Assignments
367.01 Autumn 1998
367.01 Winter 1999
367.01 Spring 1999
367.02 Autumn 1999
367.02 Winter 2000
367.02 Autumn 2000
367.02 Spring 2001
367.01 What Is Postmodernism?
poststructuralism: came before postmodernism, now subset of it
- grew out of existentialism and structuralism
- existentialism rejected ideas of philosophy based upon thinking and metaphysics;
it's paramount credo: there are no absolute essences; existentialists focus
upon daily experiences in life
- structuralism theorized that there was no single meaning to life/reality,
but there are still structures/systems which illuminate/undergird life/reality
- poststructuralism rejects idea that there are uniform, objective structures
to reality
- meaning and Truth are suspected, questioned, and debunked as situated and
contigent;
- believes instead that structures, centers, and origins are merely assumed
intellectual concepts, constructs, fictions engineered by us so we can understand
reality
- therefore, believes in and advocates free play within a heterogeneous, multiplistic,
and pluralistic bag of theories and identities
- 3 main thinkers
- Derrida and deconstruction (against logocentrism, metaphysics, positivism)
- Foucault (discourse and power relations creates us),
- Lacan and psyhoanalysis (our psyche is created in conflictive relationship
with the Other, the Symbolic Order)
- 2 responses to loss of center:
- sad nostalgia and guilt for destruction of center (perhaps invoking a
reactionary absolutism and fundamentalism)
- accept it and feel liberated and free from the need to make sense
postmodernism: 2 ways to think about
- in terms of global society:
- while modernity (Industrial Revolution to 1945) was a technical age with
few centers of power (USSR/USA) that operated according to the rationalistic,
scientific model,
- postmodernity is (1945-present) is an information age which therefore
engages multiculturalism and a narrative model
- in terms of philosophy, or more loosely, worldview
- the self and existence is fragmented and constructed (as product of surrounding
culture[s] and their discourses); not necessarily unified or cohesive
- no grand theory like Marxism or capitalism; rather plethora of little
stories
- people should be very connected to their day-to-day living experiences
- centers of power can be (are) allover the place
- because can't emphasize community (due to multiculturalism), instead engage
coalitions (though fluctuating, unstable) where they can be forged
the bottom line
- in poststructuralism and postmodernism, identity is believed to be
socially constructed by culture and its discourse practices
- the thematic purpose of this class: determining means of agency in the different
societies that construct us such that we're not merely passive vessels
- the purpose of writing in this class: exploring (analyzing, evaluating)
the multiple realities in which we exist such that we can understand and seize
some control over our identities, our lives
367.02 Strategies for Reading and Writing about Literature
As you can see, this class demands a bit of reading, though more primary than
secondary sources. However, the reading does serve an important purpose—fodder
for you to master in your own thinking and writing about literature: We'll only
not discuss ways to analyze the literature that we read (Griffith's Writing
Essays about Literature should prove invaluable) but also practice how to
articulate our ideas in critical writing. To accomplish the latter, we'll
examine others' interpretations of some of the texts we read in the Norton critical
editions. Further, we'll learn to utilize others' critical writing to
advance our own thinking about texts. Thus, my philosophy of reading and
writing supposes a fundamental symbiosis between the two activities. The
writing assignments are designed to build upon one another—essay quizzes and
response papers to literature and criticism require less compositional polish
but provide practice in determining and learning a reading selection’s themes
or theses, respectively. The explanatory paper requires development—both
in terms of composition and ideas—of your reaction and understanding of one
or two primary readings. This paper should show that you not only know
the reading inside and out, upside and down, but can clearly articulate that
interpretive analysis. The annotated bibliography provides practice in
1) reading quickly through scholarly articles for main points and 2) summarizing
those main points as briefly as possible. Finally, in the research paper,
you will be able to hone your skills in synthesizing several scholarly readings
(already written about in the annotated bibliography) and, more importantly,
using those sources to advance your own argument, your own response to a work
of literature.
- Effective Reading Strategies
- Preview [note:
primarily for critical writing]
- Determine how much and of what variety of mental effort the selection will
take on your part in order that you can prepare yourself for the experience, i.e.,
so that you can put yourself in the appropriate frame of mind.
- Ask yourself: Is the subject matter and/or style of writing new to you?
difficult? interesting?
- Gauge how much time you’ll need to spend with the material so you can find
a time
to pursue it without interruption.
- Read Actively
- For
Literature
- For Criticism
- Read for the piece’s argument: note the selection’s thesis and each of
its main points and lines of support.
- For
Both
- Note significant passages—those epiphanic sentences or sections in which
the selection is most clear, the author brings it all together, or the piece
really speaks to you.
- You’ll definitely want to read with a pen in hand—mark up the text with
opinions, evaluations, and questions.
- Review and/or
Reread
- For
Literature
- Think about how you feel toward the work, about how the work makes you
feel.
- Articulate your primary response to the work.
- Next, transform that emotional response into a position regarding what
the piece's themes are and select passages which prove that position.
- For Criticism
- Tell yourself what the overall thesis of the selection is.
- If you can’t do that off the top of your head, you’ll want to flip through
your annotations to find it, then recopy it in your own words either in a notebook or at the beginning or end of the piece.
- For
Both
- If the selection is to be read for a class, you’ll also want to memorize
and/or
copy for easy recall the passages that contain the thesis or themes.
You’ll
want to reread the material if you’re not comfortable articulating your
understanding of it.
- Guidelines for Writing Effective Position
or Response Papers
- Summarize, Analyze,
Criticize
- Point out the selection’s themes (for literature) or main ideas
(for criticism), take apart its plot/structure (literature) or argumentative development
(criticism), and judge its themes (lit) or theses (crit) based upon other
readings and ideas engaged in the course.
- Appreciate and Interrogate
- At some point, get into the author’s mind set or world view; present her
take on life and ideas uncritically and unquestioningly.
- At some other point, don’t take what the author says for granted; pose
questions and argue with the text’s premises and claims.
- A Rough Organizational
Frame
- Spend 1/3 of your examination explaining and situating the reading’s theme,
thesis, main idea, or issue; 1/3 illustrating its lines of argument and support
(crit) or plot, characterization, symbology (lit) by quoting one or two of its most
important
passages; and 1/3 giving your own take on the subject matter and broaching
issue questions for class discussion.
- III. Guidelines for Writing Effective Essay
Examinations or Quizzes
- Anticipate
- Imagine the questions you’ll be asked as you read and review the material.
- Pay special attention to the thesis and main supporting claims and evidence.
- Similarly, keep a few signicant passages in mind as you prepare for the examination.
- Get to know the instructor’s expectations: What kind of questions does
she tend to ask?
- How thoroughly does she expect you to know the material?
- Practice
- If possible (depending on how well you know your instructor’s expectations),
practice composing your response beforehand.
- Or prepare and memorize an outline of the material’s main points.
Once you’ve got the ideas down, you can work them into essay format as you take the test.
- Composition
- Instructors don’t expect in-class essay tests to be polished. Nor,
generally, do they expect nitty gritty details. Be certain to hit the high points of
the reading, to
articulate its argument, and to present as many ideas as possible in the
time
allowed. Show what you know.
Reading Scholarly Criticism
As preparation for the annotated bibliography and research paper, we'll read
and discuss scholarly articles on some of the authors and novels we're reading
in class. You are only responsible for reading the article that you're assigned.
All articles are in books reserved at the Main Library. IMPORTANT:
Do not ask the reserve librarian to look for the article; ask her to retrieve
the book it comes from. Also, it would be most helpful to print this sheet
for the librarian.
Criticsm on Kate Chopin's The Awakening
- note: the following articles are available in our Norton Critical Edition
textbook
- Ammons, Elizabeth. [Women of Color in The Awakening]
- Arms, George. [Contrasting Forces in the Novel]
- Arnavon, Cyrille. [An American Madame Bovary]
- Chametzky, Jules. [Edna and the "Woman Question]
- Eble, Kenneth. [A Forgotton Novel]
- Gilbert, Sandra M. [The Second Coming of Aphrodite]
- Leary, Lewis. [Kate Chopin and Walt Whitman]
- May, John R. "Local Color in The Awakening"
- Pollard, Percival. [The Unlikely Awakening of a Married Woman]
- Rankin, Daniel S. [Influences Upon the Novel]
- Ringe, Donald A. [Romantic Imagery]
- Seyersted, Per. [Kate Chopin and the American Realists]
- Showalter, Elaine. [Chopin and American Women Writers]
- Spangler, George M. [The Ending of the Novel]
- Sullivan, Ruth and Stewart Smith. [Narrative Stance]
- Treichler, Paula A. [Language and Ambiguity]
- Wolff, Cynthia Griffin. [Thanatos and Eros]
Criticism on Adrienne Rich's poetry
- note: the following articles are available in our Norton Critical Edition
textbook
- Auden, W. H. Foreword to A Change of World
- Ashbery, John. "Tradition and Talent"
- Atwood, Margaret. Review of Diving into the Wreck
- Gelpi, Albert. "Adrienne Rich: The Poetics of Change"
- McDaniel, Judith. "'Reconstituting the World': The Poetry and Vision
of Adrienne Rich"
- Oktenberg, Adrian. "'Disloyal to Civilization': The Twenty-One Love
Poems of Adrienne Rich"
- Spiegelman, Willard. "'Driving to the Limits of the City of Words':
The Poetry of Adrienne Rich"
- Vendler, Helen. "Ghostlier Demarcations, Keener Sounds"
Criticism on The X-Files
- note: the following articles are available in our course packet
- Parks, Lisa. "Special Agent or Monstrosity: Finding the Feminine in The X-Files." "Deny All Knowledge": Reading The
X-Files. Eds. David Lavery, Angela Hague, and Marla Cartwright. Syracuse:
Syracuse UP, 1996. 121-34.
- Wilcox, Rhonda and J. P. Williams. "'What Do You Think?': The X-Files,
Liminality, and Gender Pleasure." "Deny All Knowledge":
Reading The X-Files. Eds. David Lavery, Angela Hague, and Marla Cartwright.
Syracuse: Syracuse UP, 1996. 99-120.
Criticsm on Kate Chopin's The Awakening
- note: the following articles are available in our Norton Critical Edition
textbook
- Ammons, Elizabeth. [Women of Color in The Awakening]
- Arms, George. [Contrasting Forces in the Novel]
- Arnavon, Cyrille. [An American Madame Bovary]
- Chametzky, Jules. [Edna and the "Woman Question]
- Eble, Kenneth. [A Forgotton Novel]
- Gilbert, Sandra M. [The Second Coming of Aphrodite]
- Leary, Lewis. [Kate Chopin and Walt Whitman]
- May, John R. "Local Color in The Awakening"
- Pollard, Percival. [The Unlikely Awakening of a Married Woman]
- Rankin, Daniel S. [Influences Upon the Novel]
- Ringe, Donald A. [Romantic Imagery]
- Seyersted, Per. [Kate Chopin and the American Realists]
- Showalter, Elaine. [Chopin and American Women Writers]
- Spangler, George M. [The Ending of the Novel]
- Sullivan, Ruth and Stewart Smith. [Narrative Stance]
- Treichler, Paula A. [Language and Ambiguity]
- Wolff, Cynthia Griffin. [Thanatos and Eros]
Criticism on Adrienne Rich's poetry
- note: the following articles are available in our Norton Critical Edition
textbook
- Auden, W. H. Foreword to A Change of World
- Ashbery, John. "Tradition and Talent"
- Atwood, Margaret. Review of Diving into the Wreck
- Gelpi, Albert. "Adrienne Rich: The Poetics of Change"
- McDaniel, Judith. "'Reconstituting the World': The Poetry and Vision
of Adrienne Rich"
- Oktenberg, Adrian. "'Disloyal to Civilization': The Twenty-One Love
Poems of Adrienne Rich"
- Spiegelman, Willard. "'Driving to the Limits of the City of Words':
The Poetry of Adrienne Rich"
- Vendler, Helen. "Ghostlier Demarcations, Keener Sounds"
Criticism on Lillian Hellman's The Children's Hour
- Armato, Philip M. "'Good and Evil' in Lillian Hellman's The Children's
Hour." Educational Theatre Journal 25 (1973): 443-7. Rpt.
in Critical Essays on Lillian Hellman. Ed. Mark W. Estrin. Boston:
Hall, 1989. 73-8.
- Falk, Doris V. "The Children's Hour and Broadway, 1934." Lillian Hellman. New York: Ungar, 1978. 35-45.
- Lederer, Katherine. "The Plays of the 1930s." Lillian Hellman.
Boston: Twayne, 1979. 21-32.
- Sievers, W. David. "Freudian Fraternity of the Thirties." Freud
on Broadway: A History of Psychoanalysis and the American Drama. 1955.
New York: Cooper Square, 1970. 279-89.
Criticism on The X-Files
- note: the following articles are available in our course packet
- Parks, Lisa. "Special Agent or Monstrosity: Finding the Feminine in The X-Files." "Deny All Knowledge": Reading The
X-Files. Eds. David Lavery, Angela Hague, and Marla Cartwright. Syracuse:
Syracuse UP, 1996. 121-34.
- Wilcox, Rhonda and J. P. Williams. "'What Do You Think?': The X-Files,
Liminality, and Gender Pleasure." "Deny All Knowledge":
Reading The X-Files. Eds. David Lavery, Angela Hague, and Marla Cartwright.
Syracuse: Syracuse UP, 1996. 99-120.
Criticism on the portrayal women in film
- Stacy, Jackie. "Desperately Seeking Difference." Issues in
Feminist Film Criticism. Ed. Patricia Erens. Bloomington: Indiana UP,
1990. 365-79.
- Wood, Robin. "Images and Women." Issues in Feminist Film
Criticism. Ed. Patricia Erens. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1990. 337-52.
Criticism on F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby
- Bewley, Marius. "Scott Fitzgerald’s Criticism of America." The Sewanee Review 62 (1954). Rpt. in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s
The Great Gatsby. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea, 1986. 11-27.
- Hanzo, Thomas A. "The Theme and the Narrator of The Great Gatsby." Modern Fiction Studies 2 (1957): 183-90. Rpt. in Twentieth Century
Interpretations of The Great Gatsby. Ed. Ernest H. Lockridge. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968. 61-69.
- Ornstein, Robert. "Scott Fitzgerald’s Fable of East and West." College English 18 (1957): 139-43. Rpt. in Twentieth Century Interpretations
of The Great Gatsby. Ed. Ernest H. Lockridge. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall,
1968. 54-60.
- Paulson, A. B. "Oral Aggression and Splitting." American
Imago 35.3 (1978). Rpt. in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great
Gatsby. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea, 1986. 71-85.
Criticism on Richard Wright's Native Son
- De Arman, Charles. "Bigger Thomas: The Symbolic Negro and the Discrete
Human Entity." Black American Literature Forum 12.2 (1978): 61-64.
Rpt. in Major Literary Characters: Bigger Thomas. Ed. Harold Bloom.
New York and Philadelphia: Chelsea, 1990. 83-88.
- Gibson, Donald B. "Wright’s Invisible Native Son." Twentieth
Century Interpretations of Native Son. Ed. Houston A. Baker, Jr. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972. 96-108.
- Howe, Irving. "Black Boys and Native Sons." Twentieth Century
Interpretations of Native Son. Ed. Houston A. Baker, Jr. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972. 63-70.
- Smith, Valerie. "Alienation and Creativity in Native Son." Self-Discovery and Authority in Afro-American Narrative. Cambridge:
Harvard UP, 1987. 75-87. Rpt. in Modern Critical Interpretations: Richard
Wright’s Native Son. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York and Philadelphia:
Chelsea, 1988. 105-114.
Criticism on J. D. Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye
- Brookeman, Christopher. "Pencey Preppy: Cultural Codes in The Catcher
in the Rye." New Essays on The Catcher in the Rye. Ed. Jack
Salzman. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1991. 57-76.
- Edwards, Duane. "Holden Caulfield: ‘Don’t Ever Tell Anybody
Anything.’" English Literary History 44.3 (1977): 556-76.
Rpt. in Critical Essays on Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye.
Ed. Joel Salzberg. Boston: G. K. Hall, 1990. 148-158.
- Mellard, James M. "The Disappearing Subject: A Lacanian Reading of The Catcher in the Rye." Critical Essays on Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye. Ed. Joel Salzberg. Boston: G. K. Hall, 1990. 197-214.
- Rowe, Joyce. "Holden Caulfield and American Protest." New
Essays on The Catcher in the Rye. Ed. Jack Salzman. Cambridge: Cambridge
UP, 1991. 77-95.
Criticism of Eugene O'Neill's Long Day's Journey into Night
- Bloom, Steven F. "Alcoholism and Addiction in Long Day's Jounrey
into Night." Readings on Eugene O'Neill. Ed. Thomas Siebold.
San Diego: Greenhaven, 1998. 147-56.
Students: Nicole Curtin, George Gantzer, Nick Koval, Ron Price, Brady
Rog, Kevin Warford
- Brustein, Robert. "Family Connections in Long Day's Journey into
Night." Readings on Eugene O'Neill. Ed. Thomas Siebold.
San Diego: Greenhaven, 1998. 157-63.
Students: Megan Collins, Charles Fraley, Julie Keuper, Luke Molnar
- Sewell, Richard B. "Long Day's Journey into Night." Modern
Critical Interpretations: Eugene O'Neill's Long Day's Journey into
Night. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea, 1987. 103-14.
Students: John Agin, Rinat Halon, Jennie Latshaw, Luke Kucalaba, Cara
Orr, Manpreet Singh
- Tornqvist, Egil. "'Life in Terms of Lives.'" Modern Critical Interpretations: Eugene O'Neill's Long Day's Journey into Night. Ed. Harold Bloom.
New York: Chelsea, 1987. 51-9.
Students: Chad Combs, Mike Knopp, Josh Pike, Glenn Steinberg
Beyond this, I've also reserved books on Albee, Miller, and Williams that will
aid groups in their presentation of a critical debate and that you can peruse
for your journal and/or research paper.
Books of Criticism on O'Neill
- Manheim, Michael, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Eugene O'Neill.
Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge UP, 1998.
Books of Criticism on Miller
- Bloom, Harold, ed. Modern Critical Interpretations: Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman. New York: Chelsea, 1988.
- Siebold, Thomas, ed. Readings on Death of a Salesman.
San Diego: Greenhaven, 1999.
- Weales, Gerald, ed. Death of a Salesman: Test and Criticism.
New York: Viking, 1967.
Books of Criticism on Hansberry
- Carter, Steven R. Hansberry's Drama: Commitment amid Complexity.
Urbana: U of Illinois P, 1991.
- Cheney, Anne. Lorraine Hansberry. Boston: Twayne, 1984.
- Domina, Lynn. Understanding A Raisin in the Sun: a Student Casebook
to Issues, Sources, and Historical Documents. Westport, CT:
Greenwood, 1998.
Books of Criticism on Williams
- Bloom, Harold, ed. Modern Critical Views: Tennessee Williams.
New York: Chelsea, 1988.
- Martin, Robert A., ed. Critical Essays on Tennessee Williams.
New York: Hall-Simon & Schuster, 1997.
Books of Criticism on Albee
- Bigsby, C. W. E., ed. Edward Albee: A Collection of Critical Essays.
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1975.
- Bloom, Harold, ed. Modern Critical Views: Edward Albee.
New York: Chelsea, 1987.
- Kolin, Philip C. and J. Madison Davis, eds. Critical Essays on
Edward Albee. Boston: Hall, 1986.
Books of Criticism on O'Neill, Miller, and Albee
- Davis, Walter A. Get the Guests: Psychoanalysis, Modern American
Drama, and the Audience. Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1994.
Peer Response Questions
As you read a peer’s paper, or any writing for that matter, mentally respond
to these questions/issues and make notes in the margins. Then, compose
a concise but meaningfully constructive critique of your peer's paper for each
of these categories. Engage your peers’ ideas as you would a listserv
response. Below are some questions that will get you started. Depending
on the individual paper, some categories will require more response and criticism
than others. Also, don't forget to respond to the writer's three questions.
Your response should be approximately 150-200 words. Your peer group and I will
meet outside of class to discuss papers and exchange responses.
Grammar
Any Paper: Always be on the look out for grammatical, usage,
and typographic computer errors because the form is the window into content.
Don’t write a formal answer to this question; just mark the paper’s grammatical
errors.
Thesis and Controlling Ideas
Any Paper: Does the paper
have a clear controlling idea, purpose, or thesis?
If the thesis is not
explicit, is its subtlety appropriate?
Has the author accomplished
the goals she set for herself?
Paper 1: Does the paper’s thesis
and/or the paper in general successfully
convey the author’s interpretation of the primary text in general and the
most significant passages for that interpretation in particular?
Does the paper address
some question or issue of meaning? Has it
elucidated some meaning for the piece?
Does it not only advance
its own understanding of the work, but also, in
appropriate and effective ways, address other readings of the work
without detracting from its own interpretation?
Research Paper: Does the paper’s
thesis or controlling idea provide some
insight into either the topic in general or the connections among its
research sources?
Paper 1 and Research Paper: Does
the paper provide its own reading of the
subject-matter, that is, does the paper’s thesis distinguish itself from
its
source(s), or, does the paper NOT let itself be subsumed by the theses
of its sources?
Organization and Support of Interpretation
(Argument)
Any Paper: Is the paper's
organization clear?
Does each paragraph
have a clearly identifiable point that furthers or
supports the thesis?
Does the paper’s method
of argumentation (logical analysis, appeals to
authority, use of textual evidence, and so forth) convince you, that is,
is
it credible?
Does the argument stray
from its task? If so, to what effect?
Paper 1: Does the paper’s evidence
(quoted passages, contextual information,
and so forth) support its controlling purpose (the interpretation) in a
clear
fashion?
Does the paper deal
with evidence (textual or contextual) that runs contrary to
its controlling idea/interpretation?
Does the paper take
up all of the piece of literature’s main points, or at least
those appropriate to the paper’s own reading of the piece?
Research Paper: Does the argumentative
interpretation adequately organize,
synthesize, and/or criticize the arguments of its sources?
Voice and Tone
Any Paper: Does the paper
have a discernible, distinct voice and tone
appropriate for it's rhetorical situation? (For example, if it’s
humorous or
sarcastic, does that trait fit the paper’s purpose?)
If the voice or tone
changes, is that change appropriate?
Paper 1: Does the voice and tone
allow for, complement, and represent fairly the
voice(s) of the passages it quotes?
Research Paper: Does the voice
and tone synthesize (and/or interrogate) fairly
the different voices and tones of the sources from which it draws?
Successes and Weaknesses
Any Paper: Where can the
paper be improved?
Where is it most successful?
least successful?
What are it's strong
points? weak points?
Quality and Creativity
Any Paper: How does
the paper measure up to the standards, conventions,
and expectations of its purpose?
Is the paper dry?
Does it seem engaged
in its subject-matter?
Does the paper approach
the subject in innovative, original ways?
Does the paper distinguish
itself as that of its author and her cares?
Paper 1 and Research Paper: Does
it respond to the prompt? creatively?
straightforwardly? successfully? How so?
The Writer’s Questions
I ask that the writer include
in her paper 3 questions for her peers to respond to in addition to the
categorical questions above. These questions, typed at the end of
her paper, should not be generic like the above but rather specific to
her paper.
367.01/02 Listservice Response
Sign-Up
| Week 1 |
|
|
| Week 2 |
|
|
| Week 3 |
|
|
| Week 4 |
|
|
| Week 5 |
|
|
| Week 6 |
|
|
| Week 7 |
|
|
| Week 8 |
|
|
| Week 9 |
|
|
| Week 10 |
|
|
| Finals |
|
|
367.01/02 Group Presentation
Sign-Up
Please sign up for one group presentation. Make sure that your group does not
overlap with either of your two listserv responses. Groups are responsible for
submitting a paper (or individual papers) cover the assigned readings to the
listserv (listserv-blazer@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu)
by 7 P.M. on the Saturday or Monday before the presentation. Using other sources
during the presentation and in the paper is required. Groups should meet with
me at least one week before their presentation date (if not two weeks) in order
to discuss their presentation ideas.
| Week 3 |
10-7 |
Group Presentation #1:
The Objectivity of Science
(Bacon/Harding/Thomas) |
Ryan Brown
Patrick Moran
Robert Schmidtgoessling |
| Week 4 |
10-14 |
Group Presentation #2:
Sontag and Camp Culture
(Sontag) |
Melissa Binkley
Ben Estell |
| Week 5 |
10-21 |
Group Presentation #3:
Rich: Poetry that Crosses Boundaries
(Rich) |
Paul Harris
Jeneen McCreay
Paul Tesar
Jeff VanVranken |
| Week 7 |
11-2 |
Group Presentation #4:
American Politics: Apathy and the Media
(Lapham/Moore) |
Terrence Coluci
Dave Gulden
Brian Poling
Erin Shillingburg |
| Week 7 |
11-4 |
Group Presentation #5:
Mass Media and Culture
(Ballard/Hamill/James/Rapping) |
Adam Crider
Holly Forrest
Eileen Kim
Schal Kline |
| Week 8 |
11-9 |
Group Presentation #6:
The X-Files and Social Order
(Graham/Kubek) |
Rachel Fitzsimmons
Joe Holland
Alexander Loberg |
367.01 Research Paper Topics
All papers should, at some level, investigate and analyze either 1) a cultural
phenomena in America or 2) the construction of individual identity. The first
step in research is determining a topic a general theme, an interesting subject,
or an issue, problem or point in question from which one can, after researching
the material, compose a specific thesis an angle, an interpretation, or an argument.
Another helpful rule of thumb is composing a question that will guide your research
and inform your thesis. This list obviously does not exhaust all the topics
we've covered in this eclectic class; and many of them need to be focused according
to your reading of the issue and the discipline in which you wish to pursue
it. Feel free to piggyback off this list; if you've a subject that interests
you that's not listed here, please see me and we'll discuss it. I'm game for
most topics, though I will work with you on how to mold and/or focus them into
manageable research papers that apply course issues and have adequate sources.
Finally, I wish to be informed of your topic and question in our individual
conference.
- any author on the syllabus (read more of her work and research criticism/interpretation
of it)
- applying the conversations (for example, the postmodern worldview) of this
class to a work of art film, sculpture, book, short story, poetry, score,
painting (requires researching criticism of the work as well)
- applying any central concept of the class (objectivism, constructivism,
and so forth) to your major of discipline or field of interest (for example,
how does constructivism find its way into and/or influence the subject of
criminal profiling in psychology?)
- pseudo-events
- Disneyland
- camp culture or identity and/or related subjects of kitsch and [bad] taste
- wagging the dog, spin control, handouts
- voting (to vote or not to vote)
- the portrayal of X demographic group in X mass media (and the effect and
reaction of that group)
- politics public relations, public opinion poles, political ads, and/or
polling
- mass media's (tv's, radio's, and/or print's) affect on pop culture, politics,
or personal identity
- (for example, violence, sex, or politics in the media and news coverage
thereof)
- the ideology and/or reality of local or national news programs
- a group/movement in music, art, literature, or criticism (analyze the standards
of the creative or interpretive community)
- legalism vs/and/or constitutionalism
- a scientific paradigm (for example, objectivist or constructivist science)
- the use of propaganda and/or ideology in democratic and/or totalitarian
societies
- sports figures as "heros"
- the role of language in determining reality
- brainwashing and deprogramming
- (the cult of) conspiracy theories and theorists
- (the myth of) the American Dream
- cults in America
- (a particular) religion's place in or reaction to the postmodern, social
constructivist world view
- morality or responsibility in the face of relativism or absolutism
- the sociology vs/or objectivism of knowledge in a particular discipline
(i.e., your major)
- the constructed public persona (Madonna, Marilyn Manson, Reagan, etc) vs
the "real" person
Annotated Bibliography
(Please use the format of this handout as a guide to help you complete the
annotated bibliography assignment.)
Research Topic
Give the broad concept or issue
that you’ll be investigating.
Research Question
Contextualize what you already
know, based upon class discussion, and pose a question or two that has
guided your research.
Search Strategy
Recapitulate where and how you
went about your search for sources. A few words to the wise: 1) Don’t
put this off until the last minute. You should request and check
out materials from libraries a full two weeks before the assignment is
due. “The books are in transit” or “The books were checked out” does
not constitute a valid excuse for a bibliography lacking 10 sources.
2) Note that OSCAR will tell you if OSU owns a particular journal, but
it can’t search for journal articles. Consequently, on OSU Libraries
home page, before entering OSCAR, search Other Online Research Tools a)
OSU’s collection of “electronic journals” (this is very limited, but it
can’t hurt to try), b) “other databases by subject” page (there’s a listing
of numerous databases like Language and Literature, and Psychology, which
will link you to MLA Bibliography and a psychology journal search engine.
(You’ll get some of the same databases with which Gateway interfaces, some
with which Gateway doesn’t), and 3) finally Gateway, which searches 92
databases. 4) Once you have a critical article or book, check its
works cited and reference pages for other books that might help your research.
If you come up empty handed after trying OSCAR, the appropriate “databases
by subject,” Gateway, and works cited pages of articles/books you've already
found, ask a librarian for help! Feel free to use Columbus Metropolitan
Libraries, but note they are a public library system and your search will
need to be augmented by an academic library like OSU.
Summary of Findings
In 150-250 words, summarize the
different critical interpretations of the subject-matter, describe where
critics converge and diverge, and criticize the lines of argument. (By
adding your own take on the critical debate, this can be transformed into
an abstract.)
10 secondary sources
approximately half should be scholarly journal articles
approximately half should be books or book chapters
no encyclopedias, magazines, newspapers, web
sites, primary texts, or critical articles we've read in class (though you may use
those in your research paper)
alphabetically arranged according to MLA standards
with annotations of 50-75 words eachthat evaluate
the sources by:
Problem (Question)
Identify what’s at stake or the
issue or question that the source is investigating.
Method (Evidence)
Describe how the author supports
her argument, for instance with logical claims and assumptions and/or with
examples, facts, and statistics.
Proposition (Thesis)
Define the source's thesis, or
sub-thesis relevant to your research question, its contribution to the
critical discourse, and/or how it will help your paper; note that his can
be combined with the 'problem' section.
Annotated Bibliography Model
Your Name
English 367.01
Alex E. Blazer
Date
The Rise of Cults in America
(Annotated Bibliography Model)
- Research Topic: (broad concept or issue that you'll be
investigating) the rise of cults in America
- Research Question: (contextualizes what you already know and poses
a question or two that has guided your research) Walter
Truett Anderson, in "The Magic Bazaar" chapter of Reality Isn't
What It Used to Be characterizes cults as composed of two types
of members: fanatically devoted disciples and charismatic leaders. The two
questions that guide my investigation are: 1) What makes certain individuals
susceptible to cults (what desire or need do cults fulfill, why are people
so absolutely devoted to the cause and to the leader-is it innately psychological
or culturally determined)? 2) How does the leader inspire such devotion in
followers (why and how do the methods-sermons, rituals-function to convince
people to believe the teaching without doubt and sever social ties with the
outside world?)
- Search Strategy: (recapitulate where and how you went about your
search for sources) First, I used both The Ohio State University Libraries
on-line catalogue, OSCAR, and the Ohiolink consortium of libraries in order
to find books on cults. Secondly, I used Lexus/Nexus and The Reader's Guide
to Periodicals to find articles (newspaper and journal) on cults. Then,
I used the books and articles' bibliographies to locate more printed materials
on cults. Thirdly, I used the Alta Vista and Infoseek search engines to link
to cult-related Internet sites.
- Summary of Findings: (in 150-250 words, summarize the different
critical interpretations of the subject-matter, describe where critics converge
and diverge, and criticize the lines of argument. be more specific and content-oriented
than this example, which merely proposes to demonstrate the form of
the exercise.) Scholars of cults propose two reasons for the rise of cults
in contemporary American society: 1) those like John Doe argue that cults
fill a void of community and give a sense of purpose that certain segments
of the population lack while 2) those in Jane Doe's camp assert that given
the right circumstances, anyone is susceptible to cults because cult leaders
have enhanced their natural charisma with state-of-the art brainwashing techniques
developed by behavioral and social scientists and government officials. The
latter argument is more convincing for these critics provide more evidence
(histories of brainwashing training, cult leader interviews on the subject),
while the latter is less so because it seems more abstract and biased (their
suppositions about the state of American society don't hold water and deprogramming
seems "". to unduly bias former cult members against cults in general
such that they can't demonstrate what's in the mind of the member who's actually
being indoctrinated).
- (10 sources, alphabetically arranged, with annotations of 50-75 words each that evaluate the sources)
Anderson, Walter Truett. "The Magic Bazaar." Reali ty Isn't What It Used to Be: Theatrical Politics, Ready-to-Wear Religion,
Global Myths, Primitive Chic, and Other Wonders of the Postmodern World. San Francisco: Harper, 1990. 187-211. (obviously, you wouldn't annotate an in-class reading; this is merely a demonstration)
- Problem: (identifies what's at stake or the issue that the source
is investigating) Anderson views the phenomena of cults in America
as highly relevant to the search for identity in postmodern, multicultural
American society.
- Method: (describes how the author supports her argument) Anderson
gives a plethora of examples of cults that he's either experienced first-hand
or read of in reports. As a journalist, he mostly reports the phenomena
and only broadly outlines the characteristics of cults (though is a bit
weak in describing the motives of leaders); thus he provides a good introductory
synopsis to the subject- matter, but doesn't offer much scholarly evidence
for his theory.
- Proposition: (the source's thesis, or relavant sub-thesis, it's contribution
to the critical discourse, and/or how it will help your paper; this can
be combined with the 'problem' section) Anderson asserts that cult
members use cults to construct their identities, to find a purpose in
life, and to create social constructions of reality.
The Classical Organization for
an Analytical, Argumentative Paper
As this is a second-level college writing class,
I’m assuming that in your first college composition class or in high school,
you learned the classical organization of a paper. If so, this handout
will provide a refresher; if not, this handout will help you efficiently construct
an effectively organized paper. Unlike English 110, the goal of English
367.01 is to master using sources in your own work, your own thought.
Whereas 110 asked for development of opinions, this class requires you develop
your critical judgment. Opinion still plays a key part, but it is opinion
rooted in analysis and interpretation of a text’s argument. I expect formal
papers to be both analytical and argumentative. That is, your paper’s
dual goals should be to 1) do a close reading of the text or texts with which
your working and then 2) offer up your own interpretation and evaluation of
that text(s). Don’t simply recapitulate what the text that you’re analyzing
says, question it and build upon it. Both get into the author’s mind set
and interrogate her world view, all for the purpose of positing your own critical
evaluation of the subject-matter. My approach to structure, indeed the
typical or general organization of an academic paper, can be found in this rough
outline. Note the genre's rules: introduction which tells the reader what
the paper is going to do/argue, proof via evidence and more argument, re-proof
via rebuff (debate your idea), and conclusion which tells the reader what's
just been proven. You may find this outline helpful to use as a guide:
Engage your reader in an Intro
Say what you're going to prove in a Thesis/Argument
Then prove it with Evidence/Proof/Specific Examples/Support from the texts
you’re using
Address Opposition to your Thesis (Where/If applicable) in Counterargument
which you will Deflate/Refute (what's wrong with the other side, the
other opinion)
in order to then
Re-Advance Your Own
Finally, say what you've just proven: Conclusion
Here’s a more formal outline of how a short academic examination may be structured.
Note how each support flows from and directly relates to the thesis/controlling
idea/argument in some significant way. (4X) stands for the understood
“Therefore/Because/For example” connectivity test. If the support answers
the question “Therefore, what?,” “Because why?,” or “What, for example?”
prompted by the preceding statement, then that support is relevant. The
test promotes not only critical reflection and critical analysis but also coherence.
(It doesn't allow the writer to meander, but rather to consciously progress
and direct her composition purposively.) Note further that the overarching
arguments (opinions, generalizations) gradually are filtered into direct evidence
(facts, specific examples, in the case of English 367.01, quotes from the text
you’re working with). Of course, you may vary from this format as it is
very constraining and limiting stylistically; indeed, I encourage you too adapt
it to your own writing style. However, be certain to utilize an effective
organization, one which offers illustrative support for your argumentative thesis.
I. Introduction
A. Grabber (aka, hook): gets the audience interested in the paper
B. Related stuff: not necessarily going to be proven or analyzed but somehow relevantly/appropriately commences thinking on the subject (usually very interrelated with the grabber's content)
C. Blueprint: outlines sub-topics and supports for the thesis
D. Thesis Statement: the argument that guides and coheres the discursive
analysis
II. Body Paragraph:
no less than three, each should not only directly relate to
the thesis but also support it in some way (a major support of the thesis)
(4X) A. Thesis statement: argumentatively
and logically supports the overarching
purpose of the paper, most notably stated in the introduction's thesis
statement
(4X) 1. major support:
though still argumentative, it is somewhat transitory in
that it, more often than not, also incorporates a reading or an
interpretation of a specific example
(4X) a. minor support: the specific example, the evidence that proves the
argument
(4X) b. minor support
(4X) (1) minor minor support: this really delves into the specific
nuances of the argument, but isn't always appropriate or
necessary, depending on the nature of the argument, analysis,
and evidence
(4X) (2) minor minor support
(4X) 2. major support
(4X) a. minor support
(4X) b. minor support
(4X) 3. major support
(4X) a. minor support
(4X) b. minor support
4. summary thus far, mini-conclusion of this paragraph, or transition to
either an extension of this paragraph's argument in another paragraph
or the next main thesis support (aka body paragraph)
III. Body Paragraph
— see above
IV. Body Paragraph — see
above
V. Body Paragraph —
see above —
That addresses and refutes arguments in opposition to your own
(You can also engage counterargument throughout your paper with each
main point)
VI. Conclusion
Summarizes arguments and points already made (and does not offer new
evidence)
Restates thesis
(Possibly) ends with an epiphany or a moment of revelation; or points to
further discussion or study or to relevant issues which generated or
implicated by the argument's analysis