Live, from OCHS!

I'm back at my desk at work today and it's already a mess. Sigh. I thought I'd remind you what you'll need to do before next Wednesday. If you need more details about any of these assignments, you can find the Summer Homework post back in the June archive.

1. Memorize your rhetorical strategies. Expect a quiz soon.
2. Read "How to Mark a Book." Practice marking a book.
3. Read a novel. Send me four e-mails by September 1st.
4. Read the excerpt from "The Age of the Essay."
5. Maintain a "Curiosity Journal." Bring it with you on the first day of class.
6. Prepare a 500-750 word project proposal. Typed, double-spaced, easy to read 12 point font. Bring it with you on the first day of class.

Enjoy the last week of summer sun (so to speak)!

A Nice Poem

More than a few kids have asked if they have to successfully answer the question they ask in their papers. Poet Wendell Berry has crafted an excellent answer. You can find his poem, "IX," on the August 23, 2011 post at The Writer's Almanac.

How to Sound Smart When You're Confused

Many students are acknowledging struggles with their books without thinking deeply about the challenges. Here's an excellent example of one of your classmates grappling with a difficult book:

Student's e-mail:

The Mahabharata, abridged and translated by John D. Smith

Pages read: 203

    I'm thoroughly enjoying this book. I am learning a lot of Hinduism and the underlying principles of the religion. I have discovered dharma, adharma, social roles, reincarnation, fate and destiny. The book relates to “true wisdom” as consisting with the “understanding of the essential oneness of the human self with everything else in the universe.” Throughout India there is the superstition that reading The Mahabharata will bring misfortune, but in the beginning of the book is is said that anyone who even listens to this great story will be freed from their sins. This is acquired by reaching Brahma's realm and gaining equality with the gods.

    A great challenge of mine would be the pronunciation of Sanskrit. There's a reference included in the book explaining how to pronounce words, but there are so many characters and words in the book that I simply don't want to take the time to learn how to correctly pronounce everything. With this said, I feel bad and uneducated not knowing how to properly pronounce the names of the main characters. Another challenge I face is the one within my own mind. For example, King Yudhisthira was challenged to gamble with his evil cousin. He feels that he must accept the challenge, and it is apart of dharma, hence there is no way of avoiding it. He loses his kingdom and everything in it, his brothers, himself and his wife. This was all gained through deceit and the king was well aware of that. This section of the book nearly made me lose my mind. He did not have to gamble. Then he was lucky enough to gain everything back, but his family and him were sent into exile after another loss. My brain just couldn't understand his way of thinking.

My Response (with the most helpful part bolded):
I really enjoyed this response, largely because you were so honest and thoughtful about your struggles.


As for the struggles you mention, don't worry about pronunciation - yet. I tend to struggle with oddly spelled names and places, too, particularly when I read science fiction. My strategy is to pronounce the unfamiliar word the same way every time. That way, I can at least remember the character every time he comes up. With a book like this, there will come a time when you do want to pronounce the names and words correctly, but that time should come after you're done reading. Once you process the narrative and the arguments, it is important to go back and master the finer details, but the narrative and the arguments are much more important.

As for understanding the king's motives and choices, try finishing this sentence: I have no idea why he did what he did, but it might have been because ...

By beginning your analysis with that phrase, you give yourself permission to be wrong; once you do that, you're more than likely to be right.

Good and Better

Below are two paragraphs from one of your classmates. They are both about The Brothers Karamazov and they contain spoilers, so consider yourself warned.  I'll follow each response with a little commentary.

The first is from Quarterly Response 2. It is a very good response.

The Response: Aloysha finds this captain in deep poverty, drowning his troubles in a hovel, surrounded by his family. The small demon, Ilusha, is the captain's son, and attacked Aloysha because he was a Karamazov. The phrase "wisp of tow" refers to the captain's thin blond beard. After meeting the family, the captain and Aloysha walk out to talk. At first, the captain is immensely grateful for the money, but then seems to be either suspicious or ashamed. He grinds the money into the dust rabidly and walks off. I believe Dostoevsky's point here is that pride can also save you from dishonor or contempt.

My Comments: This is a very good response because it's a clear, well-written summary of an event in the section. Beyond that, the writer quotes the text directly (though he doesn't analyze the quotation at all). Most importantly, the writer finishes the paragraph with an analysis of Dostoevsky's argument. It's not just summary - it's summary that captures the reason the author included the event in the first place.

The second example is from Quarterly Response 4. It might not make sense if you haven't read the novel. Read it anyway, and I'll explain what makes it an excellent response in the commentary.

The Response: The actual case is rather ridiculous, in my opinion. The people clamoring for clemency for the accused believe, for the most part, that Dmitri is indeed guilty. They apparently consider patricide a forgivable crime. Is justice based merely on the current whims of the people? I feel that 'right' and 'wrong' are not affected by the burgeoning Bolshevik beau ideal. Luckily, the Russian peasants who compose the jury find patricide worthy of twenty years in the Siberian gold mines (Mme. Hohlakov suggested this to Dmitri as a money-making scheme. Ironic.). Yet another irony lies in the fact that Dmitri is innocent, and the 'enlightened' perversion of justice (the acquittal of a patricide) would actually have been fair. One slightly off-topic statement that I found interesting was Fetyukovitch's (Dmitri's excellent lawyer) reminder 'that the Russian court does not exist for punishment only, but also for the salvation of the criminal!' I am not sure if this is only impassioned rhetoric or the actual purpose of Russia's judicial system, but it could be the reason people are clinging to the hope of an acquittal.

My Comments: This is an excellent response because it synthesizes rather than summarizes. It begins with the student's opinion - that the case is ridiculous - and draws evidence from diverse places in the book to support that opinion. The first example simply moves from the beginning of the event to the end; this example covers a broader section of the text. At the end of the paragraph, the writer again moves away from summary towards analysis and reflection. 


Neither of these approaches is "wrong." In fact, other than the few responses which have simply been too short, it's hard to do this wrong. The second approach, however, is better, and it's much closer to the style of writing we'll be working on this year.

I hope you've been enjoying your books as much as I've enjoyed your responses!

Just Curious ...

How are your curiosity journals coming along? Any questions? Problems? Bragging to do? Comment below, but be sure to leave your name.

The Independent Project Clarification

I've received a similar question from three different folks, so I thought I'd address it here. They've all asked something along the lines of, "I have this great question, but I don't think I can answer it. What should I do?"

If you are in this situation, you should ask your question and, in your essay, tell me how you might go about answering it. It's not necessary for you to actually answer your question - the best questions might be impossible to answer - but you ought to be able to make progress towards an answer. You need to learn something along the way, even if you never reach your destination.

Example:
In the spirit of the Independent Project, I began this summer with a simple question: How do you write a song? I constantly tell poetry students that a song is nothing more than a poem set to music, but how do you sit down and set a poem to music?

Over the course of the summer, I've taken a variety of steps towards answering my question. I've read books from library, watched a DVD about songwriting, searched the 'net, played music with my friends, played along with my songs on my ipod. At each step, I've encountered problems and made gains. At each step, I learned that there was more to learn.

Will I actually write a song by the end of the summer? Maybe, but I'm leaning towards not likely. Will I play it for the class if I do? That would be a definite no, thanks for asking. Am I a much better musician than I was at the beginning of the summer? Yep. Do I have a better sense of what else I need to learn as a musician? Yep again. Do I know more about learning than I did five weeks ago? Yes indeedy-do.

And that's the point.