-Post full group answers from today to blog (below)
-Finish Bluest Eye
Thursday 9pm = Essay #9 peer review completed (see next post)
Friday = last class, clear afternoon schedule
Sunday 9pm = final draft to turnitin.com
Wed. Dec. 10th 1:30 - 3:30 = final exam
FINAL EXAM
-Bring bluebook
-Exam is in discussion classroom
-Short Answer (Descartes, Austen, Morrison) = choose 6 of 9, 40%
-Passage Analysis (Morrison) = choose 1 of 4, 25%
-Essay (all books) = choose 1 of 4, 35%
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Group: Ariana, Florence, and Kate
Questtion: D. List/contrast the different narrators.
Claudia- We found that Claudia has a very childish perspective of life and doesn't fully understand everything yet. The reader knows more than the characters (dramatic irony).
Morrison- Morrison uses free indirect discourse throughout the novel and at some points, you can't tell if Morrison is narrating or the character is. We see more emotions from the characters through the indirect discourse.
Pauline- Pauline's story starts out nice and happy and ends with her abusive husband Cholly. We she her life deteriorate through her personal encounters and letters. Being able to see the depth of Pauline's emotions makes the reader feel sorry for her.
I realized that I hadn't assigned the last part of the book ("Summer"), so all of you can watch out for the new narrator(s) / narrative style(s) that enter at that point.
Group: Wes, Stephanie, Jie
Question: Do we think that The Bluest Eye is a pathoes to critical analysis or THROUGH pathoes to a critical analysis
Answer:
we believe that Morrison creates a CRITICAL ANALYSIS of the characters THROUGH pathoes. by indulging us in the pasts of the characters Morrison allows readers to understand where the character comes from and their emotional reasonings for their actions. Thus, we, as readers, can make better judgements about the characters because we know their backgrounds and their reasonings behind there actions.
Question: F) What does it mean to be thinking "with" and/or "against" Morrison
Group answer: Thinking with, would obviously mean agreeing or rather sympathizing with Morrison's characters and accepting the journey Morrison takes them through
Thinking against Morrison would require a disagreement of some sort. For example the journey of Pecola, a child, involving prostitutes that neither love nor scorn her, seem unrealistic. Especially with the way Pauline is portrayed as strict black mother.
Group: Rosemary, Hannah, Monique
Question: Arguing against banning the book
The Bluest Eye brings up a lot of controversial issues that are not usually mentioned in society. Reading it allows us to experience things from a child's point of view of terrible situations in life including rape, being picked on, and self-loathing. These and the other topics that are suppressed in our society exist and must not be ignored. By looking at these situations through a fictional story, we can further understand the meanings behind the acts and why they occur, and in that way, help break down barriers.
Also, it is a literary work. The things that are in the story are meant to prove a point, and this must not be forgotten. One must look at the whole thing and analyze what it means when it comes together and not pick at the little parts.
People must also not criticize the stereotypes it makes. They are placed there in order to prove a point, and they do not directly mean that everyone that had blue eyes were superior, or that all dark-skinned people dislike themselves. They were placed there to show a description how life could be like at that time, and it does not apply to everyone.
Post a Comment