"Rebels With a Cause" (Appleman)

November 1st, 2012

I don't think I had ever heard of the literary critiquing tool- deconstruction- ever before in my entire English Language Arts experience (or atleast never specifically heard the process referred to as such). After reading the first 7 pages of Appleman's chapter on this method, I was EXTREMELY confused as to what she was referring to, and then became frightened: how I would ever manage to provide my future students with an adequate description or plan of action to complete this so-called "deconstruction" of a text!? Then I got to page 103. . . Introducting Deconstruction to Adolescents . . .
where she incorporated deconstruction references with pop-icon Michael Jackson and the DreamWorks Animated cartoon movie Shrek; immediately I was hooked, and onward I went!

I truly wish I had been taught how to properly deconstruct the novels, poems, plays, short stories, essays, etc. that I was exposed to throughout high school. Appleman points out that this is method is also relevant to the influences of the media, television shows, sports portrayals and advertisements that every single person confronts on a daily basis. We have to investigate each of these devices  (whether it be literary, entertainment-focused, or informative) at a textual, face-value level, and then further dissect them to reveal their biases and purposely hidden, or unknowingly ommitted, agendas (either political, steretypical, economical, traditional, etc.).

At the end of this chapter, Appleman stressed the cautions of informing students on the tool of deconstruction, as some previous students have claimed to call into question their entire personal framework of ideologies after working to reveal opposing binaries. As a future teacher, I see the value and validity in teaching students how to properly deconstruct a text, especially with only the intention of proving that although authors may work to strongly enforce a certain viewpoint or ideology, that by doing so they are also working equally as hard to conceal the opposition of their view(s).