Tuesday: John Adams (EAW 461-471); Crevecoeur (EAW 472-483); Paine (EAW 484-494); Freneau (EAW 559 and "On the Emigration to America")
Wednesday: Weiland (through page 139)
Thursday: Weiland (through end)
Please remember NOT to discuss the novel with anyone until you know he/she is also finished with it. Thank you!
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Readings for October 25-27
For Tuesday: Benjamin Franklin in EAW 348-349; 358-362; 364-374 and "The Speech of Polly Baker"
(Wednesday--we will still be catching up and discussing Franklin)
For Thursday: Patrick Henry and George Washington in EAW 417-429 and Thomas Jefferson "Declaration of Independence" and EAW 430-437 and 447-451
(Wednesday--we will still be catching up and discussing Franklin)
For Thursday: Patrick Henry and George Washington in EAW 417-429 and Thomas Jefferson "Declaration of Independence" and EAW 430-437 and 447-451
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Readings for October 18-20
My apologies. I've been reading papers all weekend and have neglected the blog. Please read:
Tuesday: Jonathan Edwards (311; from Personal Narrative 312-319; "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" 320-332) and Cotton Mather (259-268). I am not going to lie. Cotton Mather is a bear. But on Monday we'll compare Edwards, Mather and John Cotton. And you'll be interested in what Mather has to say about William Bradford.
Wednesday: Anne Bradstreet (176-192--"Contemplations" and "To My Dear Children" are OPTIONAL.) But read all the shorter poetry aloud. It will make a lot more sense.
Thursday: Ann Hutchinson (159-169) and Mary Rowlandson (217-230). I'm not going to give anything away, but I think you are likely to enjoy both these ladies.
REMINDER: 2nd draft explications will be due a week from Tuesday, on October 25th.
Please email with questions.
Tuesday: Jonathan Edwards (311; from Personal Narrative 312-319; "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" 320-332) and Cotton Mather (259-268). I am not going to lie. Cotton Mather is a bear. But on Monday we'll compare Edwards, Mather and John Cotton. And you'll be interested in what Mather has to say about William Bradford.
Wednesday: Anne Bradstreet (176-192--"Contemplations" and "To My Dear Children" are OPTIONAL.) But read all the shorter poetry aloud. It will make a lot more sense.
Thursday: Ann Hutchinson (159-169) and Mary Rowlandson (217-230). I'm not going to give anything away, but I think you are likely to enjoy both these ladies.
REMINDER: 2nd draft explications will be due a week from Tuesday, on October 25th.
Please email with questions.
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Explicatons
I am really looking forward to beginning to hear some of your voices in these papers! Whoo hoo!
Your first explication paper will be due on Tuesday, October 11. You may write on any of the Native American myths or on any of the discoverer pieces. This will be a first draft--do your best, but know that you will get feedback before it is graded. Bring two copies with you to class on Tuesday.
An explication paper is a very short (2-3 page) attempt to close read a passage from a larger work and to use that passage to make a small and focused argument about the meaning of that text as a whole. You will want to:
1. Choose a few key paragraphs (or lines, or pieces of dialogue) of one of the works above on which to focus your analysis.
2. Examine the selection for interesting patterns or features. You may look for metaphors, similes, comparisons, word choice, tone, and organization.
3. Use the patterns or features to draw conclusions about the author’s style or rhetoric; the text’s relationship to a specific period in history or type of culture; or the meaning of a repeated theme, symbol or motif. (Consider that the Native American myth comes from a predominately oral culture/tradition. Consider the audience to whom the discoverers are writing, and the purpose for the writing.)
In order to closely read a text (and to prepare yourself to write a paper like this) you may want to ask yourself the following questions. You will probably NOT write a paper entirely based on your answers to any one or several of these questions, but answering them will probably lead you to an interesting topic for your explication.
What is the work about?
What is the purpose of the work? (To inform? To entertain? To persuade?)
Is the writing formal? Informal?
What is the overall vocabulary used? (A lot of long, polysyllabic words? Short, simple words?)
What types of words are used? Do the words follow a pattern?
What types of sounds are used? Are words or sounds repeated?
What do the sentences look like? Are any rules of grammar broken?
What works for you as a reader? Are there any phrases that stick out as being memorable? Why? What do you like? What don’t you like?
Please keep in mind the following:
1. Papers need to be formatted as requested in the syllabus. See my notes on your first explication papers, the syllabus formatting guidelines, and the sample MLA-style papers in Rules for Writers or Writing about Literature. There is no excuse for ANY explication NOT being formatted perfectly.
2. Please punctuate your titles correctly. Book, magazine, television show, album, film titles should be italicized. Poem, short story, episode, song, painting titles should be place in quotation marks.
3. Do not forget that you need to provide in-text citations (page numbers or line numbers for poetry) for any direct quotations you use in a paper.
4. Write about literature in the continuous present tense, and watch that you do not slip back and forth between past and present tense when it is not appropriate.
5. Format all long quotations (4 or more lines) as block quotes. Do not end paragraphs with quotations (you should ALWAYS comment on quotations before you move on). Quotations should not do work for you—you are interpreting the literature. Use quotations as evidence for your interpretation.
6. Try to write as if you are NOT answering a prompt for a school assignment. Eliminate phrases like “I chose to write about _________” or “like we discussed in class.” These phrases keep you from producing sophisticated prose.
7. Beware of totalizing generalizations like “everyone knows” or “it is human nature” or calling something “OUR culture.” These phrases are overly general and assumptive. Not to mention intellectually lazy.
8. If you use an evaluative phrase, be sure to define or back up that evaluation. For example, if you note that a particular phrase in the text you are discussing is “interesting,” explain what is interesting about it. Or WHY you think it is interesting. Your reader can’t read your mind!
You may be tempted to Google the term "explication paper" to look for advice on how to write them. I suggest you don't do that. There is a lot of information out there that isn't very good. If you are looking for some good advice, I suggest you check out this handout from the Harvard Arts faculty. There are some good ideas there, and they are looking for the same sort of thing that I am. I also suggest using the description and model in the Gardner book to help guide you.
I am going to be around this weekend, so don't hesitate to email if you have questions, frustrations, or if you want me to look at something. I have a friend in from out of town, so I might be checking email a little less frequently than usual--but I WILL be checking and getting back to people.
Good luck.
Your first explication paper will be due on Tuesday, October 11. You may write on any of the Native American myths or on any of the discoverer pieces. This will be a first draft--do your best, but know that you will get feedback before it is graded. Bring two copies with you to class on Tuesday.
An explication paper is a very short (2-3 page) attempt to close read a passage from a larger work and to use that passage to make a small and focused argument about the meaning of that text as a whole. You will want to:
1. Choose a few key paragraphs (or lines, or pieces of dialogue) of one of the works above on which to focus your analysis.
2. Examine the selection for interesting patterns or features. You may look for metaphors, similes, comparisons, word choice, tone, and organization.
3. Use the patterns or features to draw conclusions about the author’s style or rhetoric; the text’s relationship to a specific period in history or type of culture; or the meaning of a repeated theme, symbol or motif. (Consider that the Native American myth comes from a predominately oral culture/tradition. Consider the audience to whom the discoverers are writing, and the purpose for the writing.)
In order to closely read a text (and to prepare yourself to write a paper like this) you may want to ask yourself the following questions. You will probably NOT write a paper entirely based on your answers to any one or several of these questions, but answering them will probably lead you to an interesting topic for your explication.
What is the work about?
What is the purpose of the work? (To inform? To entertain? To persuade?)
Is the writing formal? Informal?
What is the overall vocabulary used? (A lot of long, polysyllabic words? Short, simple words?)
What types of words are used? Do the words follow a pattern?
What types of sounds are used? Are words or sounds repeated?
What do the sentences look like? Are any rules of grammar broken?
What works for you as a reader? Are there any phrases that stick out as being memorable? Why? What do you like? What don’t you like?
Please keep in mind the following:
1. Papers need to be formatted as requested in the syllabus. See my notes on your first explication papers, the syllabus formatting guidelines, and the sample MLA-style papers in Rules for Writers or Writing about Literature. There is no excuse for ANY explication NOT being formatted perfectly.
2. Please punctuate your titles correctly. Book, magazine, television show, album, film titles should be italicized. Poem, short story, episode, song, painting titles should be place in quotation marks.
3. Do not forget that you need to provide in-text citations (page numbers or line numbers for poetry) for any direct quotations you use in a paper.
4. Write about literature in the continuous present tense, and watch that you do not slip back and forth between past and present tense when it is not appropriate.
5. Format all long quotations (4 or more lines) as block quotes. Do not end paragraphs with quotations (you should ALWAYS comment on quotations before you move on). Quotations should not do work for you—you are interpreting the literature. Use quotations as evidence for your interpretation.
6. Try to write as if you are NOT answering a prompt for a school assignment. Eliminate phrases like “I chose to write about _________” or “like we discussed in class.” These phrases keep you from producing sophisticated prose.
7. Beware of totalizing generalizations like “everyone knows” or “it is human nature” or calling something “OUR culture.” These phrases are overly general and assumptive. Not to mention intellectually lazy.
8. If you use an evaluative phrase, be sure to define or back up that evaluation. For example, if you note that a particular phrase in the text you are discussing is “interesting,” explain what is interesting about it. Or WHY you think it is interesting. Your reader can’t read your mind!
You may be tempted to Google the term "explication paper" to look for advice on how to write them. I suggest you don't do that. There is a lot of information out there that isn't very good. If you are looking for some good advice, I suggest you check out this handout from the Harvard Arts faculty. There are some good ideas there, and they are looking for the same sort of thing that I am. I also suggest using the description and model in the Gardner book to help guide you.
I am going to be around this weekend, so don't hesitate to email if you have questions, frustrations, or if you want me to look at something. I have a friend in from out of town, so I might be checking email a little less frequently than usual--but I WILL be checking and getting back to people.
Good luck.
Readings for October 11-October 13
We will be discussing the explorers on Tuesday, October 11th. Refresh if you need to. Also read John Smith in AEW (95-100) and, recommended (but not required) Montaigne's "On Cannibals" (55-60). Explications due--please bring 2 copies to class with you.
On Wednesday, we will be discussing John Cotton and John Winthrop (101-106 and 107-118).
For Thursday, please read ALL of the William Bradford section (119-136). I will also handout a chapter from Jay Parini's book Promised Land on Tuesday. This section is about Bradford and is about 30 pages or so. So make sure that you will be able to find time between Tuesday and Thursdays class to read it.
**Don't forget that you still have discussion questions due on Tuesday and Thursday as well.
On Wednesday, we will be discussing John Cotton and John Winthrop (101-106 and 107-118).
For Thursday, please read ALL of the William Bradford section (119-136). I will also handout a chapter from Jay Parini's book Promised Land on Tuesday. This section is about Bradford and is about 30 pages or so. So make sure that you will be able to find time between Tuesday and Thursdays class to read it.
**Don't forget that you still have discussion questions due on Tuesday and Thursday as well.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)