|
AML 4213: Journeys to America
Summer 2011
TERM PAPER INSTRUCTIONS: STAGE
ONE--TOPICS
If you choose one of the topics below, please don’t address it
as a “question” that has a “right” answer. When I assess papers, I
don’t think in terms of right, especially right, poor, especially poor
interpretations. I look for a reasonably tight focus (a paper that
doesn’t ramble), thoughtfulness (not just a recitation of class discussion
or lecture), and a polished technique (good grammar and punctuation, a
non-pompous but not overly informal/breezy style, and so on). In
general, a paper that tries to figure out something from an unusual but
profound angle and yet doesn’t quite pull it off will make me as happy,
indeed happier, than an essay that sounds like SparksNotes.
To put this more simply: work hard, but don’t be afraid of
taking risks, and try to get in the zone of your own creative
thoughtfulness. The best thing you can do to get a topic, or to
develop one of the topics below, is to stare hard, as it were, at the
object of your attention. Just as with a hobby that you have an
interest in, whether football, hip-hop music, video gaming, musing about
traveling, whatever … you want to be attentive to nuance. With hobbies,
such comes naturally, because you are naturally intrigued; but you can
learn to be so with analysis, also! It sounds cute, but there really is a
Zen art to writing and thinking.
Here are some topics below, which you can tweak, twist, and
etc. I have provided topics for readings only up through the first ½
of the course, as it is impractical for you to jump ahead and consider
Franklin or the long novel by B. Brown.
If you really, really want to develop a solo topic on your own, you are
welcome to do so, but I get nervous about such being viable in the
shortness of the summer term, as a good paper takes a season of thoughtful
brooding if it is to be worthy.
**************************
1--Take either Caliban’s first major passage or the scene of Prospero’s odd
forgetting of Caliban’s conspiracy against him as a brainstorming cue, and
construct an argument/analysis that uses a full range of passages from the The
Tempest yet also makes one of the former passages or scenes central.
2--Ditto in method as above, but consider the concluding radiant/Cross
light scene in The Black Robe (if you are interested in writing on
film).
3--The Black Robe is based on a novel, based in turn on some degree
of accurate historical research. Analyze the issue of how native
American “otherness” is presented in the film. The film isn’t an
anthropological treatise, but it does try at points to almost get us to the
“other” side and not just be preoccupied with the priest’s
perspective. Or, perhaps, in order to make the priest’s story rich
and complex--the story of his mission of conversion--it needs to somewhat
present the native cultural/psychological perspective. This is what I
would call a “meta” topic: not just an analysis of what “happens” in a text
(in this case, a film) but also about the parameters of representation per
se. The question of “otherness” could also be used to explore how the
character Magua (the “bad” Indian) is portrayed in the romantic/somewhat
cheesy Daniel-Day Lewis Last of the Mohicans, a film you’ll be watching
at the end of the semester.
4--Shane (another film at the end of the semester) has a very
interesting last scene in which the hero disappears into the distant
horizon, and the young lad calls out “Shane, Shane!” Figure out how
to build an entire essay on the meaning of this key closing scene
(obviously you analyze the entire film, or use scenes from the entire film:
the trick here, though, is to make a lot of a little … to make a crucial
scene resonate as analytically powerfully as possible.)
5--Rowlandson: would you say that Rowlandson ever gets to know the
Indians? Or does she use them only for rhetorical/theological
purposes?
6--Rowlandson: what is the relation between the many
scriptural passages Rowlandson quotes and her own (self)-narrative?
Don’t neglect the key one in which she reads the odd passage where God in
effect says he is unknowable.
7--Rowlandson: at the end of her narrative she reflects: “I
can remember the time when I used to sleep quietly without workings in my
thoughts, whole nights together, but now it is other ways with me. When all
are fast about me, and no eye open, but His who ever waketh, my thoughts
are ….” What causes her insomnia?
8--Equiano: read carefully the key passage in which Equiano
gets a new “blue” suit or the passage in which he speaks of managing some
slaves. Use one or the other as a central part of an argument about
Equiano’s potentially compromised identity and allegiances.
9--Equiano: especially for those into psychology, perhaps the best explanation
of Equiano is that he replaces the vacated sense of his homeland (his
“mother”-land) with a surrogate “father”-land (England) and various
surrogate fathers. Explore.
10--Ashbridge: you’ll be reading Ashbridge directly before the
essay is due, so you will need to read ahead to know if you want to write
on her, and so I will provide only one topic. She obviously has
issues with men: explore.
TERM PAPER INSTRUCTIONS: STAGE
TWO—NUTS & BOLTS REQUIREMENTS
1. Your essay should be about 3000 words (that’s equivalent to
ten pages double-spaced ) or more, and should be polished stylistically
and, of course, correct in terms of grammar, punctuation, citations, and so
on. You may use whatever citation method you prefer—i.e.,
Chicago style (citations as endnotes) or MLA style (citations in
text). See brief explanation of the two styles below.
2. Turn your paper into me via Blackboard-integrated
Turnitin. Do not provide a cover page; put your name/classname/date
turned in/your title at the top of the first page. Submit in
single-spaced (I’m the exception on this, as professors go).
3. Be prepared, should it be requested, to supply a draft
stage of the essay (if you're wondering; this helps discourage
plagiarism!). This means you must remember to permanently save a draft at
some point as you are composing.
4. You must integrate at least two pieces of research.
You may paraphrase, cite directly via “”s, or cite via endnotes. A
(brief) Bibliography is required. This secondary material may be historical-cultural,
biographical, and/or critical-interpretive, depending on your
argument. It may not come directly from low-level websites
(SparkNotes, Wikipedia, etc), but it may come from academic journals that
are available through the web (and via the FIU library online journal
section)--namely ProjectMuse or JStor articles--or scholarly volumes in the
library. ProjectMuse and JStor will be explained more fully in the
last section below, where I will give some secondary source suggestions.
5. Do NOT choose a comparative topic (as always, there
are exceptions). (I discourage comparative topics because I want you
to look at a particular text, not, as it were, between several texts.
When you compare apples and oranges you learn that an apple is smooth, and
an orange is pebbly; one is red or green, the other is orange, and so
on. Not too interesting. When you look at the orange that
you’ve just grabbed from the bowl, you sense its weight; its texture; the
little bit of rot if left too long…. Get it? In this regard, I likely
differ from any number of professors who have encouraged comparative
topics; I find them low-level and dopey [the comparative approach, not the
professors!]).
6. You may draw upon my lecture notes/reviews, but do
not just parrot my ideas and interpretations. You do not need to cite
me (“Prof. Harvey lecture on….”).
7. Refer to the Checklist below and please note the Grading
Scale. Bottom line: think hard and you get rewarded!
9. I will NOT look at drafts, but I will toss ideas around via
Blackboard email or see you in conference time allowing.
10. Finally, pleaszzzeeeee … try to have intellectual fun with
your paper. Try to get yourself in the “zone” (the way you appreciate
a hobby) in which you take unself-conscious pleasure in analyzing; stop
worrying about a grade and getting it right, and so on.
GRADING SCALE:
A = Focused, interesting main idea suggesting that you read,
re-read, and probed around the text at hand. Prose is not merely correct:
it is compelling and sophisticated. Organization makes sense given the
topic and argument of the paper. The paper is of sufficient quality that it
could be put online as a sample paper.
B = Main idea and development are clear, but the organization
is weak in a section or two, or there are a few sentence or punctuation
glitches that suggest careless editing.
C= Paper has a main idea, but not thought through by attending
to the text actively. Organization falls apart at key moments. Sentence
construction, although usually correct, is often imprecise or wordy. Nearly
every page shows signs of careless editing.
D = The thesis is vague, and the organization is very
chaotic. The paper indicates little insight about or basic
understanding of the author/text. Or the prose/grammar suggests the need to
go to the Writing Center.
F = The paper was not turned in. Such will receive (on a
0-100 scale) a “0”.
EDITING/REVISING CHECKLIST:
Three tips for effective revising:
-- Revise
with "fresh eyes": revise at least a day after you've completed a
substantial draft.
-- Use a
printed copy and revise at a different locale than your computer.
-- Revise in
four "loops," using the revision checklist below.
Yes
No
CONTENT
____ ____ sharply focused:
no extraneous material
____ ____ complex aspects
of issue thoughtfully examined
____ ____ judicious use of
supporting specifics/quotes
ORGANIZATION & DEVELOPMENT
____ ____ unified
paragraphs, with clear topic sentences
____ ____ transitions
between ideas and sections of essay
____ ____ essay unfolds
stage-by-stage, no unnecessary "back-tracking" or repetition of
sections
PROSE STYLE
____ ____ straightforward
and precise phrasing, without sentence fragments or run-ons
____ ____ few boring
"is" verbs
____ ____ appropriate use
of transition words
____ ____ varied sentence
length and patterns
CORRECT GRAMMAR, ETC.
____ ____ correct use of
possessives and punctuation
____ ____ correct match
between verbs and subjects
____ ____ no
typos/misspellings
Chicago Style Versus MLA Style of Citation
You can find lots of web sites that will explain both citation
styles, but in essence:
Chicago style:
1) Uses standard bibliographic listing of Works Cited.
2) Endnotes, indexed to superscript numbers in the main text,
cite the article or book that you are quoting from, paraphrasing from, or
drawing upon ideas from.
3) Endnotes may also be substantive, mini-disquisitions: “For
an excellent review of the problem of Babo, see John Doe’s Melville and
Slavery. However, Doe neglects to contextualize adequately Melville’s
concerns with violence….” Blah blah.
4) Some people like the mini-disquisition in the endnotes (I
do); others believe if a point is important to make, make it in your main
text.
MLA style:
1) Also uses standard bibliographic listing of Works Cited.
2) Tends not to use endnotes, and more “scientifically” and
directly relates points you are making/borrowing to citations within your
main text. E.g. “Babo has often not been contextualized (Doe, Melville
and Slavery, 22-34).
3) The intext citations (parallel to how the sciences and
social sciences typically cite) makes it seem as if what you are writing
progresses from what other scholars have said. You are welcome to it,
but I find it clutters my ability to read an article/paper, and the
citation is often ambiguous (i.e., in the above, does “Doe” not
contextualize, or does “Doe” make the observation that Babo has not been
contextualized?). I rather like the verbosity of the Chicago style, but that
is exactly why the MLA style was created!
TERM PAPER INSTRUCTIONS: STAGE
THREE—TIPS FOR LITERARY ESSAY WRITING
(examples come from a
variety of classes):
1. IDEAS EMERGE FROM THE TEXT. Abstraction will
only carry you so far. It’s best, once you have a glimmer of an idea,
to read and re-read, taking notes, circling important symptomatic passages,
and making connections with kindred passages. It is quite possible to
have whole paragraphs or more in your essay without reference to a
particular passage (i.e. no quote), but such paragraphs can only emerge if
you are truly intimate with a text and really focused on it. Look for
the little oddities, etc., that lead you to track down patterns of tension
in the text. Such doesn't mean that you end up writing about trivia;
it just means you avoid starting with abstract themes or issues in your
brain-storming/idea-generating process.
2. ARGUMENTS ARE NOT DICED-UP THEMES. One does not
want to say "the theme of marriage has three aspects in Middlemarch."
We are taught to think that way in high school and in composition
classes. Maybe we need to start out that way, but it leads to limited
rhetorical possibilities and limited argument sophistication. It is
better to think of a text as having an issue that it is
"obsessed" by and needs to find a "remedy" for.
Then you sort of play doctor/detective. Maybe even start your paper
with an odd quote that manifests, as it were, a symptom. And then you
uncover layer by layer the complexities of the issue/problem, and then show
how the problem is resolved or not resolved. In an ideal student
world, these complexities and issues resonate with something within you,
which makes you want to chase down meaning. The reader doesn’t want
to know what your obsessions are, but I do believe personal connections to
your “objective” material makes for stronger, more incisive, and
interesting arguments usually.
3. DO NOT GO INTO CELEBRATION MODE, as if you writing an
introduction to some high-school edition of the text.
4. DO NOT RUN TO THE LIBRARY IMMEDIATELY. You must think
through some issues before you conduct research. If you
"own" an idea initially, your research will have direction and
focus and you will be less likely to get lost in the morass of other
scholarly perspectives. But ultimately you must be in dialogue with
other specific interpretations. Good scholarship assumes an audience
that is engaged in ongoing dialogues about authors or texts or issues.
(For this class, I am not asking that you do a lot of secondary
research—just two instances.)
5. REVISION AND RE-THINKING IS NEVER DONE. Everyone's
draft-to-completion process works differently. But usually you have
to go through a draft over and over and over again, heaping on layers of
complexity, twists and turns, more "But this is not the real malaise
the family suffers from. If we go back to the first scene, the real
problem turns out to be...."s. The obvious challenge with this
is that you do not have time to slowly cook the paper. But that,
nonetheless, is what I am asking of you.
6. REPEAT ABOVE!
7. AUDIENCE: Assume an audience much like your fellow
students--familiar with the work, but unfamiliar with your particular
approach, and therefore requiring specific examples (textual evidence) to
understand, appreciate, and accept your analysis and argument. Avoid plot
summary or tedious repetition of an author's points without higher level
analysis, however.
8. PLAY WITH TITLES (AND SUBSECTION TITLES, IF THE PAPER IS
LONGER THAN 12 PAGES) early on in the process. This may seem to go
against the "don't think abstractly" rule, but trying to come up
with clever titles in fact can work as a good way of brainstorming, as long
as you see them as being provisional. You might not even know what
your title means initially! Sub-headings--when you’re writing a
longer paper--can help control some of those wacky ideas that get too
wacky, because you know whether sub-contents fit the sub-label. And
please: your main essay title is the first chance to make an impression. A
vague title (e.g., "Melville’s Bartleby") that could fit any
other paper written on the same author gives a vague impression, indicating
that the essay to follow likely lacks a focused main point. Nothing is more
irritating (to me) than a vague title: it indicates, immediately,
carelessness.
9. WE MUST KNOW YOUR THESIS/MAIN POINT BY THE END OF
YOUR INTRODUCTION. But don't think of a thesis as capturing the
entirety of your argument or analysis. All that is needed is a
nomination of the main issue/question in play (not the answer). This
allows for an inductive rather than deductive approach. (Many of my tips
are suggesting an inductive method of getting ideas and composing.)
Please do not start off with weighty generalities about morality, the human
condition, and so on. Avoid the "funnel" opening paragraph if
possible. If your introduction is more than a single paragraph (it
might be two paragraphs if, for instance, you were setting up an author in
terms of especially pertinent historical or cultural background), give an
extra line space between the introduction and paper proper.
10. QUOTES. Depositing too many long quotes in a paper
wastes space. Too few or no quotes, however, suggest inattention to the
text or texts. You should probably have one or two longer, inset quotes,
which you set up and analyze; the purpose here is to indicate that there
are especially key or symptomatic passages that warrant lingering over
because they are so revelatory. Quotes, besides helping to
anchor/prove your points, often lead to analytical discoveries as you
ponder/unpack them.
11. FIRST REAL SECTION OF YOUR ESSAY MIGHT BE
HISTORICAL. After your introduction, depending upon your topic/text,
you might have some background information about the author, the era, the
place, etc. This is reassuring to the reader because it makes you
seem knowledgeable.
12. DEVELOPMENT. Good essays unfold a major idea or
argument stage-by-stage, in a manner that will be compelling and convincing
to the reader. This means that the old, boring high-school strategy of
breaking down your basic idea into three (more or less disconnected)
subpoints may not be the most suitable arrangement. Instead, for example,
an essay (depending upon the thesis, of course) could in the first fourth
highlight some intriguing contradiction or tension in a text; the next
fourth might frame the tension in terms of a larger moral, literary,
philosophical, religious, or historical debate or issue; and the last two
fourths would illustrate the ramifications of the tension for the text
you're exploring (tensions resolved? and if so, by what means? tensions not
resolved? and if so, how does the author/narrator cope with irresolution?).
An essay can be thoughtful and well-organized, and yet still be confusing
to the reader. Most often this occurs because the essay writer needs to
provide clearer sign-posts to the overall argument. At crucial junctures
(the topic sentence for a paragraph introducing a new stage of your
argument), try to foreground analytical points rather than just something
about character or the plot or the page-by-page sequence of a text's ideas.
There are two basic patterns of development:
Deductive: here, you state the thesis of your argument (your
main point) directly up front and proceed to provide evidence for your main
point. For example: you could make your main point "Equiano's
obsession with status is not defensible" or "Equiano's obsession
with status is justified." And then the subsequent paragraphs
would present aspects of your position and your evidence for those aspects.
Dialectical/inductive: here you proceed to make successive
more complex discoveries through a thesis--antithesis--synthesis
pattern. For example: the first third of your paper would explore how
"Equiano is obsessed with status"; the second third would explore
"how Equiano is in fact filling in a void with status seeking";
and the last third would pull the two ideas together through a more complex
observation, that "Equiano fills in his grief of being exiled from his
native country by seeking to emulate the status values of European
culture" (note how what seems to be a negative point about
Equiano--that he is a sell out by seeking status--ends up to be a more
complex positive point). Rhetorically, in your introduction you may
want to state your overall point as "Equiano fills in his
grief..." or you might want, without being vague, to state the thesis
as a problem that your paper in effect solves, but without giving the
solution immediately: "Clearly, Equiano's eagerness to obtain status
makes his character a vexing one if we assume he should remain consistently
loyal to his native country or identity."
13. IF YOU DON'T, DO READ YOUR OWN PROSE ALOUD for a
better style. It is easy to start getting pompous sounding and lost
in verbiage. I do it all the time! ALSO: print out a hard-copy
and edit from a hard-copy, at least once during your drafting of your
essay. A lot of slop occurs because you compose and edit on a PC.
Print your essay draft out in a smaller/different font (this helps
defamiliarize your from your own words), go into your livingroom or take a
bath with your essay, pen in hand, etc etc, and edit… anywhere not in front
of the PC.
14. PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT WORKS FOR YOU WHEN YOU READ
SCHOLARSHIP. This may mean specific rhetorical maneuvers (i.e., how
to write an introduction), or just words that you've never used before and
that have a lot of critical-theoretical possibilities packed within (“gaze”
for instance). It sounds dull, but you should start keeping a list of
such words if you are into literary theory.
15. DO NOT BE AFRAID OF BEING THEORETICAL, BUT DEMYSTIFY
THEORY BEFORE YOU BEGIN USING IT (THIS TIP IS FOR THOSE INTERESTED IN
LITERART THEORY). Applying theory can be the direct, self-conscious
application of a theoretical perspective (and perhaps querying the utility
of the perspective at the same time); or the theory can mostly be in the
sort of issues/content you focus on (gender issues, sexuality, body stuff,
imperialism, othering); or it can be the use of a certain vocabulary (gaze,
other, compulsory heterosexuality, and so on). The extent to which
you actually cite theorists in your essay, if you are so inclined, is going
to be highly variable according to your topic, personal style, background
and so forth. Theory (to me) is best used as a brainstorming
device--a lens that helps you see things you might not already see.
Your own idiosyncratic interests and the need for a cogent, coherent
argument that YOU believe in will do the rest. That's why I repeat
the mantra of "listen to the text" AND "listen to your
response." You want to avoid the ventriloquy effect of many contemporary
scholarly-interpretive essays, which often all sound very much alike, all
making the same moves, all citing the same theorists, and so on. In
essence, the best writing happens from playing intellectual ping-pong with
yourself.
TERM
PAPER INSTRUCTIONS: STAGE FOUR—SECONDARY RESOURCES FOR TOPICS ABOVE
Go to the main
online page for FIU Libraries, click on the link to connect from home (if
you are working from home), click on "Find Articles and Do
Research" link, find the "A-Z" list of electronic
journals/resources, find the electronic journal database "Project Muse"
and/or “JStor,” do a search using the terms (without quote marks) of your
main author and one word nominating your topic (you might have to use a
variety of topic words: example “Rowlandson Indians” or “Rowlandson
mourning” or “Rowlandson Bible” etc.).
Usually, 5-10 articles will pop up. Select the two that seem most
pertinent, and incorporate them as you see fit. Keep in mind I give you
broad latitude on this. I’m not interested in you doing research per se as
much as learning the rhetoric of including research in YOUR argument.
If you can find only one relevant article, you may use as your second
research source any of the introductory/editorial apparatus in the editions
ordered for the course.
Do not email me about how to find articles using electronic FIU resources.
It’s your responsibility to figure that out. ProjectMuse and JStor will
suffice once you tap into them!
***************************************
Finally, let me repeat: I’d much prefer a somewhat sloppy,
risky thoughtful paper than a paper that boringly discusses a “theme” in
three major sections. I cannot give you permission to meander, but I
find that students sometimes in their effort to be tidy (with outlines of
ideas, for example) actually turn out to shut down thought. They think
they want to write about “X”, and rather than seeing that “X” is very
complex, do a sort of highschool equation a+b+c=x. Bottom line: if
you know what your paper is about before you write your paper, it will be a
bad paper!
|