paper topics
20 January 2004 14:35![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
juldeaOkay. Dr. Goble has found the paper topics for the two papers I could write, and has given me an offer for a third. This will give the some of you who want to help a bit of insight on what he (Dr. Goble) is like and what he looks for.
LTRS 4503
Letters Capstone
. . . the experiment continues
First, some things you probably should know. The chapter "Sad Irons" somewhat past the mid-point of Robert Caro's The Path to Power, the first of his eventual four-volume The Years of Lyndon Johnson. Like everything else that Caro (or any thinking author) writes, it fits into a larger context. In this case, the largest context happens to be the defining theme of the entire multi-volume biography, namely the relationship between Johnson's insatiable desire for his own power on one side and his desire to use that power to benefit others on the other. The relationship is complex, and (even now) Caro is still in the exploring process. "Sad Irons" is to be understood as a piece of that puzzle in its earliest form.
When this chapter appears, Johnson is primed to entire his first term in Congress, representing the Tenth Congressional District of Texas. For most of the preceding 500-odd pages, Caro has zeroed in on his incredible drive to get as much power as he can any way he can. Only briefly has Caro discussed the uses to which Johnson might put that power, however. "Sad Irons" is a major first step to Caro's broadening his inquiry to take on that part of the question. Even then, however, the chapter appears on the heels of his discussion of LBJ's unfolding relationship with George and Herman Brown and their construction company, Brown and Root. Suffice it to say that Brown and Root needs a congressman and needs one badly. Johnson is their boy - but not a victim unawares. On the contrary: LBJ has cultivated that relationship, believing that it is his nearest and most direct "Path to Power." But power for what ends? Is there a larger, more consequential, and more laudatory story here? "Sad Irons" begins Caro's answer.
As it opens, his (Caro's, that is) chief purpose is to introduce the reader to life as it was known in central Texas, the Tenth District in fact, at the time the district (and Brown and Root) was sending Lyndon Johnson to Washington. That is why the name Johnson scarcely appears (and then only tangentially) in the chapter. For that matter, neither do Brown and Root nor Washington nor the United States Congress - none are here. That is as it must be, for this is the story not of power nor even of politics; it is the story of people. Plain people. People who, as it happens, also need a congressman and need one badly. "Sad Irons" tells the reader why they do. Thereby, it prepares that reader to appreciate what they will get from that congressman - prepared for what Brown and Root and many other not-so-plain people will be getting, too.
That is not the point here. Here the question is certainly simpler, maybe harder, and hopefully more important. The question is How does he do it?
We'll make that our question, too. First, we will be doing it together, walking slowly through Caro's words, trying to see what he is doing and how he is doing it. Then you will - individually. In a written assignment.
Specifically, break apart Caro's text and tell me what you see. Take that section that runs from page 503, line 17 through page 505, line 38. What's he doing there and how's he doing it? That one, we (or I) will address. The remainder you will. As detailed as you can. As thoughtfully you can, And as soon as you can. Meaning the first class meeting after spring break.
See you.
LTRS 4503
Letters Capstone
Wit - the play, the film, the story, all are elaborations upon many themes. More than the themes, though, are their patterns. Nearly every theme is introduced, explored, and resolved (if at all) in the form of a puzzle, a paradox. Not without reason, then, do so many of the pivotal scenes consciously discuss and conspicuously use one or both words. You need to do the same.
Specifically, what do you see as the central paradox upon which the film/ story is based? How is it developed? How is it resolved, if at all?
In theory, the University of Oklahoma's Bachelor of Letters degree signifies that those who have earned it have thereby mastered the skills of critical reading and reasoning as well as the are of clear and artful expression, particularly written expression. Theory also holds that such skills, though unattached to any particular trade or vocation, are, in fact, absolutely essential to success in any and every "real world" career. More than that, such abilities enable one to not merely a profitable life but one that is truly good as well.
In your personal experience, to what degree do these theories (at this point) match your experiences. If you have, in fact, improved your grasp of such skills, how did your college work contribute to that? If not, why did it fail? Do you anticipate a future that will be in any way enriched by the work you did in earning this degree? How so? Why? (or why not?)
PS: If you choose this option, I urge you to think carefully and to write persuasively. Meaning (in part) at least 5 pages, hopefully a bit more . . . .
I didn't do the first one because I didn't have/make the time to read the chapter. I didn't do the second one because of massive writer's block; we had discussed the movie in class and many neat topics were brought up, therefore I couldn't use them and had to think up something of my own to use in order to be intelligent and innovative. And I couldn't. The third one bothers me because my first instinct is to write, "That five years was a waste of my life." And then of course there's a block on coming up with my own idea.
Sigh. I'm so close, and yet so far.
LTRS 4503
Letters Capstone
. . . the experiment continues
First, some things you probably should know. The chapter "Sad Irons" somewhat past the mid-point of Robert Caro's The Path to Power, the first of his eventual four-volume The Years of Lyndon Johnson. Like everything else that Caro (or any thinking author) writes, it fits into a larger context. In this case, the largest context happens to be the defining theme of the entire multi-volume biography, namely the relationship between Johnson's insatiable desire for his own power on one side and his desire to use that power to benefit others on the other. The relationship is complex, and (even now) Caro is still in the exploring process. "Sad Irons" is to be understood as a piece of that puzzle in its earliest form.
When this chapter appears, Johnson is primed to entire his first term in Congress, representing the Tenth Congressional District of Texas. For most of the preceding 500-odd pages, Caro has zeroed in on his incredible drive to get as much power as he can any way he can. Only briefly has Caro discussed the uses to which Johnson might put that power, however. "Sad Irons" is a major first step to Caro's broadening his inquiry to take on that part of the question. Even then, however, the chapter appears on the heels of his discussion of LBJ's unfolding relationship with George and Herman Brown and their construction company, Brown and Root. Suffice it to say that Brown and Root needs a congressman and needs one badly. Johnson is their boy - but not a victim unawares. On the contrary: LBJ has cultivated that relationship, believing that it is his nearest and most direct "Path to Power." But power for what ends? Is there a larger, more consequential, and more laudatory story here? "Sad Irons" begins Caro's answer.
As it opens, his (Caro's, that is) chief purpose is to introduce the reader to life as it was known in central Texas, the Tenth District in fact, at the time the district (and Brown and Root) was sending Lyndon Johnson to Washington. That is why the name Johnson scarcely appears (and then only tangentially) in the chapter. For that matter, neither do Brown and Root nor Washington nor the United States Congress - none are here. That is as it must be, for this is the story not of power nor even of politics; it is the story of people. Plain people. People who, as it happens, also need a congressman and need one badly. "Sad Irons" tells the reader why they do. Thereby, it prepares that reader to appreciate what they will get from that congressman - prepared for what Brown and Root and many other not-so-plain people will be getting, too.
That is not the point here. Here the question is certainly simpler, maybe harder, and hopefully more important. The question is How does he do it?
We'll make that our question, too. First, we will be doing it together, walking slowly through Caro's words, trying to see what he is doing and how he is doing it. Then you will - individually. In a written assignment.
Specifically, break apart Caro's text and tell me what you see. Take that section that runs from page 503, line 17 through page 505, line 38. What's he doing there and how's he doing it? That one, we (or I) will address. The remainder you will. As detailed as you can. As thoughtfully you can, And as soon as you can. Meaning the first class meeting after spring break.
See you.
LTRS 4503
Letters Capstone
Wit - the play, the film, the story, all are elaborations upon many themes. More than the themes, though, are their patterns. Nearly every theme is introduced, explored, and resolved (if at all) in the form of a puzzle, a paradox. Not without reason, then, do so many of the pivotal scenes consciously discuss and conspicuously use one or both words. You need to do the same.
Specifically, what do you see as the central paradox upon which the film/ story is based? How is it developed? How is it resolved, if at all?
In theory, the University of Oklahoma's Bachelor of Letters degree signifies that those who have earned it have thereby mastered the skills of critical reading and reasoning as well as the are of clear and artful expression, particularly written expression. Theory also holds that such skills, though unattached to any particular trade or vocation, are, in fact, absolutely essential to success in any and every "real world" career. More than that, such abilities enable one to not merely a profitable life but one that is truly good as well.
In your personal experience, to what degree do these theories (at this point) match your experiences. If you have, in fact, improved your grasp of such skills, how did your college work contribute to that? If not, why did it fail? Do you anticipate a future that will be in any way enriched by the work you did in earning this degree? How so? Why? (or why not?)
PS: If you choose this option, I urge you to think carefully and to write persuasively. Meaning (in part) at least 5 pages, hopefully a bit more . . . .
I didn't do the first one because I didn't have/make the time to read the chapter. I didn't do the second one because of massive writer's block; we had discussed the movie in class and many neat topics were brought up, therefore I couldn't use them and had to think up something of my own to use in order to be intelligent and innovative. And I couldn't. The third one bothers me because my first instinct is to write, "That five years was a waste of my life." And then of course there's a block on coming up with my own idea.
Sigh. I'm so close, and yet so far.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
on 21 Jan 2004 09:37 (UTC)no subject
on 21 Jan 2004 16:04 (UTC)You have carte blanche if you're allowed to propose alternatives. The way to best use this opportunity is this: Instead of finding something to say about the works you've been assigned, find a work you have something to say about, and write on it instead.
If someone came to you -- as a friend of mine just came to me in a recent LJ meme -- and said "Recommend a book and a movie to me" what would you recommend? And if they asked you, "Tell me why I should see it?" what would you say?
There's a number of avenues to pursue to find a work to write on:
* Pick something which makes you angry. Explain why it's wrong.
* Pick something you love, especially if you feel its undervalued. Explain it's virtue.
* Pick something which really made you think or confused you. Explain what was so unusual about it, why you think the author did that, and whether or not you feel the author was effective as his/her aims.
* Pick something which changed your mind. Describe where you were, where you got to, and how the author got you there.
* Pick something which showed you its seams, which made you aware of the choices of the creator in putting it together: language use, symbolism, narrative structure, literary devices, cinematography. Describe how the creator went about creating.
It's much easier to find something you're already passionate about, and write about it, than it is to find passion about something you've got. And, frankly, five to ten pages doesn't require much passion at all.
It's better to have something to say and to struggle with how to say it, than to struggle to find something to say in the first place. I don't think it's the job of a Liberal Arts degree (though what do I know, I don't have one) to teach you how to find something to say about anything -- that's bullshitting -- but to equip you to deliver whatever message you find yourself carrying.
So what messages do you have? What things do you have something to say something about?
That's what I would recommend you pursue. That way you might yet manage to snatch some education from the jaws of schooling.
no subject
on 25 Jan 2004 21:49 (UTC)I like your ideas, and am pondering how I could turn His Dark Materials into a paper, seeing as how I'm often having something to say about it - or at least wriggling in joy at a particular passage. Or I could go over one of my other favorite books - the idea of choosing something that I use as an answer in "suggest something" memes is really great. After all, these are things I'm passionate about.