they fail to answer the question of why we live. The aesthetic beauty contained is lavish diction; the morals and values we ascertain from heroic stories and tragic tales, and the introspection incentivizing reformation of our flaws and personalities are derivative of the art of literature. Living without the magnificence of literary art, in my opinion the pinnacle of art, is a life not worth living.
Marc Priester is a sophomore economics and government and politics major. He can be reached at opinionumdbk@gmail.com.
