# 3

In the readings ofLiteracy Theory Eagelton attemptsto touch basis on the complexed language of conscious and non-conscious social class norms. Eagelton states, " The important point to grasp here is that language is not a simple naming process". Fish too shared part in this theory that we fall preyto letting others dictate what a social norm means to us. For example, Fish says,"Thus while it is true to say that we create poetry (and assignments and lists), we create it through interpretive strategies that are finally not our own but have their source in a publicly available system of intelligibility".

In both of the readings one of Eagelton and the other of Fish both pick a part the genre of what is the social norms of life expectancies.

The interaction in Fish' classroom was amazing for the simple fact that a simple list was made out to be an array of things. Fish had two classes one being a Linguistics and Literary class and the other a English religious poetry class. The fist class was given an assignment which was a list of names and the second class walked in while the assignment was still on the board. The second class than began to pick a way at the simple list. One of the things that was interesting while the class was coming up with the meaning of the poem as well as where it derived from was that it had to be biblical but only because of the name usage along with a couple other factors. Truthfully if I had seen the same list I would've thought it to be just a simple list.

A social expectation can usually always be found in a group setting especially at a concert. For example, If a performer at a concert tells you to throw your hands in the air everyone would just do it because it would almost be considered a norm in a concert setting. If while walking home from that same concert in the middle of the night someone screams throw your hands up you would think your being robbed. Why couldn't have been that they to just came from the same concert.