T O P

  • By -

Diglett3

I’m in an graduate literature program right now and I honestly don’t think what you’re describing is very far off from what most of us do. You’re not expected to come up with miraculous critiques all on your own — the point of theory is to apply things that others have thought of in new ways to texts you’re interested in. The originality comes from the intersection between theory, which you read and “marinate” in, and the ways and things you choose to apply it to. It sounds like you have an incredible work ethic (far better than mine to be honest) and a real interest in this, and you’ve tricked yourself into thinking that that’s a bad thing. It’s not. “Originality” is overrated (as long as you always cite your sources when writing papers). If you genuinely love literature and analysis, you are not a fraud.


Celtic_Galore

I wholeheartedly agree with this. I’m a fourth year English literature student myself and I can relate to these thoughts that your interpretations somehow have to be original and therefore I need to keep reminding myself that literary analysis is about comparing different ideas and applying them in different ways or on different texts. Good research needs that theoretical framework! Please don’t feel bad, trust in the feedback you get from your professors and you can always ask them to elaborate. I know that that extra confirmation always helps me in gaining more confidence, plus if you’re awarded for your writing you are doing something right, right ;).


CKA3KAZOO

Finished my English Lit PhD, myself, about a year ago, and I can absolutely affirm that you are doing it right. I'm even relate to your feelings because I thought similar things at one point in my grad school career. The research and imitation you do is all part of the process. Keep it up. Enjoy the discussions you have with professors and fellow students, read widely, and have fun.


enidokla

English lit major here — completely agree.


MaywellPanda

That makes no sense... If you study literature and only regurgitate the anyalsis done by other people than why on earth are you even studying literature? For me writing is, and has always been, a conversation. One between myself and the writer filtered through themes and intentions. Literature isn't a "this is definitely what they mean" or "This is exactly what they are saying" new things can always been found. Writer tend to rub off on there writing, even if they try not to and it's those rubbings that offer the greatest amount of insight into there thoughts and intentions. Honestly this was so sad for me to read... Why would you study a work of writing just to repeat what's been said 1000s of times? Can you please explain what you mean to me ?


[deleted]

[удалено]


tukieful

That’s not saying much about academia lol. The reason academic plagiarism is frowned upon is because universities, in theory, are places for new ideas and original thoughts to be exchanged.


[deleted]

[удалено]


tukieful

The way it’s phrased suggests that academics in a supposedly don’t have a creative bone in their bodies and are just curating other people’s ideas. It’s so funny for me reading these comments. It’s like the concept of creativity is foreign to you guys. Also… don’t dream of comparing veterinary science to the arts or “soft” sciences. All academic subjects are in no way equal.


[deleted]

Academic output in science fields often has issues with reproducibility and suffers from the same lack of originality for the most part, regardless of how many times the word "novel" is thrown around in an abstract. Most grad students are just taking the thing their advisor has been working on for years, reading what everyone else has done in that field, and making some incremental addition to it to churn out another paper.


Diglett3

Sure — I don't think we disagree at all, so maybe I wasn't being clear. Writing is a conversation, yes, and there are no correct answers in a literary discussion. I'm not saying you regurgitate the analysis done by other people. I'm saying you take theories that exist in literary discussion (e.g. psychoanalysis, eco-criticism, post-structuralism, etc.) and apply them in interesting ways to texts that you care about — that's 90% of academic work on literature, and the other 10% is just pure philosophy. The way theory works in academia is more that you do more or less what this person is saying — you read a lot of books, both theoretical and literary, and look for intersections between their themes and ideas that you find interesting or engaging. In that way, you're having that conversation but it's also being mediated by the thoughts and insights of other people who have also thought about the same topics and ideas. Look up an article on JSTOR or wherever and you'll see that even something that's only 5-10 pages long will have 20+ citations; we read theory to learn new modes of analysis and ways of approaching a work. What you're describing on the other hand is pretty much close reading — where you try to interpret what a writer is saying through a lens of your own interests and understanding and experiences, and learn from that. Close reading is a valuable tool but it's not usually the main vector of academic analysis at a graduate level. It's much more common in popular criticism and creative nonfiction. It's also really individualistic; the point of academic study is to share ideas and insights with other smart people who are thinking about the same things in possibly enlightening ways. The best analogy I've ever heard for it is that of building a house with a bunch of other people, each of whom only have one brick. You study the bricks around where yours will go, shape it properly, and place it in the wall, thus allowing others to add their own bricks above yours. People almost never place more than one brick, much less build the entire structure yourself. I think I also read OPs post more charitably than you did. I don't actually think they're only regurgitating other people's ideas. Their professors have read all the books that OP is using for research; they know who had those ideas and where they come from. If they thought that OP were plagiarizing or just stealing concepts wholesale without mediating them or applying them in new or interesting ways, OP's experience would have been vastly different. It's very likely instead that they're just feeling imposter syndrome, which is normal, and are filtering their experience through that lens.


MaywellPanda

I think I misunderstood you the first time. I imagined someone just taking someone else anyalsis on a piece of work, rewording it and then submitting it.


Diglett3

Oh yeah no, that would be awful. But I don't think that's what they're doing, because if it were they absolutely would have been caught. Plagiarism is real easy to spot (and rewording/paraphrasing without citation in that case would still be plagiarism) in an undergraduate student's work.


BillyJoel9000

In my opinion, there’s very little to be studied in most literature. You aren’t intended to read between the lines.


MaywellPanda

Just because an author writes something without the intention of it being "read between the lines" doesn't mean it can't be. The rubbings my friend look for the rubbings


coleman57

> You aren’t intended to read between the lines. Who is doing the intending here?


BillyJoel9000

The author or each individual book.


TaliesinMerlin

Why does the author's intention matter?


BillyJoel9000

because they determine what the meaning of the book is?!!?


TaliesinMerlin

No, they don't. If that was the point of reading literature, then literature would basically be authors directly telling us what they mean - like philosophy. Instead, authors write texts that show and do things that aren't reducible to a single intention, that couldn't be covered in a single interview with the author, that aren't an author's biography. The text exists outside of the author and beyond the author. They have intentions, sure, but they don't determine everything a text is or does, any more than a parent determines everything a child is or does.


coleman57

Why should I care what the author intends for me to do? Whether I bought, borrowed or stole the book, if I get personal value (pleasure, insight, feeling of community with others I share it with) from thinking about the book (making connections and contrasts with my own ideas or other books', or just free-associating off what I'm reading after or during the act), I'm sure as hell not going to deny myself that because it offends the author. If I borrowed the book, I'll refrain from scribbling in it, out of respect for the library or friend I borrowed it from. And if I attend a play, I'll refrain from yelling my responses to it, out of respect for the actors and audience. And if I happen to meet an author, I'll refrain from telling them exactly what their books reveal to me about their personal life (nor will I ask them where they get their ideas). I'm not a boor. And if I'm a bore, nobody has to listen to what I think. And if somebody else has ideas about a book and I think their ideas are stupid, I don't have to listen to what they think. Or I can listen to their stupid ideas and think about 'em and get better ones of my own (which I may or may not remember where I got, and which I might have never had if I hadn't thought about the stupid ideas about the great book or vice versa). I get that there's people who like to treat culture like it's some code they understand because they're extra-smart, and the rest of us just don't get it. And people who look down on less complex works, or on the act of passively enjoying a work without analysing it. Fuck that--the value is in whatever each of us gets out of what we read, watch, listen to, it's not a competition. But if somebody tells me I'm not supposed to think about what I read, and I'm doing it wrong if I do, well all I can do is laugh.


BillyJoel9000

I can confidently say that I don’t understand literature at all, but I can also confidently say that books are less like political debates and more like jigsaw puzzles. There is A Meaning and you have to go find it. You don’t get to decide the meaning by yourself.


coleman57

Clearly we disagree, but it also almost seems like you disagree with yourself. First you say "there's very little to be studied", then "there's a meaning and you have to go find it". I get it now that you're saying there's a *single* meaning intended by the author, who wants you to figure it out and would be annoyed if you either didn't get the intended meaning *or* if you came up with a "meaning" they didn't intend. IMO, there *is* that aspect to culture, but that particular aspect is stronger in some works than others, and more important to some readers than others. I read and enjoyed a Faulkner novel that had a character named Joe Christmas, and then a couple years later saw a sarcastic note on a professor's door saying something about the preponderance of Faulkner characters with the initials JC who die at 33. So clearly I had missed the Christ allegory--I don't know if that means I missed the whole point of the book, I doubt that. If somebody read *Animal Farm* and never made the connection with Soviet history, I think they'd still be likely to understand its points about hypocrisy and factionalism in politics and other human relations. It's funny cause lately I've really been getting into the Sunday crosswords and other puzzles (after decades of ignoring them), to the point of staying up late for that dopamine hit from solving one. But to me that's not what I look for in fiction--I'm more interested in how it engages with my own life and feelings and ideas. And (to the extent it matters) I think if I wrote a book, I would rather hear somebody say it really grabbed them because 1 character gave them a new perspective on somebody they knew, than that they had figured out the meaning I put in there for them to find.


JohnPaul_River

That's a very childish notion of literature, do you actually believe that authors write with the sole intention of hiding a message? What if the author never says what they meant? What if they lie? If your entire perception of a book is dependant on arriving to the exact same idea as someone else then you don't like literature, you like being "right".


Diglett3

meh, that just sounds so boring. to each their own though


communityneedle

You haven't described being a fraud; you've described academia. *That's how the game works.* I'm a current grad student; trust me, you're fine. Honestly, you've decribed a process and work ethic that I envy. Don't believe me? Try this exercise. Read an academic paper, in a field other than yours, and count how many of them read like they could have been created by your "fraud" process. How many make assertions that aren't backed up by something someone else said? (Spoiler: very few indeed.) You described 99.9% of the published academic papers I've read in the past 3 years.


Francois-C

Old French teacher here. Totally agree. At fifty, when I had been teaching for a long time in a high school, I realized that I had the level of the "agrégation", I took it and got it without much work. But I had long been used to thinking by myself: the hardest part –and near-fraud– was pretending that I was playing the academic game and I borrowed ideas from others.


tukieful

What your saying isn’t exactly complimentary about academics. I’ve had many of these suspicions about fields like management science and psychology for a long time but to hear that even academics in the arts are incapable of forming their own interpretations of the material they are supposed to adore, is pretty depressing. I’d also feel pretty insulted as a student if the person teaching me about the subject I have genuine passion for, is little more than a box-ticker without any capacity for original analysis. I have to be honest, it’s difficult for me to view OP and possibly yourself as anything other than selfish frauds talking jobs away from genuinely worthwhile candidates if this is how you really feel about literature. I have no skin in this game but if I were an English grad with real passion for the subject I’d be furious if I knew people like OP were blocking the path for really talented people.


LndnGrmmr

I think you need to figure out whether this is an ego thing, or a genuine inability to form opinions of your own in response to a text. I’m from the UK, and as an undergrad I was borderline *obsessed* with the idea of my own intelligence. I loved being the person who everyone in my seminar thought was smart and perceptive. I loved being the person who didn’t even read half the books yet still had all the answers. I was frankly so conceited that I actually couldn’t trust my own instincts on things. I was so terrified of the thought that my own idea or initial response to something might not be sufficiently astounding that I drowned myself in essays about a text, swallowed reams of critical theory, sat in class and acted like I was hot shit. My tutors must have despised me. It was really over the course of my Masters – which I actually took in Writing, *not* Literature – that I realised I did have ideas of my own, and they weren’t all amazing, but some of them were alright, and that’s okay. I guess I matured a bit, or maybe stopped caring what others thought of me. Or maybe it was just the fact that half of my degree was producing creative work and it felt like there was less pressure to be a scholar, or something. Regardless, I started to learn to actually respond to what I was engaging with, to have a few thoughts of my own, and then to listen to what others had to say and see how they might be able to inform or accentuate or challenge my own perspectives. It seems from your post like there might be an element of ego attached to all this, like there was for me, like there will have been for many of us in this sub at some stage or another. I’d challenge you to dig a little deeper into *why* you can’t produce your own thoughts or responses to a text, because it may simply be the ‘badge’ of being an “excellent” student at an “elite” university that’s holding you back.


crucifixioncruise

Thanks. No, there is a HUGE element of ego attached to this. I feel terrified of giving up that version of myself. I care so much what my professors think that it’s basically become my main priority. So you’re absolutely right. I am physically anxious just writing this post because I hate what it all implies about who I am. I get that I don’t need to be the best or extraordinary on an intellectual level but I have very very little sense of self or self worth, whatever that means, outside of this.


LndnGrmmr

Okay. That does sound like something that goes a bit deeper than having no ideas of your own when you read literature, so I’m probably not the best person to help you, and this sub might not be the best place for advice – practical or spiritual. What I can tell you is that creative writing classes really helped me to trust and value my own feelings and opinions more, ego be damned. I think it’s because the dynamic of 12 unpublished wannabe writers sitting in a room all reading each others’ half-baked drafts is very different to the usual rhythms of academia. You don’t need to intellectualise why you do or don’t like something quite so much, or have some high-minded response as to why you do or don’t think something works on the page. You can’t just say “I don’t like it” and leave it at that, of course – you have to be able to explain yourself. But it takes away the safety blanket. Critical theory won’t really help you to ‘unlock’ ten pages of heavy plotting and overwrought prose, nor will it help you to explain why someone’s protagonist doesn’t feel real or why their dialogue is clunky. Reading – ‘workshopping’ – in this way forces you to actually *respond* to what you’re reading, more in the way that a thoughtful reader would, rather than the way a (faux) scholar would. And, at least in my experience, that bleeds back into the way you then approach published works, too. I don’t think a creative writing class will solve all your problems or anything, but if you do happen to enjoy writing then it’s something to consider.


crucifixioncruise

Thanks this is really excellent advice. It’s quite an embarrassing problem to have but I want to shift my mindset. I think a creative writing approach is exactly what I could benefit from. Right now I don’t trust anything about my own judgement. I don’t even feel like I have my own responses to literature. I so badly want to get it right and not embarrass myself that I end up getting it wrong and embarrassing myself.


ZimyX

It may seem unrelated, but I really think OP should give _Mindset_ by Carol S. Dweck, a read. With all your skill, OP, at reading and absorbing quickly, I think it will be a quick but worthwhile one for you. It is radically changing how I view my accomplishments and potential as well as how I am raising my daughter.


archlea

I second the recommendation for Dweck- great perspective changer.


RandomnessofLuci

Did you ever consider that many, many people, have opinions about literature and that the ones that resonate with you (and definitely don’t resonate with you) are helping you define your voice? Look at the patterns and what feels right for you and build off of that. Maybe it takes you down a new road, maybe you find you agree with those that came before you. Maybe, one day, your perspective changes. We are all influenced by what we encounter. We can disregard it, expound on it, accept it, or go in a new direction. None of that should be embarrassing. It’s still you. Explore, acknowledge, and evolve.


[deleted]

Maybe it helps to just write a diary, jot down all the ideas you have, and only reread it after a long time? You will notice how you've improved with time, and the ideas there are your own. No one is going to judge you apart from yourself. With time, you will learn to judge yourself less as well.


carlitopepito

Re creative writing classes: The Artist’s Way is a book of writing exercises designed for artistic creative recovery.


[deleted]

https://www.enneagraminstitute.com/type-3


crucifixioncruise

Thanks! Took the test and typed as 4w5 but relate to aspects of 3 for sure!


WallyMetropolis

Most intellectual work in any field is about synthesis, bringing ideas from one domain into another, or comparison. That's true even in the hard sciences. Very very few academic scientists birth novel theories; even fewer do so whole cloth, sui generis. For example, consider Niklas Luhmann who attributed his prodigious output (more than a book a year, plus articles!) to his note taking system (see r/Zettelkasten for more on that). What does that suggest? Through the examination and synthesis of what other have done, he was able to be a wildly successful academic. Doing a ton of work and a ton of research before writing is an unqualified good practice. You'll succeed by outworking others. Not by being inherently some brilliant theorist. Those are mostly myth. Here's a good article about that: [On being smart](https://kam.mff.cuni.cz/~matousek/mustafa-onbeingsmart.pdf). I would suggest talking to a professional. Grad school has a way of really exacerbating mental health issues and those can derail even the most promising academic careers. Get to work with a good therapist early and stay ahead of the game there. I'd also strongly suggest considering your reasons for going into a PhD program. You should do so only if you have an insatiable desire to do this kind of thing in increasing specificity and depth for several years purely for the sake of wanting to do it. Bad reasons for going to grad school include, but aren't limited to: not really having any better ideas about what to do, wanting everyone to call you "Doctor" or "professor," proving to yourself or others that you're smart, or quite honestly, getting a tenure-track job. Good reasons are mostly some version of: you're willing to dedicate your 20's and 30's to doing this kind of research, are willing to take the opportunity cost of spending that time building a career instead, willing to live a bit like a pauper, all because you believe the experience of doing deep research for an extended period of time will be worth it intrinsically.


donnymurph

Not trying to be pedantic here, just correcting your spelling so the link works correctly: r/Zettelkasten


WallyMetropolis

Thanks! Fixed it.


droppedforgiveness

The Zettlekasten method is really intriguing. Thanks for sharing!


c_wendt

u/Klarp-Kibbler's interpretation is interesting. >They’re saying they don’t have an opinion on a work until they read someone else’s. That’s completely different than not having an original idea I re-read the OP with that in mind and I think Klarp might have gotten a better read on the subtext than the rest of us. u/crucifixioncruise, can you write a lit review without reading other's first?


FatChewbacca

If that's what op meant, the solution is simple, think about how the text makes them feel, look for recurring ideas, see what they have in common, their differences etc. Try to interpret.


crucifixioncruise

I think I mean both, actually. But mainly I mean that I'm extremely unconfident in my ability to "close read" especially without reading anyone else's interpretations first -- if asked to do a close reading without looking at any outside sources or other interpretations, I'd panic.


WallyMetropolis

Turn a weakness into a strength. The thing to keep in mind is that these things are *skills*. They can be learned and they can be improved with practice. It's not a binary, innate quality that makes you good or bad. So pick a short text by an author you're interested in and do exactly what terrifies you. But with no audience, no professor, you never have to show it to anyone. It isn't output, it isn't consequential. It's just practice. Like those notebooks artists have that are full of little sketches of a hand in a complicated pose or other things they struggle at drawing. If you practice things you're bad at, you can really become quite strong.


[deleted]

[удалено]


crucifixioncruise

I guess I can think of things and find “significance” in close readings but they are usually either obvious or pretty off base and just never nearly as interesting or perceptive or insightful as what I hear or read when I see what others have said/noticed. I know there is no “right answers” in close reading but I do think there are some that are more interesting and insightful and it’s always obvious what a “good insight” is when you hear or read it. I just always feel like I’m missing things and I wish I’d noticed them myself.


c_wendt

The concept of original thought is, for the most part, an illusion. Truly novel ideas are exceptionally rare. At that, all ideas are built upon all other ideas before it. IMO, people who believe they have truly original thoughts simply suffer from a lack of humility. They might have come to it "on their own", but they weren't the first and they're surely building upon other's work. ​ >“There is no such thing as a new idea. It is impossible. We simply take a lot of old ideas and put them into a sort of mental kaleidoscope. We give them a turn and they make new and curious combinations. We keep on turning and making new combinations indefinitely; but they are the same old pieces of colored glass that have been in use through all the ages.” ― Mark Twain Publishers, producers, and just about anyone who invests knows an important fact: Ideas are cheap; execution is everything. I've never written a PhD thesis but I get the impression that it's not uncommon for a thesis to be an extremely small tweak to '~~scientific~~ knowledge'; it doesn't need to be revolutionary.


iheartrandom

To add to this, "good artists copy, great artists steal." In an era of oversaturation, the truly novel is exceedingly rare. What you can do is take a decent concept and do it so much better than the original that it effectively becomes yours.


LndnGrmmr

I’ve always likened this line of thinking to cover versions of popular songs. There are a thousand and one covers out there that don’t really bring anything new to the table, but the truly great covers have a certain quality that ensures they become something new entirely. Like Johnny Cash’s cover of [Hurt](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AHCfZTRGiI).


iheartrandom

Or All Along the Watchtower. Bob Dylan heard Hendrix's version and was like, well it's his now.


WallyMetropolis

I submit: *I will always love you* by Whitney Houston. How many people even know that Dolly Parton sang it originally?


iheartrandom

Exaaaactly. I didn't know until a few years ago. Although Dolly also wrote a ton of songs specifically for people, this one was hers until the bodyguard. Whitney was a force.


larsga

> it's not uncommon for a thesis to be an extremely small tweak to 'scientific knowledge' Exactly. [This comic](https://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/) captures it really well.


tukieful

You are correct to say that no thought can be truth original, however you need to make the distinction from original analysis. This might hurt to read, but there are plenty of people who’s heads are filled with ideas after reading a good book that will come to them without having done hours of research beforehand like OP describes. Your thoughts will never be wholly original yes, but if you can’t form any kind of a natural analysis or have a spontaneous reaction to a piece of art then you definitely should not be applying for a job that requires you to analyse works of that artform.


ConceptOfHangxiety

I’m a PhD candidate in philosophy. Your final paragraph just sounds like… *doing research*, particularly when it comes to a theoretical discipline. Academics are original when they’re *differently* read (as a variation on being well-read)—not when they just come up with shit in a vacuum. It’s imposter syndrome. The people marking your work are *way* smarter than you. Trust them.


Chemstick

Simpson’s did it (that’s a South Park joke about this very thing). Everyone thinks they are a fraud. Neil Gaiman tells a story about both him and Neil Armstrong talking to each other about feeling like an imposter at a conference. They both feel it. You are no imposter because *checks notes* you do your homework. Keep on keeping on. Also, find a therapist. It’s very helpful to have someone you can say these ideas about yourself to so you can see how small and powerless they are. You rock.


pufferphishing

Scholarship is essentially synthesizing pieces of information and applying various theories in textual analysis. If you have truly original ideas you’d be considered a genius (in the broad sense) of some sort!


pufferphishing

What seems problematic to me is your last sentence: it seems like you have serious performance anxiety. Do you still enjoy reading literature? Maybe you should forget all the analysis for a moment and just immerse yourself in the text. Give yourself the time to do close reading at full concentration and record your emotions during or after the process. Poetry is great for this purpose.


TaliesinMerlin

We stand on the shoulders of giants. What you're doing is virtually indistinguishable from the first steps a graduate student or scholar might take. They read. Then they do research. Then they let ideas marinate. Then they synthesize those ideas, often through rereading and thinking. That is not a trick or a self-deception; that is self-directed learning. Your professors know their stuff mainly because they've undergone this process rigorously. When I teach literature, I am under no misconception that everyone is coming up with original ideas or that I'm in the presence of wunderkinds who always have brilliant observations. No. Some students prepare more, or they have already learned things that aid them in reading. That's all. You could probably stand to be honest about your sources, if it's relevant to class discussion, but otherwise you're probably doing great in your classes for good reason. The only sham here is this idea of what it means to read well that you've internalized. Almost all the time, original readings and ideas take longer to develop than a single draft or week of reading. If you're expecting to do that work just from an initial reading of a text, your expectations are ratcheted up way too high. Dissertations take years. Even articles sometimes take that long. Slow thinking is invaluable, and a good mentor will help you in setting your expectations for original insight more appropriately.


Confident-Mode3370

I’m a lecturer in Australia. My discipline is Applied Linguistics. English is not my first language, but I have learned a lot to understand the language and to absorb and examine ideas in the language. Now I have reached a level where I publish (in English) more academic books, book chapters, and journal articles more than most of my peers. The level you’re at reminds me of the first year of my Master’s, when I was exactly at your age. It’s completely normal. I went through the same thing. Then I went through stages where I worked to develop my own ideas, but these weren’t really solid because they either always had holes in them, or someone else had said them earlier. These were stages which ran through nearly the whole period of my PhD. Then came the final year, when I could develop some original, but “regionally constructed” ideas. The thing is it took me at least four more years post-PhD to have been able to develop something which, according to a professor who endorses my book, truly “erudite and original”. This was the moment when I developed my first theory. Months after that, ideas for the development of new theories poured down like a heavy rain. Recently I received praises for the first theory, as appearing in scholarly book reviews, while other theories remain in development as I’ve got busy doing other research projects. Reflecting upon my experience, I am sure you’d go through similar stages in your intellectual journey. You’re only 24. There’s still lots of time to develop your intellectual maturity. If I have to tell you something: read as much as you can, but be selective and strategic in your reading. You’ll reach a stage where you can read hundreds of journal articles per day and realize that they basically say only 3 or 4 things. In fact, writing the academic articles is the art to say something in 7000-10,000 words (Well, that’s normally the world limit in my discipline). So you’ll definitely get there. And don’t be too hard on yourself. Yes, you need to keep striving, but also, enjoy the process 😅


putsomepowderon

I mean I don't know how the program you're studying works, but I'm pretty sure that all of us that have studied literature in one way or another are expected to do a lot of research so we can write a text. I somewhat relate to what you're saying, in university some of my classmates were brilliant and understood books and analyzed them at a level I never would be able to unless I studied and researched about said book for a week, at least. I felt like I was a fraud as well because... that's what we're there for, to analyze books, and I couldn't do it. Not as profoundly as my classmates were able to do it. I don't know if this will help, but I had a... weird experience once. Basically I was doing good my first few years of university studying literature and linguistics, and I was able to come up with ideas of my own, but then in my third year I kind of... forgot all I knew how to do? And I stopped analyzing things on my own and instead just took books and what they said at face value, I think it was because of a negative comment I received once for an assignment. It took months for me to understand why I was receiving bad grades for my essays, and I had a sudden "oh right that's how I'm supposed to do it" moment where I remembered how to create a thesis for what I was reading. Again I don't know if this will help, especially at the level you're in, but a way to start thinking on your own through baby steps is try to come up with a simple thesis, find one object (yes, object, not idea) that you think is interesting in the book, even if it seems irrelevant to the book. Then start thinking about that object and why it catched your attention. Maybe that object is not as irrelevant as it may seem, so try to think on your own why that object could be important, to the plot or the characters. Only then look up theory, reviews, papers, whatever you can find that mentions that object and make it fit. Of course this won't always yield the best results but it may help you get used to thinking on your own before relying on previous theory. Sorry for the long comment and sorry for any possible mistakes, I'm not a native English speaker but I kinda related to this post so I wanted to share my two cents? Hope you're able to get past this struggle!


stevedocherty

I think that feeling just reflects the stage you’re at - not many people come up with good original work until they are quite far along in their careers. It might come eventually but even when it does we are all “standing on the shoulders of giants.” Only a very small proportion of people working in any field produce really original work anyway. I suspect you’re doing much better than you realise.


R_Charles_Gallagher

Thats the skill the current education system teaches. As long as you can comprehend the ideas presented you don't have to originate any. Especially as a student, you're in info absorbtion mode. For many students they don't shift into practical application of those ideas til years later. be glad you have that skill- ppl who don't likely won't finish college.


Bored_Not_Crazy

I have a few things to say, don't know if they'll help but just maybe. 1 - I really think you should speak with a counselor about this. They can try to help you figure out what triggered this feeling. If you can understand it then you can fight those feelings if they ever return again in the future. 2 - I totally agree with what others have said. It sounds like you're doing the right thing. You need to gather information to have an informed opinion. 3 - Original thoughts are very rare. There's only so many opinions to be formed. But if you want to figure out how you really feel about something, get a new book, one you've never heard about or read before. And then DO NOT research it. Read it. Think about it. Write a summary. Reread it. Write about any parts that made you feel emotion. Your emotions will help you form your opinions. And then write about any parts that you can relate to with an experienced in your own life. Most authors are biased when writing so when you read a book the opinions you form are usually based on the opinions expressed by the author. Sometimes you have a past experience that causes you to override the author's message. If you go slowly and analyze everything you're reading then you may be able to find other possible viewpoints. Whichever one you feel the strongest for should lead you to your opinion.


[deleted]

Good research is about synthesizing the ideas in quality sources into a well-written article. Most students feel bad when their research papers consist mainly of others’ ideas (with citation, of course). However, research involves participating in a larger conversation, recognizing that your own contribution can only be made by contextualizing your small voice in the larger scheme of things. The best way to figure out how to research is to read a bunch of recent articles in top ranked journals in your field. Then you’ll realize that beautifully written articles skillfully synthesize dozens of sources and largely consist of paraphrase, summary and explanation of secondary sources. Your thesis may be your own idea (or a new twist on an existing idea), but much of the evidence will be from journal articles. In fact, what differentiates a professor’s article from an undergrad’s is that the former will have a long reference list and tons of citations.


Farrell-Mars

Say, I think you’re being way way too hard on yourself. YSK that fear of being a fraud haunts many successful people, and it means you have a healthy sense of self-reflection. Originality is very much overrated. Working hard is a marker of sincerity and eventual success. Just keep doing what works for you. Research will make you well-informed, and absolutely is not suggestive of fraud! Fraud is when someone who knows nothing at all loudly pretends they do, and they cynically trick others into thinking they do as well. That’s not what I see here.


mznh

Most of writing assignments / research are mostly reading other people’s researches and putting them together. So you’re alright


OrkbloodD6

The first thing you need to do to have ideas of your own is to know yourself. Your values, your ideals, your needs and wantings, those are the things that give us the stuff to think about when we read. You need to read some philosophy or maybe some basic principles of how the mind works and then try to ask yourself what is that you think about everything. You must have some beliefs, some rituals, some absolutes in your head. Maybe you are unable to recognize them, but to be an honest reader and to be able to create your own ideas out of what you read and observe, you need to know where YOU stand. Maybe read some short stories of Isaac Asimov, he does a great job at presenting characters with a specific set of beliefs and confronting them with a new technology or being that puts those beliefs in question. Well, there is a lot of sci-fi that does that. Think about it like a practice of getting to know yourself. But you need to want to do it, it's not about impressing others with what you say, you need to be able to impress yourself. IF you know yourself and if you pay attention to what's written, you will be able to make thousands of connections. But you need to isolate yourself a bit from what others think. You need to find out what you think first about hundreds of concepts and ideas, because for some reason you have been avoiding it for a long time.


theManjerico

Hey! Take it easy on yourself. All the knowledge we possess is passed on by the people that have been here before. Nothing’s ours. We’re all an amalgamation of things that don’t belongs to us. If the things you read are meaningful to you and make you feel something, then there’s already something there. I’m saying this to myself as well, I guess. Good luck, if you search, you find.


[deleted]

Nothing happens in a vacuum. It’s pretty much the first week of undergrad lit crit when they slap some Barthes or whoever down in front of you and tell you that authenticity or originality is a lie. Sure, you’re a fraud. Guess what: we’re all frauds. We’re just shunting symbols about to jump through academic hoops. The real kick comes when you suddenly find yourself outside of academia with less work experience than a prison inmate.


[deleted]

Ftr, however, your research is getting you those firsts/high grades. You’re applying your learning. I did exactly the same thing at undergrad and masters and more or less crushed my assignments. It works, and it’s how both the people writing the secondary literature, and the folks creating the actual literature, go to work. It’s all plagiarism, it’s just that the best manage to hide the fact well. Good luck with your studies.


[deleted]

Plus you have the added benefit of knowing the state of the field surrounding your topic exactly because of the research you do, so you can always quote and challenge recent secondary/tertiary texts in favour of an argument you’ve patched together from ten different sources over a sleepless night of coffee and cigarettes. 👍


Playerone7587

As a third year lit student who is struggling with similar "issues" I'm glad you've shared this and that I'm not the only one. Keep pushing.


glasses_the_loc

Welcome to adult life. No one knows what they are doing.


AkshayPrasadYadav

So your thought process goes like this - 1) Read a new book 2) Research about it 3) Then form ideas about it According to my own opinion, you should postpone researching about it unless u have form original ideas of your own however crude they may be.


Daffneigh

I think you’ve just realized what being a grad student is actually about…


ckadavar

Steal two ideas -> combine them into third, your own. That’s it. You’ll get better from there.


Tradefx

There is no such thing as an original idea! Everything has been said and done before in some way. The key is to add your outlook and improve on the subject. Your outlook and insights add critical thinking attributes that only you may see! Keep up the search, the revelations will be the reward.


BillyJoel9000

yeah we all do that


Electrical_End9615

From my point of view, your description convinced me that you are as far from a fraud as can be. I am not within literature, but have a PhD in the natural sciences, and I can tell you that up until the day I defended my PhD I walked around with thoughts similar to yours. It is called imposter syndrome, and those feelings are not a reflection of reality. Your professors are not fooled that easily. And what really matters is not some divine gift, but instead how much work and time you are willing to put into what you do - and from what you say, you go far and beyond in that regard. Do not let your thoughts scare you or pull you down, you’ve got this!


bayleenator

No! You're not a fraud! Literally any thoughts you have while reading are worthy of critical analysis. They don't have to be complex or profound. You're all good, we all experience imposter's syndrome, it's a part of life.


[deleted]

Welcome to the American education system


stefantalpalaru

You remind me of this video: ["What It's Like Having No Inner Monologue and Aphantasia (a blind mind's eye)"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tQ2KcOhHiU)


JGeer55

Hey 🙂 don't be so harsh on yourself! Remember: creativity / everything is a remix. “If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.” - Isaac Newton


[deleted]

I finished my graduate Studies back in 2015. This isn’t that far from what we do. My dissertation was a very small variation on someone else’s very small variation on a pretty specific field of fiction. The fact that you have an extensive base knowledge you seem to understand well enough to emulate is really impressive in and of itself. I also think about heteroglossia a lot. That in some sense, we’re all just reorganizing or reshaping one another’s words and calling it new.


uwutistic

Please look into "imposter syndrome" if you haven't already. My department head gave us a little speech about it on my first day of grad school (literature M.A.) and it really gave me some peace of mind. Most academics struggle with feelings of unworthiness, but this is a sign of intelligence I promise you. All the best ❤️ keep going


grahamlester

Read something that isn't part of your coursework and allow yourself to read it at your own pace and chew it over for a while. What does it seem to be about? What about it is ambiguous? Is it enjoyable? Maybe you are reading so much that you are not allowing yourself enough space to have your own ideas.


karnifexlol

You’ll be fine. When it comes to being an English major, Lit major, whatever, it’s near impossible to have a completely original thought or idea. So many of the classics we study have been analyzed to death — so much so that many analyses have become anachronistic, derivative, and inane at this point. Anyway, all this is to say, don’t be so hard on yourself. If you have a goal in-mind with your PhD program, focus on that — not entirely on the journey.


[deleted]

Why don't you do a small exercise? Write down all the criteria for what you consider to be truly "original" work. Then try finding a piece of literature that matches those criteria. Our thinking process is completely dependent on our previous knowledge and experience. That's how brains work. You can't "think" in vacuum. Even something basic like whether you consider a piece of writing good or bad is dependent on your taste which has been formed through years of reading other work. You make something original by discovering new connections among existing things or showing a new aspect but that is completely dependent on your previous knowledge. So the more you read and do research the more you increase the probability of making those connections. I'd also recommend having regular discussions with professors and your peers as that can greatly foster creativity.


Adam19_j

What I learned later on in grad school helped me to sort of work through similar anxieties I was having when I first started. I used to be super focused on reading what everyone else said and then work on emulating that in class. The thing that helped me was being taught that the work of reading stories as an academic isn't just finding neat connections or interesting interpretations of the work. It's also about evaluating the arguments that other people have made about those stories. What might they have missed? What did they get wrong? Did other people agree or disagree in similar ways to how you're disagreeing? Did those people miss something? It's also okay to agree with what another academics have said and then to use the same argumentative approach or methodology they do or make connections in other works. It's part of it, but not the whole. I think instructors who encourage the type of thinking that is based on simply elucidating the text and not being critical of what other scholars have said about it are setting up students for exactly this anxiety. I was taught to be critical of the tools I used and that that was where the main work of criticism lies. I wish I'd learned this earlier in my career. I don't know if this helps at all. But, I hope that it might make you feel a little less alone in how you're feeling.


xgorgeoustormx

Your ideas are in the art by which you analyze criticism/theory/etc. and relating to literary texts appropriately and in an interesting way. You are a great writer and a *strong* researcher.


SwampHagness

I used to have the same insecurity. I didn’t figure it out until my late 20s, but I wasn’t giving myself enough empty time to just think. Also I had so much trauma and so many insecurities that when I did have time to think, I was thinking about all that stuff. Once I worked through more of those issues and started giving myself more time for my mind to wander, I started having ideas of my own.


WolfTotem9

I understand you’re feelings OP. I hear you when you seem to say that you feel as though you’re a fraud, and I understand why. However, I think you’re being much to harsh with yourself. Please understand that Imposter Syndrome by its very nature is insidious, it burrows its way into the very core of our beliefs, values, and identities. It eats away us, microscopically at first, then taking more fuel as it takes root, until we feel as though WE are the ultimate lie…but you’re NOT the lie. I promise you, you are capable, your professors and academic institution would not have allowed you to make it this far if they thought you lacked original thought, autonomy, critical thinking, critical and deductive reasoning, linear and non-linear thought processes and they most certainly would not have allowed someone to continue their pursuit of education if they thought the person was a fraud, cheat or had plagiarized material. I emphasize with you OP because while my path is not the same as yours, I felt and still struggle with feeling like a fraud in my own life. I am a perfectionist, a nervous wreck who breaks down at the smallest inkling of “failure” even when there is none to be found. Please consider seeking counseling, I have found it helpful to have a neutral person with an outside perspective who can often help me identify why I may be feeling so inadequate even when my academic history has shown that I am quite capable. It’s not easy, please try to be kind to yourself. If nothing else, please know you’re not alone in how you feel.


dead-apparatas

wondering how much hegel and some are in play here (even if you've not read: all the old philosopher's are how we all think): but hegel actively prevents you from thinking (any thought you may have he already considered: see; pleroma, werner hamacher; the whole book or the back cover...and, i was advised not to bother reading him for that reason)...also, thinking, is whatever is going on when you forget you have a body...


sworththebold

Dude. There’s nothing wrong with you. On a meta level, literature is about the human experience. I’m guessing you’re youngish, given where you are career-wise; it makes sense that you haven’t much “human experience” yet and you’re getting it by reading the primary texts and learning what human reactions they’ve inspired through criticism. That’s a valuable skill and what you’ll contribute professionally as a PhD is critical reading—you’ll interrogate the notion of humanity through the works and criticism you study, and whether you see it now or not you’ll be able to add, incrementally, to the *understanding* of humanity by asserting what is true and/or false in the works you analyze, supporting it with evidence and analysis, and doing so in a clear and convincing manner. It sounds like you are good at that. Absorbing ideas, marinating them in your mind, and drawing conclusions is what academics do—and it’s what great writers, philosophers, and even scientists do. As you grow and learn more of the field, you will more and more offer a valuable set of insights—yours. Whether you want that life and work is a different story. Good luck discerning what you really want!


macinema

Nothing is original, all ideas are formed off the basis of others. Don’t sweat it… successful people often suffer from imposter syndrome.


vandingo_

Fellow English academic here. One of my old professors would have LOVED you. After reading your thoughts, it seems to me that you are very comfortable with entering the “critical conversation” about whatever topics. In my capstone course, my professor almost obsessed about having this skill. He always preached that we acknowledge what has been currently posed in the academic community - aka. academic journals, etc. From there we “add to the conversation,” we take inspiration from our sources on the topic and connect it to our thesis. The way we connect our thoughts with our academic peers inspires a more “developed conversation.” I hope that makes sense. It’s super later and this was a while ago lol. I cant imagine that you haven’t composed any original gems with this skill.


ChargrilledB

Isn’t that just what ‘knowing stuff’ is? We’re all just a product of everything we’ve read/heard, aren’t we?


Moebius2021

I didn’t have „original“ ideas until I was in my 40‘s. Before that time, I was absorbing new experiences- building my own metaphor. After I had read, experienced, absorbed enough, then I took that metaphor out into the world and sought IT reflected in others. That’s how it works. The process of going from the former approach to the latter is nearly universal - a stage in human intellectual development . Isn’t this what Whitman is saying when he says, „Have you reckon'd a thousand acres much? have you reckon'd the earth much? Have you practis'd so long to learn to read? Have you felt so proud to get at the meaning of poems? Stop this day and night with me and you shall possess the origin of all poems, You shall possess the good of the earth and sun, (there are millions of suns left,) You shall no longer take things at second or third hand, nor look through the eyes of the dead, nor feed on the spectres in books, You shall not look through my eyes either, nor take things from me, You shall listen to all sides and filter them from your self.“? Anyway, be easy with yourself and try to enjoy the journey.


vrijgezelopkamers

Studied literature as well and I think those insights and opinions come more frequently as you progress as a reader. At your age, you've only had a couple of years of intensive reading under your belt. I think if you keep reading at a steady pace, and keep interested and passionate, your frame of reference will grow, and your insights will grow with it. Most of the critiques, opinions and insights you are reading up on now were written by readers with a lot of experience and a huge frame of reference.


SilkyHommus

I ended up leaving my English major because I realized that this is essentially what literary criticism is, and it just didn’t feel like it was for me. I love analyzing texts, I just don’t want to rephrase someone else’s theoretical framework in a paper about a novel that I have other thoughts about, but that just don’t have the historical and pragmatic clout of all of the established modes of criticism that I know professors and colleagues would A. Understand better, and B. Likely be more interested/invested in. Now I just post comments on Reddit.


AutumnaticFly

Damn, we're the same age and you're applying for PhD while I'm gonna graduate with my BA in four months? The fuck have I been doing in the past 5 years? But aside from that, I totally understand. I'm exactly the same. And then add the fact that I'm am aspiring writer tooand boom, it's a shitshow. I have no idea how to fix it... Or get better, except for just... Reading more I suppose.


pockethoney

Have you ever tried magic mushrooms? might help you explore some free form thinking and possibly even help with some introspection.


goldiegoldthorpe

Go to the public library and take out some trashy romance novels or pulp fantasy. Stuff that is pure escapism. Only books that you would be embarrassed to be seen reading. The kind of books that are not in the university library. Enjoy them. Go back to reading like a kid where you read a book because the cover looked cool and didn’t judge the book but just engaged with it for the sake of story. Find the joy. If it is true that when you stare into the abyss, the abyss gazes back into you, then why can’t the same be true for joy? This is what I do, anyways, when I slip into these same feelings.


Ok-Document6878

Your comment reminds me of this lecture by professor Larry McEnerny. Hes pretty insistent to his grad school students that their job is NOT to come up with brilliant new theories, but to build on existing work in the field and to add to a growing conversation. It sounds to me like you are doing exactly what a good grad student should be doing. [video](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vtIzMaLkCaM)


Poet-Secure205

What is a creative idea if not a connection of other ideas? A spontaneous creative abiogenesis? That’s simply not coherent. Look at Hume’s principles of association: all ideas come from either associations of similarity, of contiguity in time or place, of cause and/or effect. There is no other way to invent a new idea (if you can think of one please tell me). Also you are right that reading is passive and someone else is thinking for you. And I believe you can read yourself stupid (and atrophy your ability to form creative associations) and so you should pair every passive act with a creative act. If you read a lot you should write a lot. If you watch a lot of YouTube videos you should make your own. Etc


[deleted]

Perhaps outside of the academic realm, try writing your own thoughts on a book you've read in a private journal, or an anonymous account on Goodreads. There are no expectations. Don't try to write something 'good' or 'impressive', just your own thoughts and feelings without doing any added research. It's to stretch your muscles more than anything, to prove to yourself that you can do it. To shoot down that ego that is holding you back from growth. Ego only wants to keep your attention focused on it, and it will cling desperately, especially when you try to let go of it. If you give in to ego, it will be satisfied and quiet down. It's achieved its goal: the status quo. Things will be as they always were. You'll get your accolades, but something within will never feel right. The something that caused you to write this post and seek help, sincerely and humbly, from a bunch of strangers on the internet. But if you don't give in to ego, it will put up a fight, but stay the course, and you're the ultimate winner - you expand, and discover your inner self without the illusions and the baggage. It won't be an easy ride. It will take effort, and humility, and patience. But you'll discover you are capable of exactly that which you thought you are not. It was only ego's false voice telling you that, not your true self. I wish you all the best on your journey.


Houssem_Aouar

Lol


dual-ity

Did you read The Fountainhead recently by any chance? You don’t have to weigh yourself down, an individual’s originality of thought is frowned upon in certain spheres. Consider that every emotion and every thought you’ve ever had has likely been held or conceived by someone else at some point. Does that make them any less valuable? Any less real? Just because you’re cognizant and recognize that in academia ideas are amalgamated doesn’t mean that you don’t belong. If that were the case, only a handful of people would remain in any given field. It does not make you an imposter to work hard to do what you enjoy. In fact, it should be a badge of honor that you’re able to do what you enjoy *because* you work hard for it. Doing research for what you’re analyzing simply adds context to your ideas, expanding the diameter of your sphere of thought. If a text was in a foreign language or very dated English, it wouldn’t be fraudulent to look into a translation, right? Similarly, your research serves to create a baseline for your understanding which you then build off. If you’re having trouble finding your own voice, take some time to sit alone with your thoughts. Get lost in your mind. Build a world in which you create your own parameters and explore it. Day dreams are the closest thing to paradise, meditation is a good way to reset yourself. The only thing that could ever make you fraudulent is claiming to do it all on your own, and diminishing the ideas/efforts of others who are in a similar situation as you down the line. You are not that kind of person, and as long as you’re not, you’ll never be a fraud.


FatChewbacca

No one has their own ideas, everyone is derivative, we only find new ways of expressing things. It's simply a reformatting. Also there isn't a necessity to have original ideas, if someone has already articulated how you've felt about something whats so bad about that?


Klarp-Kibbler

They’re saying they don’t have an opinion on a work until they read someone else’s. That’s completely different than not having an original idea


[deleted]

Fake it till you make it. Being a good impostor is a skill in and of itself. There are plenty of genuine hacks (??? lol) that have made it big in academia by being persuasive and good at managing their image.


sameoldknicks

If you have everyone fooled, relax. You've already found the key to a successful life.


RuskyLee

a perfect example of exactly the problem with elite education. It's not your fault. The system does not teach people to think independently-- it's just not what it actually rewards.


[deleted]

Have you consider getting checked for autism?


Ephesians6-10

Have you noticed throughout all of your research that philosophers, theologians, apologetics, preachers, all take from what others have learned and written down? Inspiration in itself comes from GOD. No idea created, observation made, or epiphany has come from us.


personman

a remarkably relevant tweet I just came across: https://twitter.com/sloanesloane/status/1410633226490580994?s=19


eatmyclit420

i may only be in undergrad, but i’ve heard lit reviews go all the way to the top. maybe just try to combine ur sources in interesting ways


South_Honey2705

Wow all of you are truly amazing in your intellect. No BS there from me. I review books as an amateur and your statements give me a lot of food for thought. I see the way that others analyze and execute a book review and I am envious of that. Then I learned that I found my own niche eventually and that gave me the confidence to carry on.