Salient. Victoria University Student Newspaper. Volume 36, Number 23. 23rd September 1973
[Gordon Campbell replies]
Gordon Campbell replies: - I would have thought it was the Department, not the student body who have failed to make a "coherent case". Rather than "simply restate the problem" we have offered these constructive, workable suggestions.
|(a)||a 36 credit general major|
|(b)||failing that, a two tier degree structure providing for both the general and specialist conceptions of an English major in conflict here|
|(b)||(c) placing the language requirement on the same footing as other potentially useful supplements to an English degree.|
So we have never simply "attacked" the Department. We recognise their commitment, have even articulated it for them — the point is whether it should over-ride our equally valid idea of the degree, especially when our view at least leaves room for the specialist student. And no one's knocking the "canon" — the debate is about whether its best served by galloping through the whole field, or by in depth study of particular related periods. Finally, the request for postwar writing is not "pandering" it was never sought as an alternative to the English canon — our claims is that it holds an important place, in that canon. Your pro-Department views don't bother me; its your inability to grasp the issues and present them fairly that gets me down.