Reflection on 2010 Conference Schedule

Hi Guys. As most of you probably heard in class, my first experience with Virginia Woolf was not one of the best. The stream of conscious style that she is so greatly known for really baffled me and made some of her novels a difficult read. Luckily, when given another opportunity, I grew to love the Virginia Woolf style of writing and I’m excited to discuss her works more fully over the course of the semester. I feel like there have to be more surprises in store from this woman. Although her work interests me a great deal, I am also hoping to discover a little more about Woolf’s life in general. Just from the very little information I happen to know, she seems to be a person who really expressed herself through written prose. I have always heard she had a variety of psychotic issues, which may or may not be true, but I am curious to see how that shines through in her writing. I would also like to explore whether or not her mental instability may account for some of her success as an author.

When reading over the schedule for the 2010 Virginia Woolf conference, I was first intrigued by the male to female ratio of those interested in Woolf scholarship. It was apparent that feminist ideals were strongly represented, as more women seemed to be presenting at the conference. Although many feminists probably embrace Virginia Woolf’s success, I am curious to explore the male population and its feelings toward Woolf. Is it normal for many presenters to be female or did this conference just happen to include many female critics? This is one trend I am hoping will reveal itself more fully through our course of Woolf studies. I also noticed the same works being discussed very frequently. Because I have read over our syllabus I was familiar with all the titles I encountered and I am curious as to why these seem to be the most popular Virginia Woolf works. Are they the most interesting, do they contain the most scholarly information, or are they simply some of the only manuscripts we have? I assume I am just intrigued as to why the same novels appeared on the conference list numerous times.

Since I am also enrolled in a Literary Criticism course this semester, the paper entitled A Chinese Interpretation of “ The Death of the Moth” really captured my attention. As an introduction to the Literary Criticism, I discovered that one’s critic of a certain work is influenced by their background and past experiences. I think this author should be praised for taking the initiative to recognize that portion of criticism. To publish a paper with such a personal touch is a bold statement; therefore, this paper would probably be one I would most enjoy reading. Incorporating one’s own culture into literature could give readers a completely new look from which to analyze a work so I’m sure Qinghong Wu’s work caught the attention of many conference goers.

Animal imagery also seemed to be a noticeable trend in discussion at this particular Woolf conference. The title A Woolf in Hare’s Clothing was actually one of the catchier of the entire bunch. The papers that discussed more than one of Woolf’s novels also intrigued me. It is an ambitious task to analyze two separate pieces of literature so an in-depth study of two Woolf’s novels would be a highly interesting paper to study. Overall, I thought many of the presentations seemed like a worthwhile depiction and representation of the greatness that Virginia Woolf embodies.