STUDY GUIDES:
Create two new pages for the Gatsby Study Guide, one for Chapter 8 and one for Chapter 9. Ask roughly eight questions for each chapter, just as the Study Guide does for chapters 1-7. Include one Close Reading challenge per chapter.
ANSWERS:
Answer any two questions - other than the Close Readings - from each set of questions, for a total of four responses.
CLOSE READING EXERCISES:
In addition to the four responses, complete the Close Reading challenge you pose for each chapter.
THUS... Your completed assignment will consist of sixteen questions, four answers, and two close reading responses.
FORMAT: Completed responses should be typed. Spacing is up to you. Be clear.
DUE DATE: 3:30 p.m. on Tuesday, March 9, via email or in print.
QUESTIONS? Room 201 - tall guy - glasses, etc.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
The Papers
I admit it: I kept them for a long time because I genuinely didn’t want to give them back. They are dear to me because they’re variously so funny, so thoughtful, so original, and above all, so enthusiastic. Singular gems reside among them – I’ve taken the liberty of photocopying several; let me know if you object – but what I like best of all is the sensation of holding the whole stack in my hands. As a class you did such beautiful work, and I knew I’d be the last person ever to grip the whole stack.
A simpler way of saying it… You make me proud to be your teacher.
For this, the occasion of a generic message, please allow me some general observations:
TO THE BARTLEBY/RWE Authors: There were grades of ‘A’ on both sides of the argument. Some outstanding essays argued that Bartleby is Emerson’s great man; at least two strong papers earned top-honors by arguing that Bartleby is a schlump who defies “great-man” status. If you proved your point using abundant textual evidence to back up your arguments, you probably got a respectable grade. (Reminder: ‘B+’ = Very, Very Good in a 12th grade English course.)
TO THE THOREAU Authors: We have serious philosophers in this room. The Thoreau/Time prompt generated some of the most creative, profound, searching, and fearless essays I’ve read in my (admittedly brief) career. I’ll try to share some of your observations on the SmartBoard. Congratulations on addressing a biggie!
TO THE SCENE-Unto-TONE Essayists: As I said to Kellen, this required student authors to ski the black diamonds of literary analysis: through a slalom course, on sheer ice. This was to literary analysis what “skating figures” is to figure-skating: carving those perfect circles, ovals, etc. as you switch blades, cross ankles, etc. at just the right moments. There were a few wonderful essays in this batch – so strong, in fact, that I felt pangs of guilt for having asked you to write about anything else. This was the most “A.P.-like” of the four prompts, so I was extremely proud of each person who even contemplated writing it. (And P.S., if you didn’t do this one, you might remember it, because it’s the kind that dogs people on the A.P. Lit. exam… “How does scenery contribute to tone? How does irony contribute to characterization? How does setting affect mood?” The whole genre of “How does A affect B?” is “boffo” on the A.P. test these days, so please use your book speeches to warm up on this stuff!)
TO THE POETRY Authors: Congratulations on your bold decisions to write on America’s two finest poets. The most beautiful descriptive & analytical language emerged in this one; further, I thought yours was the gutsiest of the four choices, given the uber-succinct amount of time we’d spent on Whitman and, especially, Dickinson(!) as a class. I intend to share some of your fine work on the board.
To all: Congratulations again on the occasion of producing a strong batch of essays. I apologize for being so slow in returning them. Your score is based on 100 points (10-each in six categories; 20-each of two categories). A forthcoming announcement will explain a process for corrections and re-writes. (The worst area, overall, BTW, was that of Vague Pronoun Reference. If I had a nickel for every time I drew the “reverse-arrow-circle” gimmick (plus ?-mark), I’d be able to buy a cheap Toyota Camry with a reliable gas pedal. SV-Agrmt. suffered in a few cases; PAR means “You missed an opportunity to create a helpful parallelism.” Prepare to go a-fishin’ in these streams in the days ahead.)
PRB
A simpler way of saying it… You make me proud to be your teacher.
For this, the occasion of a generic message, please allow me some general observations:
TO THE BARTLEBY/RWE Authors: There were grades of ‘A’ on both sides of the argument. Some outstanding essays argued that Bartleby is Emerson’s great man; at least two strong papers earned top-honors by arguing that Bartleby is a schlump who defies “great-man” status. If you proved your point using abundant textual evidence to back up your arguments, you probably got a respectable grade. (Reminder: ‘B+’ = Very, Very Good in a 12th grade English course.)
TO THE THOREAU Authors: We have serious philosophers in this room. The Thoreau/Time prompt generated some of the most creative, profound, searching, and fearless essays I’ve read in my (admittedly brief) career. I’ll try to share some of your observations on the SmartBoard. Congratulations on addressing a biggie!
TO THE SCENE-Unto-TONE Essayists: As I said to Kellen, this required student authors to ski the black diamonds of literary analysis: through a slalom course, on sheer ice. This was to literary analysis what “skating figures” is to figure-skating: carving those perfect circles, ovals, etc. as you switch blades, cross ankles, etc. at just the right moments. There were a few wonderful essays in this batch – so strong, in fact, that I felt pangs of guilt for having asked you to write about anything else. This was the most “A.P.-like” of the four prompts, so I was extremely proud of each person who even contemplated writing it. (And P.S., if you didn’t do this one, you might remember it, because it’s the kind that dogs people on the A.P. Lit. exam… “How does scenery contribute to tone? How does irony contribute to characterization? How does setting affect mood?” The whole genre of “How does A affect B?” is “boffo” on the A.P. test these days, so please use your book speeches to warm up on this stuff!)
TO THE POETRY Authors: Congratulations on your bold decisions to write on America’s two finest poets. The most beautiful descriptive & analytical language emerged in this one; further, I thought yours was the gutsiest of the four choices, given the uber-succinct amount of time we’d spent on Whitman and, especially, Dickinson(!) as a class. I intend to share some of your fine work on the board.
To all: Congratulations again on the occasion of producing a strong batch of essays. I apologize for being so slow in returning them. Your score is based on 100 points (10-each in six categories; 20-each of two categories). A forthcoming announcement will explain a process for corrections and re-writes. (The worst area, overall, BTW, was that of Vague Pronoun Reference. If I had a nickel for every time I drew the “reverse-arrow-circle” gimmick (plus ?-mark), I’d be able to buy a cheap Toyota Camry with a reliable gas pedal. SV-Agrmt. suffered in a few cases; PAR means “You missed an opportunity to create a helpful parallelism.” Prepare to go a-fishin’ in these streams in the days ahead.)
PRB
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
