Those aren't discourses, they're pathologies. Insofar as painting the corpus of children's literature in different shades of black and furthering the careers of obfuscators and charlatans, they're perfectly useful. It does not occur to the purveyors of this sort of intellectual mishmash that they themselves will be the subject of similar critical studies some years hence when the principal question will be how anyone could have been so deluded as to think that they were accomplishing anything by it.
This sort of abuse is to the study of literature what an autopsy is to the study of a living body. "He who breaks something in order to understand it has left the path of wisdom."
An English class at university required a reading of "Balloon Man"; the TA was adamant that the short story was really about a child molester, not a well-loved old man selling balloons to kids. My view was that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and my report was not well received, as I discovered the author had committed suicide, and mentioned that in my report. The goofball about blew a gasket "You've been doing outside research!!" etc. etc. That's not allowed, apparently. What was the point of the exercise? In any case, the people running the universities outside the rational sciences are just beyond sick.