Hello class! This week we'll again be debriefing dialectical journals and learning from each other different ways to strengthen our analytical writing. Here's what's on the docket for this post:
Debriefing our Setting Dialectical JournalsThank you so much to the anonymous students whose work we are learning from today! Just two student samples today. Let's check out the first one: Setting: How does the setting function in the story? Concrete: “She had met Mrs. Peters the year before at the country fair, and the thing she remembered about her was that she didn’t seem like a sheriff’s wife. She was small and thin and didn’t have a strong voice.” This setting shows that Mrs. Hale thinks Mrs.Peters personality is timid because of the way she looks. She thinks she doesn’t fit to be a sheriff's wife. Abstract: The effect of my noticing is showing how Mrs.Hale views the people around her or just her views in general. I think it contributes to the story because you gain more insight while reading the story. There are some important guiding principles that we can learn from this student example. Adding on to the guidelines discussed in our previous debriefing, here are three more guidelines: 1. Only the author's words in the concrete column, only your words in the abstract column. Quite a few of us were confused by this, partly perhaps because of my language (what did you notice) in the first column. I tweaked my words a bit (what did you notice in the text). What I mean by noticing is: what text leaps out at you? What strikes you as meaningful? In the dialectical journals, it's important to isolate our concrete noticing/hunting text skills and our extracting meaning/abstraction skills to be able to strengthen them and distinguish between the two skill sets. In the student example above, the student's words are added to the concrete. Some students also stuck extra quotes in the abstract column. Just keep it clean: concrete for column for the author's words, abstract column for yours. 2. Avoid general language. In the student example above, the student literally writes "her views in general." General language is abstract, but it serves us no purpose. With generalizations, we can end up saying nothing at all. Other common culprits were the words: "things," "something," and "aspect." 3. Avoid talking about yourself. Every piece of analytical writing can be strengthened by removing the language "I think" or "I believe." Remember from AP Lang about ethos, the credibility of the author? The "I think" undermines your authority as the analyzer. You sound wishy-washy. Best to just say it is how it is. Assert yourself when you analyze. In a related point, the general "you" should also be avoided. You can refer to specifics about the experience of the reader, but best to stay away from the assumptions and generalizations that come with an unqualified "you." And now let's look at an exemplary student example: Setting: How does the setting function in the story? Concrete: “the cupboard—a peculiar, ungainly structure, half closet and half cupboard, the upper part of it being built in the wall, and the lower part just the old-fashioned kitchen cupboard. As if its queerness attracted him, he got a chair and opened the upper part and looked in. After a moment he drew his hand away sticky.” Abstract: This quote is used to characterize man’s ability to glance over details that may be of importance. The dichotomous, queer structure of the cupboard serves to represent how men can only look to half of their story, their own perspective, while women can unveil the other half. The men are drawn to the queerness of the cupboard, yet are blind to the ultimate clue in the case: the bird’s cage. Ultimately, it’s the women whose alternative perspective allows them to open the cupboard and find the birdcage. The setting serves to characterize the gender divide throughout the plot. This student addressed how the setting reflected the characters (structure of the cupboard as a reflection of the men's limited perspectives) AND how the setting enhanced the theme of gender divides in the cultural landscape of "A Jury of Her Peers." Like many of your DJ's, this one earned a "Well done!" in the comments section. Callback/Review of Our Last Debriefing Before we move on to discussing the structure of your analytical paragraphs, I want to reiterate something I mentioned in our first debriefing from last week: at this level of writing, paraphrasing is our enemy. Paraphrasing is when you rewrite the author's words. There is no inference, no extracted meaning, no climbing the ladder of abstraction, no depth. And without any of these things, there is no analysis. Paraphrasing is still the number one most common problem with our DJ's, especially the substitution of paraphrase for abstractions. POV versus CharacterizationI've only graded about 1/3 of the Saunders POV Dialectical Journals, but I've graded enough to realize that some of us are confusing characterization (especially character perspective) with POV. The POV (point of view) of "Puppy" is 3rd person limited that switches between two character experiences: Marie and Callie. Most of the tension and conflict in the story comes from the difference in how these two characters perceive the world, and Saunders choice of POV is vital in unfolding the thoughts of these two characters. Characterization and POV are related, but not the same. Here's an example of a DJ that did a good job of addressing the function of the POV in the text: How does the point of view function? How does it affect plot, meaning, character perspective, and/or character motivation? Concrete: “So her mother could go right ahead and claim that she was spoiling the kids. These were not spoiled kids. These were well-loved kids. At least she’d never left one of them standing in a blizzard for two hours after a junior-high dance. At least she’d never drunkenly snapped at one of them, “I hardly consider you college material.” At least she’d never locked one of them in a closet (a closet!) while entertaining a literal ditchdigger in the parlor.” Abstract: The short story is told from a third person limited perspective, namely shifting between the inner dialogues of Marie and Callie. As demonstrated in the quote I have selected, the narration is delivered in a manner that conveys Marie and Callie’s voices. In this quote, the reader feels the resentment that Marie feels towards her mother and how she has channeled it as a mother to give her children everything that she grew up without. This reveals Marie’s motivations and it reveals how Marie views the world; she feels anger at bad parents, or what she perceives as bad parenting. because of the third person perspective, there is some distance between the reader and Marie. As a result, the narration maintains a degree of objectivity-the reader feels the bitterness that Marie regards her childhood with, but the story is not presented through this lens of resentment as it would be if the short story were told through Marie’s first person perspective. Writing Our Analytical ParagraphsThinking back to our discussion of the ladder of abstraction, we climb the ladder of abstraction when we write our dialectical journals. We collect our concrete evidence, then we make our abstractions as we consider what it means. In analytical paragraphs, we begin with our highest, most perceptive, most insightful, most original rung on our ladder of abstraction: our claim. Claims (and theses) must be abstract or they are not claims. After you state your claim, you climb back down to provide the concrete text evidence that supports your claim. Then you end with your conclusion, climbing back up. In an analytical paragraph, we climb down, then we climb up at least one time. Your paragraph should be at least five sentences long in order to give you enough space to develop the kind of depth that expected. Try to keep it ten sentences or less. Actively explain how your quotes support your claim. There should be many, many more of your words than Octavia Butler's words. Try to select small, meaningful quotes. Stay away from long meandering quotes. And use at least 2 quotes. Not more than 3. Unit 3 Novel Choices Which short story did you like the best? "Puppy," "Lusus Naturae," or "Bloodchild?" Next week, you will be voting on which novel we'll be reading, so use your vote wisely! Research the three books and cast your vote. As you can see from the cover, Lincoln in the Bardo won the 2017 Man Booker Prize and is a NY Times Bestseller. Here's a link to a review at the Guardian, where they don't have a paywall. I have never read it before, so we would all be experiencing this book for the first time together. Even though Margaret Atwood is most famous for A Handmaid's Tale, she's written so many other amazing novels. I read The Blind Assassin so long ago that I only have a vague remembrance of the plot, but I do remember it blew me out of the water. Here's another Guardian review to help you make your choice. It also won the Man Booker Prize in 2000. As we discussed in class, Octavia Butler received the MacArthur Genius Award for her work. Kindred uses time travel to explore themes of slavery and social justice. Walter Mosley said, "In Kindred, Octavia Butler creates a road for the impossible and a balm for the unbearable," which sounds pretty good to me right about now. Here's a link to a review on Medium.
Comments are closed.
|
AuthorI'm a Houston high school teacher. Welcome to my adapted, socially-distanced, quarantined AP English Literature and Composition classroom. Archives
May 2021
Categories |