Here it is. The biggest blog post
in all the land. It’s also our last. Use everything you’ve
got. We strongly recommend working in groups of 2 or 3. But if
that’s impossible, at the end of the semester, you can do it yourself
instead. (Either way, just make it clear in your post who did the
work!)
Part
One (4 points): Observation—Signification and Rhetoric
This is the what and how—what
is this book doing to us, and how is
it doing it? Obviously it does a lot of things to its readers, so: choose one important thing you see it
doing, and explain it in detail. Think about all of our discussions (and
past blog posts) about positioning.
But whatever you choose, most important is the detail. Find a few key
moments in the book where you see that thing being done, and read them
closely. Stick to the text—no outside sources. Pay attention to
wording. To selection of detail. To names. To verb
tenses. To narrative. To empathy. To intertextuality.
This is show and tell. Show us something, and explain how it works.
[The focus here is on DETAILED DESCRIPTION: show us the
unexpected and un-noticed details about the book (remember 'Reading Culture'
from our syllabus. p 2?).]
(Example:
in our work on Avatar, we analyzed
several clips of “nature” scenes on Pandora. What they were doing to
us? They were making us love Pandora, and ultimately take a side with the
Na’vi against Colonel Quidditch and the humans. How were they doing
it? We analyzed lots of visual and audio signifiers that were in these
clips—tails, whirling white thingies, monsters-turned-dogs, camera angles, growling
sound effects, Titanic-like
underscoring, etc.—and discussed the ways that, put all together, these
signifiers constructed strong feelings in us, the viewers. This what
we’re asking you to do here.)
Part
Two (4 points): Theory—Analysis and Context
This is the why it works the way it does. You’ve already analyzed one thing
the book is doing and the ways it’s doing it—now, you’re going to analyze why
it works that way on audiences here and now. What makes the signifiers
you described signify in the ways that they do? What hegemonic ideologies
of contemporary Western/American culture do your moments from the book draw
on? How, in Hall’s sense, does Susan Collins make her meanings “intelligible”
to young American readers in the early 21st century? Here’s
where the theory, the keywords, and the outside sources come in. Use
anything you need, from anywhere in the course. Cite material from
outside the course if you need to, but otherwise stick to what we’ve got…which
is plenty.
[The focus here is on THEORIZED EXPLANATION (sorry about the
jargon): use our theoretical concepts (and really use them; not just mention or name them) to show how the book works
(remember 'Theorizing Culture' from our syllabus. p 2?).]
(Example: after we analyzed the Avatar clips, we looked at Wordsworth
and Rousseau and Hobbes—and the concept of Romanticism—to understand why those
particular signifiers in the Avatar
clips evoked all those strong feelings in us. The reason why huge
orchestral music and light-up ground and whirring beach-sounding white discs
make our “hearts leap up,” we discovered, was because of a 200 year long
history of similar representations, which have entered our cultural “common sense.”
They have become part of our habitus. Our bodies react to them, in ways
that seem natural, but are anything but.)
Part
Three (4 points): Argument—Agency and Representation
This is the why it matters. By now you’ve explained to us what the book is
doing, how it’s doing it, and why it resonates with contemporary American
audiences. Now comes the most important question: why should we
care? What does it matter? Here’s where you’ll draw on your
observations (Part One) and your analysis (Part Two) to make an argument about how this book’s representation of reality gives it agency to affect the way we think and
act in the world.
[The focus here is on CRITICAL ENGAGEMENT: remembering that
all cultural activity has the power to shape, change and maybe even improve
lives, take a position and argue for it—about whether this novel (and all the
stuff around it—reviews, websites, Tumblr reblogging, arguments with the library,
cosmetics, action figures, pundits) is good for us or bad for us (remember 'Changing Culture' from our
syllabus. p 2?).]
(Example: after we studied
Romantic literature and political theory, we went back and looked at the Toruk
Maktou scene again. We read its signifiers (Part One), we discussed the
way it connected with Rousseau and Hobbes (Part Two)—and then we used those
things to make an argument. Our argument was: Avatar is making us feel really excited and happy about the White
Messiah who’s come in to save the helpless non-white people. Even though
it draws on Rousseau-like representations of nature and “noble savages” in
nature, it ultimately suggests that these non-white, non-human natives need a
white male human Marine, with all the training and trappings of civilization,
to come save them. We end up being opposed to most people from
civilization, because they’re insensitive to the environment and native
cultures and only care about profit, but feeling like certain people from civilization,
like Jake, are absolutely necessary. Note that we didn’t say this message
was “good” or “bad”—that depends on your own opinion, which is irrelevant
here. But whatever your point of view, it’s important.)
Comment
(3 points)
Spend some time writing your
comment. 2 points means you clearly read the post carefully and
participated in a serious critique of the post’s observations, analysis, and
argument. 1 point means you didn’t read the post carefully, and/or your
commentary is superficial. 3 points means you bring something new and
important into the discussion—a new theoretical perspective, a new context, a
new piece of Hunger Games text that
complicates the argument.
Good luck! And, well, you know
about the odds…
No comments:
Post a Comment