Purpose This paper aims to draw from work in the field of English that questions the “limits of critique” (Felski, 2015) in order to consider the limits of critical literacy approaches to literature instruction. The study focuses on the relational and affective demands that resistant reading places on readers and texts. Design/methodology/approach Drawing from post-critical (Felski, 2015) and surface (Best and Marcus, 2009) reading practices in the field of English, the authors perform analyses of two recent articles that illustrate critical literacy approaches to literature instruction, drawing attention to the ways the resistant reading practices outlined in each article reflect Felski’s description of critique. Findings The authors’ readings of two frameworks of critical literacy approaches to literature instruction produce two key findings: first, in emphasizing resistant readings, critical literacy asks readers to take up a detective-like orientation to literature, treating texts as suspects; second, resistant reading practices promote a specific set of affective orientations toward a text, asking readers to cultivate skepticism and vigilance. Originality/value While the authors do not dismiss the importance of critical literacy approaches to literature instruction, the study makes room for other relational and affective orientations to literature, especially those that might encourage readers to listen to – and be surprised by – a text. By describing critical literacy through the lens of Felski’s work on critique, the authors aim to open up new possibilities for surprising encounters with literature.

Toronto and Region was designated a Great Lakes Area of Concern in 1987 due to significant degradation of environmental quality and impaired beneficial uses, including Degradation of Aesthetics. Historically overflows of combined sewers, direct discharge of poorly treated industrial wastewater, contaminated storm water, and litter contributed to excessive floating debris, odour and unnatural turbidity along parts of the waterfront and in some sections of Area of Concern watersheds. Despite the perception of poor aesthetic quality of these waters, little to no monitoring was carried out to assess the Degradation of Aesthetics Beneficial Use Impairment due to the challenge of reporting aesthetics in a quantifiable, unbiased manner. Here we describe the qualitative monitoring program implemented in the Toronto region to assess the aesthetic condition of local watersheds. An Aesthetic Quality Index developed for use by Areas of Concern was adapted by taking advantage of existing monitoring programs and local expertise. Results of the assessment indicate that no persistent objectionable deposit, unnatural colour or turbidity, or unnatural odour was present in the Toronto region during the period of study.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract