(Plot+Characters)*Voice^2=Literature?

[Lindolirian]

Speaking of the definitions of literature, there is something that has been growing on me for some time. My AP English 12 teacher is somewhat of a mathemetician when it comes to literature and it really bugs me. For her, a good story comes from the Five Act Formula (she doesn't really call it this) with an exposition, rising action, climax, falling action, and resolution. Add a protagonist, conflict, and antagonist, a few side characters (better if it includes a pretty woman), throw in a pinch of what my teacher likes to call "narrative voice" which includes tone, diction, syntax, and word choice. Foreshadowing and flashbacks give it some zest, too. And voila! Without even trying, you have plugged and chugged a New York bestseller! Funny, I had always considered writing to be an art rather than a algebra formula.
I of course realize all of those factors are rather necessary to a story and it would be unintelligible without them, but the way that she teaches my peers and me to "plug and chug" (as my pre-calc teacher says when it comes to formulas) really bothers my sense of literature and what it could become if this is really to be believed and followed to the very word.
Now as for classifying books as "epics" or whatnot, (clickey) it's perfectly understandable to analyze the content of them once they are written, but to look for the final product before you begin is not something most (good)writers do. Look at Tolkien. "In a hole in the ground, there lived a hobbit." We all know he had no idea where that was going and one look at the Histories of Middle Earth will dispell any doubt.
My point is really to ask you whether or not you notice this in some writers and whether or not it affects how much you enjoy reading their works. And also to probe for other unfortunate students who have teachers like mine...those who could really use a good lesson from the greats who frequent these misty graves.