> English ... didn’t fall because it lost funding or because business leaders promoted STEM fields. It fell because the dominant schools of thought stopped speaking about the truth of literature.
I've wanted to know if this was true myself. The fact is that we can't know how it would have turned out.
I am completely in agreement with the author's thesis: "When theory killed literary truth, it doomed the discipline." But, simultaneous to English departments making themselves irrelevant, there were major changes in the global economy that were also making STEM degrees more valuable. It's hard to believe that an English degree would be worth as much as it was in the 1960s if Derrida et al. hadn't taken over, in any case, though I do genuinely think the world would be better off.
I've wanted to know if this was true myself. The fact is that we can't know how it would have turned out.
I am completely in agreement with the author's thesis: "When theory killed literary truth, it doomed the discipline." But, simultaneous to English departments making themselves irrelevant, there were major changes in the global economy that were also making STEM degrees more valuable. It's hard to believe that an English degree would be worth as much as it was in the 1960s if Derrida et al. hadn't taken over, in any case, though I do genuinely think the world would be better off.