Citation for "Elephant"

This may not be formatted correctly (depending on how it shows up on the blog), but here's the citation you'll need for the "Elephant" piece.

Orwell, George. "Shooting an Elephant." The Dolphin Reader. Ed. Douglas Hunt and Carolyn Perry. 5th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1999. Print.

You can cite the novel and the Harmon and Holman (if necessary) for yourself.

"DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER"

Winston doubleplusbravewise notewrite, but do you have the guts to do it? 

How would you overthrow Big Brother?

Be goodthinkful; we have dissected the oppressive tactics of the Party, as well as its impact on individuals and society. Keep in mind, this may not be a quick operation by any means...

Give yourself 30 minutes to brainstorm and write.  (Once again, bullets are fine.) I can't wait to hear your plans! 

(I'll make sure that the room is free of telescreens and undercover thinkpol, like Mrs. Browder. It'll be just us oldthinkers plusbellyfeeling crimethink!)

Bahahahahahahahahaha! 

(I mean, doublepluslaughful.)

"Victory" Homework

Respond to the following prompt for 25-30 minutes.  Be sure to write well: use a strong command of language, varying sentence structure, textual support for your ideas and avoid using paraphrase as analysis—make your points explicitly.

We’ve read a wide variety of literature, from Greek and Roman classics to modern novels and poems; within this selection, we’ve also come across many different genres, from epics to existentialism; romanticism to transcendentalism; modernism to magical realism.  In our current novel, Orwell introduces us to a new genre: a "soft" type of science fiction.  However, the ideas presented should be familiar.  Many of our authors have made similar statements about the human and/or societal experience, no matter what the genre.  Therefore, what thematic connections are you seeing to other pieces we've read this year?  Choose at least two and explain.

P.S. BOTH Achebe and Conrad are off limits--you can use one, but not both.

What the Faulkner?

Below I have provided excerpts from the Harmon and Holman on “modernism” and “modernist literature.” The term “modernism” has nothing to do with the time period in which a piece is written (i.e. not all contemporary pieces are modern).  “Modern literature”:

“[…] is centered in the experimental examination of the inner self”

“[…] protested against the nature of modern society”

“[…] explor[es] the private self through the stream of consciousness”

“[…] is writing marked by a strong and conscious break with tradition”

“It employs a distinctive kind of imagination that insists on having its general frame of reference within itself.”

“[…] [employs the viewpoint that] we create the world in the act of perceiving it”

“[…] implies […] a sense of alienation, loss, and despair”

“[…] rejects traditional values and assumptions, and it rejects equally the rhetoric by which they were sanctioned and communicated”

“[…] elevates the individual and the inward over the social and the outward, and it prefers the unconscious to the self-conscious”

“[…] revels in a dense and often unordered actuality as opposed to the practical and the systematic, and in exploring that actuality as it exists in the mind of the writer it has been richly experimental”

Now, you’re going to need five notecards, one for each of the pieces that we’ve read this week (Woolf, Kafka, Faulkner, and Marquez) and then an extra for the final question at the end of this post.

On each notecard, make connections between the tenets of modernism and the piece you’re exploring.  Please note: we’ve dug into some pretty specific aspects of these pieces during our discussions—I’d rather see you focus on specifics than fill your notecard with broad, general statements that don’t really show a thorough read of the pieces.

After you’re done, answer this question on a separate notecard: What else have we read this year that you would consider modern?  Why?  (Don’t fall into the trap of picking a piece just because it matches one of the criteria above—make sure to choose based on a comprehensive view of the piece and the excerpts from the H & H).

Achebe and Conrad...the final question

Tomorrow, we will have one last "timed-answer" question with Paloma leading off, and then we will discuss the question below:

          Consider Marlow’s discussion with Kurtz’s Intended and the closing paragraph of the novella in conjunction with the final chapter of Things Fall Apart.  Compare and contrast the conclusions of these two pieces and how they function as closure for their respective works.

In order to answer this question, here's what I'd like to see:

1.  Spend at least 30 focused, uninterrupted minutes on this.  Put your phones away, get off of Facebook or Skype and focus on the question and what it's asking.

2. For 20 minutes, you may answer this however you'd like: a stream-of-consciousness-esque freewrite, a spiderweb mind-map, a list of notes, etc.  Any option that you choose, though, is going to come with PLENTY of writing in 30 minutes--get as much on paper as you can.  Now that we've studied these books in depth, you know that what the question asks is not as simple as it seems (especially the italicized part)...

3. For the last 10+ minutes, craft a two-three sentence answer to the question.  When finished, these answers should not be the least bit awkward, choppy, or clunky: carefully craft each word that you put on paper.  Realize, too, that in answering this question you also have to provide clarification on what the prompt is asking--and that's up to you. (You're welcome!)

Remember that your typed quote journals are due on Wednesday and that you'll have 30-45 minutes of reading for homework tomorrow night.

Achebe Rewrites and More!

Here're your assignments for the weekend:

1. Due Monday: a HAND-WRITTEN rewrite of your timed essay for Things Fall Apart.  I can't provide any more help on this this weekend, but don't be afraid to rely on each other.  Like Stephen Colbert says: "You scratch my back and I get my back scratched."  (Waaaaaait a minute...)  Anyway, I think that you'd learn a lot by seeing what each other did right and wrong.

2. Due Wednesday: a reading journal (the quote kind) for both Achebe and Conrad.  (This needs to be typed.)  Choose three quotes from each piece and dig into them.  We are going to continue to discuss these books through the end of class on Tuesday, and I expect to see a comprehensive view of the quotes you've chosen.  Pick them apart for everything from theme, to narration, to lit. devices, etc.  Treat the quote as part of the piece as a whole--not an island: How does the quote you chose affect the novel as a whole? You will have homework on Monday and Tuesday night--which is why I'm giving you this over the weekend.  Trust me, procrastinating this until Tuesday night will prove extremely painful.

3. You can always work on lit. devices, as well.

To be or not to be...A tragedy?

You have three assignments for tonight; here they are:

1. Read (or reread) the Achebe bio from the Norton Anthology that I gave you before we read Things Fall Apart.  (Yes, it's lengthy.  Read it.)  Make notes on important facts or concepts.
2. Read (or reread) the Conrad bio from the Norton Anthology that I gave you before you started Heart of Darkness. Make notes on important facts or concepts.
3. Reread the tragedy handout from Hamlet; as you do, make notes on if and how Things Fall Apart is a tragedy.  Instead of focusing on the broader facets of tragedy, see if you can connect the novel to some of the more specific pieces.


We will continue our discussion tomorrow!  Let me know if you have any questions.

Things Fall Apart...Now Put it Together

We spent the entire class period explicating W.B. Yeats' "The Second Coming," the poem from which Achebe took the title Things Fall Apart.

So, why would Achebe use this line as the title to his novel?

This question needs to be answered in one sentence.  That's right: craft one sentence that really gets to the heart of this question.  (I'll warn you right now: stay away from anything topical.)  Every word of this sentence should be chosen carefully.

Then spend at least twenty, but no more than tweny-five, minutes providing supporting reasons for your answer.  These can be listed in phrases and bullets, but they need to consist of both specific textual details and analysis.  (For example, "Okonkwo" is not a specific detail, neither is "Okonkwo's temper.")  Go back through the text if you have to to find specific, focused details, and then make sure to provide little bits of analysis connecting them to your sentence.

This is due at the beginning of class tomorrow.  If you have any questions, please let me know.

Stoppard Homework

Question #1: Check out the first page of the play--everything up until Ros speaks.  Stoppard is developing "character notes" for his duo.  Do these exist throughout the entire play? Consider Ros and Guil's behavior in acts II and III: do their characters shift and change at all?  Give examples.

Question #2: The Player.  What's his purpose?  Why is he important to this play? Give examples.

R & G Journal

First of all, if necessary, re-familiarize yourself with Absurdism or the Theater of the Absurd.  Both of these terms should be in your Harmon and Holman.

Okay, the first part of your "journal" does not require you to type or write anything.  (Well, except for marking up your book as you read.)  Being an active reading for this play is SO fun!  Tom Stoppard, the author of the play, is brilliant and witty--in a John Gardner "make-your-brain-explode" kind of way.  Sweeeeeeeeeeet... : )

So here's what I'd like you to do with the stickies.  You have three different types of stickies, yeah?  Divide up their meanings like this:

-one for stuff that's funny

-one for stuff that makes you totally confused

-one for stuff that's super awesome: ideas or lines that you really happen to like and think are really powerful

As you're reading and you come across anything that falls into the above categories, mark the page with the corresponding type of sticky note.

Yup.  That's it for the first part.

The second part is to pick five quotes from the play and type up one of those journals where the quote goes on one side and the reason why you picked it goes on the other.  Remember not to take the quotes out of context when you analyze them.

Seriously, have fun reading this play.  Like Gardner, Stoppard has a way of sticking around in your brain--even when you're not reading.  Let the ideas marinate in there...

We'll begin our discussion on R & G Are Dead at 12:05 on Tuesday, 2/5.  Let me know if you have any questions! : )

Coleridge's Take on Ham and Pol

Samuel Taylor Coleridge, who wrote "Rime of the Ancient Mariner," was a well-known critic of Hamlet.  Two of his more popular insights are:

-->On Hamlet. - "Hamlet's character is the prevalence of the abstracting and generalizing habit over the practical. He does not want courage, skill, will, or opportunity; but every incident sets him thinking; and it is curious, and at the same time strictly natural, that Hamlet, who all the play seems reason itself, should be impelled, at last, by mere accident, to effect his object. I have a smack of Hamlet myself, if I may say so." - June 15, 1827.

On Polonius. - "A Maxim is a conclusion upon observation of matters of fact, and is merely retrospective; an idea, or, if you like, a Principle, carries knowledge within itself, and is prospective. Polonius is a man of maxims. While he is descanting on matters of past experience, as in that excellent speech to Laertes before he sets out on his travels, he is admirable; but when he comes to advise or project, he is a mere dotard. You see Hamlet, as the man of ideas, despises him. A man of maxims only is like a Cyclops with one eye, and that eye placed in the back of his head." - June 15, 1827.

Thought you might find these helpful in your discussion with Johnston...

Let me know if you have any questions.

No(te) Small Task...

First of all, this assignment won't really make sense until you finish Hamlet, so your first job is to read Act V and do your reading journal.  (I'll be collecting all of the journals at the end of next week.)

Once you've finished reading the play, your assignment deals with finishing the Johnston lecture and reacting to it.  You'll need 7-10 3x5 notecards.

1. Finish the last five pages of the lecture.  (We're on Part E: "Some Interpretative Possibilities.")
2. On the front (or back) of each notecard, place a quote from the Johnston lecture (it doesn't have to come from Part E--you can choose anywhere in the lecture as a whole, but focusing on "C" and "E" will help you the most on next week's assignment); on the opposite side, react to the quote, citing specific passages from the play as support for your assertions. I'm expecting 3-5 sentences of well-explained analysis supported by specific textual references per card.

Act V needs to be read by Monday; the notecards are due on Tuesday.  (You may have an additional assignment given out Monday night.)  If you have any questions, please let me know.  

Character Notes for Wednesday

This assignment should take somewhere between 30-45 minutes of solid, attentive work time.

You left class with a character (or two); what I'd like you to do tonight is to track that character through Acts III and IV: why is he or she important?  What sort of revelations do we get about his or her character? Does he or she have any particularly awesome lines?  How does he or she add to the meaning and structure of the play?

This can be jotted down in note form.  As we discuss Acts III and IV, you can jump in when your notes are applicable.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Don't forget that the Ophelia response is due at the beginning of class on Friday.  Oh, we also need to figure out who's bringing what to this ham sandwich + shakes potluck on Friday--I'll make a note on the board and you can sign up for whatever you'd like to bring.

IS Ophelia Pregnant?

Read Epstein's article on Opehlia. To agree or not to agree? That is the question.

Your job is to write either a rebuttal to or confirmation of Epstein's theory. Try to model your own writing off of his for this one: take a close look at his voice, the method behind his argument, and the layout/format of the piece.  You must use text as well (at least three excerpts) to support your ideas. It's okay to use an excerpt that Epstein also employs, but, in that case, you should use original analysis--don't just repeat what he has said.

I know that when speaking about this assignment, I said that there was room to be funny. There is, but intelligence and craft are important as well—keep that in mind when treating the text.  (Oh, and be sure that you're quoting and citing Shakespeare correctly...Epstein was not necessarily concerned with that...)

This should be typed (no more or less than two pages) and is due at the beginning of class on Friday. (You also have another task assigned for tomorrow, but you'll get nothing else Wednesday or Thursday night.)  Let me know if you have any questions.

Hamlet Act I and II questions

Here's what I'd like you to do this weekend (in no particular order):

1. Read Act III and IV and complete your reading journal.  The Act I and II journals looked a little skimpy to me...This is a complex play (which is about to get even more complex) and you are getting better at not only learning how to read it, but how to look for the meaning in the nooks and crannies: your reading journals should reflect that.  REREAD parts if you need to; REREAD the research; go back to the summaries that I gave you.  If you work hard to understand this play, it'll pay off big time, and part of the process of understanding is looking at all of the different facets, which is what the reading journal asks you to do.

2. Get some lit. devices out of the way.  (Soliloquy, foil, and aside are good ones to tackle right now--IF you didn't write about them first semester.) By earning well over a 90% on that portion of your final as a class, you have earned the opportunity to only have 15 devices this semester instead of 20.  All of the rules still apply on this semester's lit. devices: you can do rewrites, etc.  However, they are now worth ten points each, instead of five, and you may not write about any device that you wrote about first semester.  (Think about it, too: Some of you used Christmas Break to finish up lit. devices last semester.  That can't happen this semester because of a little thing called, um, what was it again?  Oh yeah: GRADUATION!)

3. Here are your three short-answer questions for Acts I and II.  I'd like you to choose two questions to which you'll respond in a 10-to-15-minute freewrite each (so 20-30 minutes total).  As you answer these, don't worry about the quality of your writing, but focus more on the quality of your response: use specific detail, plenty of analysis, etc., but get as much down on paper as you can.  The remaining question should be answered in one-two detailed, proofread paragraphs; again, it's up to you which question to answer this way.  Here they are:

-----Consider the role of Ophelia: why is she important or meaningful to the play as a whole so far?  (As you answer, don't just focus on what she says or does; think about this as well: If this play is about the tragedy of Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark, why is she needed?)
-----Hamlet has two foils in this play: Fortinbras and Laertes.  In what ways are these two characters foils to Hamlet?  Why would Shakes craft them this way?  What does this do for the play as a whole so far?
-----The Player's speech is pretty amazing on a lot of levels...why?  Why would Hamlet choose it?  Why does Hamlet feel the need to begin it?  (Check out the part that Hamlet speaks compared to where the Player starts in...)  More importantly, why would Shakes include it?  (You should look back at the notes that we took on the Renaissance for help on this one...)

Let me know if you have any questions!  Enjoy your weekend!  Oh, and we'll be watching Hamlet from 3:00-5:00 this Friday.  (We could start at 2:45 if you want to be able to discuss more like we did yesterday...Acts III and IV take 1 hour and 40 minutes to just watch, so if we start at 2:45, we have extra discussion time.)

The Soliloquy's the Thing...

Tomorrow, we are going to discuss the differences between Hamlet's first soliloquy in I.ii and his second at the end of II.ii.  (You should look back at the notes that I emailed you about the first one.)

You don't need to write up anything fancy for this, just give yourself a good 30 minutes to reread the passages and brainstorm ideas; bring your notes to class.  As you look over the soliloquies, compare and contrast them not only for the components that we've been looking at for the past few days, but, also, how Shakespeare is using them to direct the play as a whole.

See you tomorrow!  Remember, we're watching and discussing the movie from 12:45-3:15.  : )

"Ice, Ice Baby..."

(AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!)

"Alright stop: collaborate and listen..."

(Sorry, I couldn't help it...)
 
So here's what I've got for you:

1. You can't go anywhere, so besides watching "Dr. Who," why not claim your lines on the blog (see the "Somebody Bring Me Some Ham!!! (let)" post below) and work on your excerpt? : )  On Wednesday and Thursday, each person will get somewhere between 17-20 minutes in front of the class to discuss his or her lines.  As you talk, I'll be going through a check list of whether or not you've covered everything that I listed in the blog post.  I don't expect you to talk for the entire time--we will want to comment on and discuss your lines as well.  I chose an excerpt that I was going to walk through tomorrow to show you exactly what I'd like to see you do.  I will type it up; send me an email and I will respond with my example.  That way, you can have something on which to base your own notes.  As you're working on this, feel free to text or email me with any questions you may have.

2. I was going to give you Thursday night to work on lit. devices, but I can't do that anymore--there's something that we'll need to look at Thursday night in order to discuss on Friday.  So...Get a head start on your lit. devices!  Soliloquy and aside are FANTASTIC devices for Hamlet!

3. We'll be watching/discussing Acts I and II of Hamlet on Friday.  Originally, we were going to do this from 1:00-3:00, but since we're losing an entire day of discussion on those acts, I thought that you may want to discuss more.  Will 12:45-3:15 work for everyone?  I know that it sounds like a long time, but I can't explain how much watching the movie--and the pausing and discussing--will help with your understanding of the play.  Text me or email me, please, and let me know if this will work for you.  Also, what are we eating?  We won't have any classtime to design a menu, so discuss among yourselves and let me know what you'd like by the end of class on Thursday.  I'll take care of this Friday's food, and then we can do pot-lucks for the next two.

Let me know if you have any questions!  See you Wednesday! : ) 

"Somebody bring me some HAM!!!" (let)

(Liz Lemon 30 Rock allusion?  Anyone...anyone?)

(Ferris Bueller's Day Off allusion?)

Choose 20-30 consecutive lines of either Act I or II that you feel are important to what we've read so far (Hamlet's first (I.ii) and second (II.ii) soliloquy are off limits, though). These lines can come from one character's speech or consist of dialogue. Claim your lines on the blog, please.   

(Only one person per scene--first come, first serve.) 

When you claim your excerpt, please tell me the act, scene, and line numbers.  Also, our books may not label the lines in the exact same way, so could you tell me something like: “Starts when Claudius says, ‘Corruption, schmoruption…it’s all worth it,’ and goes until Hamlet says, ‘Hey, my uncle’s kind of a jerky-pants.”’

Now that you have some lines, dissect them: what can you pull from them? Consider, for example, the content, characters involved and how they’re characterized, diction, syntax, tone, structure, stage directions (explicit or implied), relationship to themes of the play, the atmosphere of the scene and act in which they’re housed, any of our research (from the Norton’s introduction to the essay on tragedy to the Johnston lecture)…the list goes on.

On Wednesday and Thursday, you’ll lead a discussion on your lines and explain their importance to us. You can have whatever notes with you that you feel that you need, but I will make a clean copy of them for you to put on the projector.

If you have any questions, please let me know!