Response Paper 4
Carver, “Cathedral”
OPTION 1:
In “Principles of a Story” Raymond Carver writes,
I like it when there is some feeling of threat or sense of menace in short stories. I think a little menace is fine to have in a story. For one thing, it’s good for the circulation. There has to be tension, a sense that something is imminent, that certain things are in relentless motion, or else, most often, there simply won’t be a story. What creates tension in a piece of fiction is partly the way the concrete words are linked together to make up the visible action of the story. But it’s also the things that are left out, that are implied, the landscape just under the smooth (but sometimes broken and unsettled) surface of things.
Do you think that Carver follows his own advice? What tension is present in “Cathedral”? What information or details are implied? How might the “sense of menace” or “tension” that Carver mentions affect how you interpret this story?
OPTION 2:
This option is an exercise in comparing and contrasting. Select two of the four stories we’ve read thus far (“Cathedral,” “The Birth-mark,” “Hills Like White Elephants,” and “The Story of an Hour”). Think about what these stories say about “happiness”–do they depict a uniform view of how people experience happiness? Why or why not? How?
You might even want to pick two specific characters to work with. For example, how does Jig’s experience of happiness differ from Georgiana’s?
DUE: Please post on the Blog by Tuesday, March 22, no later than 5PM.
NOTE ON BLOG RESPONSES:
Because these responses will be posted on the blog, please make sure that you have some audience in mind when writing. This might mean that you ask a question or two in your response, or approach your idea/topic in a way that would solicit a reader’s response. You should also keep an eye on the blog and comment on your classmates’ writings!
AND…Remember, there is always the “invisible third option”!
Response Paper 3
Ehrenreich, Chapter Six: “Positive Psychology…”
Hemingway, “Hills Like White Elephants”
OPTION 1:
Write a movie review of “Best In Show.” Do NOT just summarize the film. In fact, for this response paper, you are to use no summary unless it is a detail or scene that helps you to prove the argument you are trying to make about the film.
OPTION 2:
In “Against Interpretation,” Susan Sontag famously writes, “the modern style of interpretation excavates, and as it excavates, destroys; it digs “behind” the text, to find a sub-text which is the true one.” What is Sontag saying about how we read?
For this response paper you will pay close attention to how you read. In fact, I’d like you to write this short paper immediately after finishing reading the Ehrenreich or the Hemingway, or both.
What do you notice in the text(s)? What do you think about while you are reading? After reading? Is your experience as a reader different when you read a story than when you read an essay or book chapter? This does not have to be a formal paper; it can take the form of a journal entry or a “stream of consciousness”-type response.
DUE: Please post on the Blog by Tuesday, March 15, no later than 5PM.
NOTE ON BLOG RESPONSES:
Because these responses will be posted on the blog, please make sure that you have some audience in mind when writing. This might mean that you ask a question or two in your response, or approach your idea/topic in a way that would solicit a reader’s response. You should also keep an eye on the blog and comment on your classmates’ writings!
AND…Remember, there is always the “invisible third option”!
Response Paper #2
Plato, The Republic, Book Seven
Freud, Beyond the Pleasure Principle, Chapters 1 and 2
OPTION 1:
Daniel Gilbert and Freud have at least one thing in common…they both study psychology. However, Freud was writing and thinking long before Gilbert. Select one specific idea from Freud’s text that you imagine Gilbert either learned from or objected to and make sure to explain why. Use at least one quote from each author.
OPTION 2:
In Chapter 2 of Freud’s text, he carefully investigates “children’s play,” specifically a game of “disappearance and return” which becomes known as “fort da.” Why do you think this game is so important to Freud’s ideas? How does this compare to Plato’s “allegory of the cave”? And, of course, what does any of this tell us about happiness?
DUE: Please post on the Blog by Monday, February 21, no later than 5PM
NOTE ON BLOG RESPONSES:
Because these responses will be posted on the blog, please make sure that you have some audience in mind when writing. This might mean that you ask a question or two in your response, or approach your idea/topic in a way that would solicit a reader’s response. You should also keep an eye on the blog and comment on your classmates’ writings!
Response Paper #1
Selections from Aristotle’s Ethics (Selections from Books One and Ten)
Gilbert, Chapter Two: “The View from In Here”
Ehrenreich, “Introduction”
OPTION 1:
Even though you’ve only briefly encountered Gilbert and Ehrenreich, you should have a good sense of what their voices and writing styles are like. Select a section (at least one paragraph) of Aristotle’s to work with and rewrite Aristotle’s text in either Gilbert’s voice or Ehrenreich’s voice. This means that you will pretend to be Gilbert or Ehrenreich “translating” Aristotle’s ideas into his/her own voice or jargon. Please indicate which segment from Aristotle you choose to work with.
OPTION 2:
Compare and/or contrast Aristotle’s definition of “happiness” with what you think Gilbert and/or Ehrenreich’s definitions appear to be. Which do you agree with? Why?
DUE: Wednesday, February 9 (1-2 pages typed)
