Modernism

After the last class of the semester, everyone burst into applause. I really thought I was hallucinating. Although Vandenberg is obviously very intelligent and knows what she's talking about, she simply repeats the same theories and buzzwords the entire semester. I heard more about sperm in this class than in my high school Health class--nearly everything is a phallic symbol to this woman, regardless of the author's intent or the existence of other perfectly valid interpretations. Also, she went on at length about outside literary/psychological texts and expected everyone to have read them--I don't understand why she didn't just assign the texts if she wanted to discuss them. I was really disappointed, especially since I loved what we were reading and her approach prevented me from enjoying it. I'm an English major because I enjoy interacting with literature, and there was none of that in this course. There was tons of pretentious theoretical discussion though, so if you like that you should definitely take a class with her.

This is probably not the class to take if you've read Ellmann on Joyce more than Portrait of the Artist, nor if you dig talking about what the articles in the title really mean. It's also probably not for complete Modernism novices and English majors/GS students etc. who really jst need some 20th C. lit and don't like dicking around with crazy impenetrable stuff, nor for people who only like Woolf and just want an excuse to concentrate on her, nor for people with very rigid, fixed ideas about the interpretation of the readings, because all of the latter will be disappointed. Modernism is probably the most fun, thought-provoking, and amusing-anecdote-generating class I've taken, though, and its success or failure as an enjoyable experience lies as much with the professor as with the material. Margaret Vandenburg is, basically, about as colourful as a professor can get without veering into actual eccentricity. Her Well-of-Loneliness-informed novel tells a story of lesbian sexual awakening in '20s Paris expat society, and, at least if you've any familiarity with '80s feminist culture, that won't surprise you once you see her: she tends towards loose suit jackets or button-down short-sleeved shirts, and she has this pair of neat black Docs she wears often. She's extremely demonstrative in this very dry way, and tends to spend class leaning or curled around her pulpit-like podium-
desk. The class seems to generally run to a few dozen in the single hottest room on either campus; the size is prohibitive to seminar-style discussion if you're one of those people who doesn't feel the need to raise their hand every time they get an epiphany or have a question, (and if those people irritate and offend your sensibilities in general, feel free to take this review with a grain of salt, or several); it's mostly La Vandenburg ranting, with interjections/digressions from students at random intervals, which is both oddly personal and yet as pulpit-y as a lecture class- a setup actually ideal for Vandenburg's purpose: to get into your head and implant her ideas about androgyny, style, and the Transcendental Signifier into your head (and if that last one isn't obvious, either rush to your academic advisor now or don't even bother looking at this class, I don't know which).
Actually, in all seriousness, for someone with such pronounced ideas about their subject matter, Vandenburg is surprisingly willing to allow one their own opinion; while she can be dismissive about questions, she often defers to a questioner's subjective interpretation; whether this has always been the case, I don't know. She even asks for feedback sometimes, and likes hearing what the class thinks of the reading, unless it's the often-true 'I don't get it'. Her Freud/Kristeva/Saussure-related babble isn't as unfounded as it seems on second glance- she cites, even- and, no matter what one thinks of its validity, it's incredibly amusing- she knows how ridiculous she sounds sometimes, but once one has gotten used to her interpretation, the reading will start to seem ridiculously obvious, too, and if you can get past the transgressive kicks of talking about penis to the really subversive fun of anticipating what she would say before she says it, you'll be made, both in enjoyment of the class and ability to use her strategies.
I'll admit that there are a lot of things about this class that would irk me, were I of such a mindset, and that many of the reviewers aren't too far off in their negative assessments. I still wouldn't trade this one for any other for the sheer amount of really interesting ideas that've collected around some familiar texts since I've been in the class, and the sheer comedic value of it has been enough to make far more fallacy and impenetrability worthwhile for me. So, in other words, weigh this one carefully.

I loved this class! I am not an English major, and was originally just taking this for the lit. requirement, but I am so happy I did! It's definitely not easy, but I loved the readings and her engaging lectures. There was a handful of people in the class who I figured were here "followers", but they weren't as irritating as I had heard. She's incredibly approachable, and extremely helpful with the papers during office hours. I cannot say enough wonderful things about her! Make sure to take at least one class with MV before you graduate.

I found Vandenburg tedious and inarticulate. She constantly says "you know" to explain her points, but the problem is that I never felt as if I did know what she was talking about. Though others have a more positive view on their experience, almost everyone feels slightly confused and overwhelmed, and this seems to me to be the WORST way to teach a class. I appreciate the syllabus that I was exposed to, and what little I gleaned from the class, but I did not have a good time of it. She lets other students talk as much as they want, which is great if you are feeling excited about a work, but awful for everyone else who sits through you rambling on and rephrasing Prof. V. I think if she had allowed only limited discussion and lectured more, the class would have improved. Also, she does a great job of bringing in additional sources and references, but I often didn't understand how they related and wished we had focused more on the texts in front of us.

I am not as obsessed with Professor Vandenburg as some other students, but I can see why they are and I loved her class. This was definitely one of the most challenging classes I have taken at Columbia, but only because I did all of the work--I think some of the other reviewers say it was easy because Professor Vandenburg doesn't check up on you or your work, so you really have to do a lot of it independently. And I don't think it was an easy A at all (I worked VERY VERY hard for an A). That said, the class is very rewarding and she is always ALWAYS willing to meet with students outside of class (and I would recommend it to boost your class participation grade--it's always better if she knows your name--and she does try to learn everyone's name). As a survey course, I would very much recommend this class.

Sometimes it really pisses me off when I see negative reviews of Professors I admire, but this time I just think it's FUNNY--how can anyone think Vandenburg "rules over class with an iron fist?" The woman is the personification of chill, intelligence, and sincerity. Yes, she conducts discussions along the lines of her reading of the material, but to accuse her of tyrranical teaching is beyond absurd, like I said before--hilarious. I think if there is one Professor I've had at Barnard or Columbia who had zero ego and every right to have a huge one, it is Vandenburg. That said: She will not give you an easy A. She will treat you like a person. She will make you want to impress her by virtue of her knowledge of and passion for English. She will not treat you differently as a human if she doesn't like your work. A note on the class itself--these texts are heavy stuff, so really only take the class if you want to dig dig dig. And go to office hours--you won't want to leave, Vandenburg is so personable and humurous.

As an English major, the class still seemed pretty daunting. Even though I was scared the first week too, the readings are amazing. Even if you may not get into it at first, Vandenburg's lectures bring new insight to them and even if many students are talkative in class-they bring a lot of interesting insight to the reading as well. Class was enjoyable, because it was lively-most in part due to the class' lively discussion and the professor's amazing lectures.
Grading on the first paper was done by a reader. The final paper is read by Professor Vandenburg herself [advice: don't wait till last minute to do this paper] The finals-ids and an essay

As nearly all the other reviwers say, Vandenburg is amazing. She's incredibly knowledgable, modest, and very good natured, both one-on-one and in class. This class is mostly full of English majors- if not all English majors than people who could or should be. I myself, not English-major type, freaked out the first week- This is way over my head! I'm gonna fail!- but it was fine. Sure, there are the VERY vocal few who spout out thier extensive knowledge of other modernist works and basically anything else ever written ( Vandenburg herself cites many other books in lectures- but you don't need to have read them), but, as in any other class, just ignore these people, and you'll be fine. The material ranges from great to awful (for the non-English major. Those talkative few LOVE everything). Likewise, the class is either awfully boring if you didn't like the reading, or SO amazing if you did. I'd say all in all, this class is great. You may be subject to fits of passion/rage, but any class that is as good as the good parts of this one is well worth it.

I will admit it: I was in the Vandenburg Cult (but not in the annoying, speaking all the time and going to her office hours to have inane discussions) way. But, when I was a sophomore, I believed the hype, loved the modern novel, thought Vandenburg was brilliant. And then I grew up, and realized, hey, we're just misreading a whole lot of critical theory and hearing Vandenburg fondly expound ad nauseum on HER very narrow view of the Moderns--
and if you have different opinions? Well, you're in Camp Vandenburg, so, as said in a prior review, leave original thought at the door and be prepared to listen to lots of sophomores who raise their hands REALLY high parrot back the gospel according to Professor V--not just in this class, but in ALLLLLL English classes at Barnard--"oh, I haven't read Freud, but Vandenburg says . . ." was actually a comment I once heard in an upper-class English SEMINAR.

But, digression aside, Vandenburg is dangerous because she teaches baby-
college thinking, while making people think that a) they're thinking really hard and are so, so smart or b) because they have original thoughts, are thinking differently or are engaging intertextually, that they don't understand, that they don't get it. Vandenburg subtly runs the class with an iron fist, and this shoddy thinking seems to permeate the English department at Barnard. The class discussions are RIDICULOUS (and so regenerative--the same ubiquitous four to five people waving their hands wildly), the novels fabulous. But, remember that the idyllic meadow of novels is filled with some poisonous snakes who will at the very least make you feel nauseous.

Bitter? A bit. Not grade wise (I got an A), but education wise . . . this class praised me and others for shoddy, simplistic thinking which just isn't fair!

Vandenburg is extremely knowledgable in many areas of literature and able to explain many esoteric texts, easily bringing out nuances in the works. Although the class is run as a lecture, she welcomes questions and discussion and has the ability to never make anyone's comments seem stupid.

I recommend staying on top of the reading (all of the works are interesting) and taking notes in class. I also recommend NOT taking this class as a first-year. I did that, and although it was easy to stay on top of the reading and the lectures, it was obvious that my writing was well below par and lacking in ways that everyone else in the class (mostly seniors and juniors) did not have problems with.

Overall: very interesting and fun because of Vandenburg's intellect and witticisms. definitely my favorite class this semester.

i really like professor vandenburg, but the class was not so likeable. some of the readings were great, while others were impossible to understand or boring. she sometimes assumes that her students know a lot about other religious, mythological, or literary works not read in class, which can make the class a little overwhelming.

She's the best. Once you take a class and if you "get it" you join the Vandenburg Cult...i.e. voluntarily attending office hours and waiting in line with other "admirers"

All too often during Vandenburg's lectures---which all too often degenerated into maddeningly idiotic (and maddeningly unchecked) pontifications by students---I found myself shrieking inside my head, "I AM NOT PAYING THREE GRAND A CLASS SO THAT I CAN SPEND THREE HOURS A WEEK RELIVING A HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH CLASS." Because, in too many ways, that's what Vandenburg's class was.

Sure, Vandenburg cites plenty of Classical and poststructuralist references, offering links to other thinkers and writers--but too often, the links offered seem either arbitrary or obvious (more often the latter; how many times do the names of Freud, Jung, and Lacan really need to be cited a la some Modernist sign of the Cross?). Sure, she has a good sense of facilitating discussion--but too often, she lets students rattle off countless inane questions and comments.

An important thing to note about Vandenburg's Modernism class is that at first it sounds damn promising: she's a lively but approachable lecturer, she asks and answers questions, and she tries to bridge disciplines. But after attending more than a few classes, you'll realize how damn reductive her whole process is. For the most part, the class is an extensive list of buzz words bandied about in a dangerously general fashion. The same names, sooner or later, will crop up in just about every class, as will general mention of gender, tradition, and duality.

That's all well and good, yes, but after a point, Vandenburg doesn't really go anywhere with them. She makes general, digestible, and really very obvious assertions by way of grossly reductive drawings on the blackboard: "light" and "good" go under "presence," "dark" and "bad" under "absence," etc. It's sheer high school-level simplification that might prove useful were Vandenburg to use it to prove some larger point---but unfortunately, those larger points rarely come along. Instead, you're left with a series of general ideas about the major players of High Modernism that in no way do their respective works justice and that leave you with juvenile assignments. (For instance, paper assignments that are far too far-reaching to fit into the short page-lengths allotted to them. Oh, and the topic for the essay on the final: "What is Modernism?" Ha.) Not only that, but I got the distinct impression that Vandenburg -wanted- things that way. When I went in to her office hours to discuss a possible topic I'd come up with for my research paper, she immediately discouraged me, telling me it would be too difficult and suggesting I try a safer topic. Uh, since when are professors supposed to encourage students NOT to take intellectual risks?

If you want to go in-depth in Modernist novels at all and not spend an entire class period leaping from generalizing statements about a work/author (i.e., "Woolf's writing is cubistic! Joyce likes epiphany!") to ineffectual nitpicking ("look, it's another example of Eliot's obsession with tradition!"), then Vandenburg's Modernism is not the class to take. If you're totally new to Modernism, though, and just want a general overview, the class could be beneficial.

Do not graduate without taking this class. This class is what I thought all of college would be like. The reading list is excellent, but beyond that, MV illuminates the works with a combination of depth and wit, constantly focused on engaging the class.

Vandenburg is an intense teacher. Class has a great reading list and classtime itself is well structured. Vandenburg interacts often with students, and seems to genuinely respect their opinions. But, she does assume A LOT of background on the topic. The first couple of lectures were even very confusing at times. Also, paper topics are VERY open, which can make them even more difficult. Overall I would recommend the class to upperclassmen who are interested in learning a precise outlook on Modernism that may contrast with other interpretations of the subject.

This class, and this professor, epitomized what I always imagined my college experience to be. As a first-semester freshman, my first day of class (and many subsequent days, as well) were quite intimidating, but the extra effort was 100% worthwhile. The syllabus is incredible and Professor Vandenburg is absolutely brilliant, not to mention approachable, helpful and funny. Although the class has about 60 people she manages to run it as a seminar, appreciative of every contribution. Entirely in awe of her, I found myself--and got the impression that others did the same--making sure that my comments were well thought-out and had evidence to back them. Because the majority of students seemed to make the same effort, the class level was very high and I appreciated others' comments almost as much as Prof. Vandenburg's explanations. Something I particularly liked about her is the way in which she is always supportive of a student's contribution to the discussion. Not once throughout the semester did I see her make anyone feel at all uncomfortable or unintelligent. Even if a student said something blatantly incorrect, she managed to manipulate it in a supportive manner to correct the statement without acknowledging the fact that they had made a mistake. This class was absolutely amazing; I found myself raving about it to all my friends, family members and even past teachers. If you enjoy English and are willing to work hard, you will emerge a better person for it.

Could be the best professor I have had in my Columbia career. I have only a few points on which I differ from most of the other postings. I don't think it's actually necessary to be as well versed in modern literature as others would contend. I didn't get the impression that Prof. Vandenburg expects you to know that stuff when she references it, rather she admits that it's impossible to cover all of modern literature in one class and frequently references other authors not on the syllabus as avenues for further research or reading. Also, if you think you are an expert on modernism and modern thought, think again. Vandenburg takes no bullshit, so if you name drop in class, make sure you know what you're talking about. That said, she is incredibly approachable and encourages contributions from all of the class, not just the typical brown-nosers or over-enthusiasts. (a small confession: I am one of these people. Among other things, Vandenburg taught me to enter into dialogue with other students in class, listen critically, and be critical of my own contributions). Because of her frequent integration of writings from other disciplines in her lectures, both scholarly and pop cultural, I had not only an example of how to write a solid research paper, but also the beginnings of a bibliography.
Be prepared for some unorthodox views about literature, the classroom, and modernism, including critiques of over-simplified feminist readings of works by Hemingway and D.H. Lawrence. Professor Vandenburg loves the authors on the syllabus, and after her inspiring class, you will too.

Truly one of the best professors I have had. She completely cares, and while at first you find her insights to be overdetermined, over the course of the semester, you see that what she says about modernism is correct, interesting and true. She provides you with a lens and a languagge with which to talk about modernism in literature and in the world, and also a way to be critical of it. I love her and she has really moved me.