Division of Liberal Arts and Sciences

Department of English, Foreign Languages, and Journalism

English 220-01: Introduction to Reading Texts

Dr. Mike Cadden

Spring, 2002

Class time: 9:30-10:50 T, Th

Class place: 104 Murphy Hall

Dr. Cadden’s Office: 222-F Eder Hall

Hours: W 10:00 am-noon; T & Th. 12:30-2:00 pm; and by appointment.

Phone: 271-4576

E-mail: cadden@missouriwestern.edu

Course Description: The process of reading literary texts involves skills and raises particular issues specific to the reading process. Even if we aren’t aware of "how" we are reading, we nonetheless end up with a "what"--or a response--at the end of the experience, whether that "effect" is boredom, inspiration, thought, or confusion. It is my goal that through this introduction to both literature in general (and the major of English in specific) that you will be more conscious of the approaches we take when reading. We will, in Robert Scholes’ words, learn how to "read closely and carefully, how to situate a text in relation to other texts (intertextuality), [and] how to situate a text in relation to culture, society, [and] the world (extratextuality)" (The Rise and Fall of English 166).

I have three goals for what you’ll know or be able to do by the end of this introduction to the major of English: you will be able to identify, take, and defend a critical position in relation to a text; you will learn how to situate that position in a larger critical conversation using the tools of the trade; you will learn a bit more about academic professionalism.

Prerequisite for ENG 220: ENG 108 or 112.

DiYanni, Robert, ed. Literature. 5^th ed. Boston: McGraw Hill, 2002.

Participation: 10%

Midterm Exam: 15%

Final Exam: 15%

Three Critical Papers: 60%

The MWSC Policy Guide states that "each instructor will determine and make known to the class the requirement for attendance" (45). If you don’t come to class you will obviously jeopardize your class participation grade. I will not quantify how much presence equals what grade. I will be judging your total participation performance, not just presence. I can also tell you that the exams draw heavily from class work. Also, since you are responsible for all announcements in class, you run the risk of missing important information regarding papers; I will not accept absence as an excuse for ignorance. In short, if you’re not here, you’re going to suffer through other assignments directly and indirectly. I will not formally assign a number of absences to failure; I’ll allow those things will be related naturally.

Please read the Policy Guide for information for other information about the College’s policies regarding attendance and absence.

2/26: Sandra Cisneros continued.

2/28: Transformations: adapting a text--bits from ch. 10 (TBA)

3/5: Transformations continued.

3/7: Midterm Exam.

4/4: Drama: Trifles continued—context across dramatic traditions (leads to chs. 18-22).

4/9: Poetry: Voice and Diction (686-702).

4/11: Poetry: Imagery and Figures of Speech (703-14).

4/16: Poetry: Symbolism, Allegory, and Syntax (715-28); Essay #3 Due.

4/18: Poetry: Sound, Rhythm, and Meter (728-44).

4/23: Robert Frost (868-900).

4/25: Robert Frost continued.

We will be engaging in various in-class exercises (including your own presentations), remarking on out-of-class work, and participating in class discussions. Perfect attendance, preparedness, and a willingness to be involved in discussion and activities should help ensure that this grade will be high.

You will write three short papers this term.

We have (or will have) pointed out three general categories for critical response: subtext, text, and, context . You will focus on each of the three approaches in respective papers. The structure will look like this:

1. Brief summary of the work discussed (perhaps a paragraph at most),

3. Statement of thesis ("The use of rhyme lightens the mood of the poem."),

4. Explanation of the assertion (support), and

5. Comment on significance to the reader (who cares and why?).

Each paper should be roughly two-three pages, single-spaced.

Each paper will treat a text to be found in DiYanni’s book.

I recommend that you not try to approach a work we’ve discussed in class unless you are clearly tackling it from a different critical perspective.

These entries are open to revision—as often as you wish. All revisions are due by April 30.

Consider the increased restriction of choice over the course of the term. Any text (or comparison of texts) in DiYanni is fair game. But, over the course of the three papers, you must choose texts from at least two different genres (papers one and two might feature a poem, but the third, then, must feature either a short story or a play, for instance; however, you might consider comparing two texts across genres in any paper), and you must use a different critical approach for each paper. Obviously for the first paper that leaves you a wide range of choices of texts and approaches, but by the last paper you will have less choice. Be mindful of this. I will keep track of your choices.

Each paper must employ the help of at least one source beyond the primary text(s) you’re studying. I expect you to own and consult your copy of the MLA Handbook as you complete your essays. I will require that you use interior and works cited citation with competence.

Consider that there is a whole section at the back of the book devoted to small excerpts of critical essays (chapter twenty-five). It is very likely that one of those authors is saying something that would either help you come up with a topic and/or be useful in your analysis. We will be going over to the library to discuss research tools and strategies. In any case, I encourage you to browse.

For ideas, see the ends of chapters six (short story), thirteen (poetry), and both twenty-two and twenty-three (drama). Also, many times at the end of a selection parallels are offered to other texts. See also the "Suggestions for writing" sections in the three "Writing About" chapters (four, eleven, and seventeen). Lastly (or at the very start), you are invited to come by my office to discuss paper topics, theses, focus woes, and other matters. I will be happy to do that, as it often saves both of us time in the long run.

The exams will be both an in-class and out-of-class expression of what we’ve been up to all term. Since an exam needs to be relevant to what has happened in class (not to what I plan or hope will happen before the term begins) I can’t tell you much about them. We’ll talk about the form and content of each exam as it nears, however.

You can count on a couple of things, though. Since we don’t quiz on a daily basis, exams will in part account for your having read the works. This will likely be in the form of passage identification in the in-class portion. The out-of-class portion will involve essay questions that enable you to connect works that we’ve read. The final exam will likely combine identifications with an in-class test of your ability to take a work, discuss if from a critical angle, and incorporate an outside/secondary text.

"A":

General Qualitative Description: Excellent, Superior, Outstanding.

Conception: Your idea should contain some new, perhaps surprising, element, some angle that

is uncommonly thoughtful and insightful. You are not rehearsing other people's ideas, and you

are going beyond an average reading. You expose and challenge the explicit and implicit assumptions of the text. If you are incorporating research, you will have WORKED your sources--using what supports your argument, and acknowledging and dealing with

what challenges it.

Organization: Your organization should be flawless and should match your content. You should anticipate, address, and work through opposition to your argument and build a strong case for your own. You should employ evidence with regularity and in appropriate circumstances. If you are incorporating research, you will spend some time positioning your argument in the context of the larger conversation.

Style: Your presentation should be artful. You have obviously paid attention to the way your

language sounds as well as what it says. You have found a way to make your presentation style

match the content of your paper (other than a groovy font style!), perhaps through a sustained

metaphor, or a particularly apt example that you carry through and refer to in the entire

paper.

Grammar and Mechanics: Your paper should be absolutely clean and free of grammatical and

mechanical errors of a rudimentary nature, though you may have a few problems with complex functions of grammar. You should never avoid complex language in order to avoid errors, in other words.

"B":

General Qualitative Description: Above average, Good, Commendable.

Conception: Your idea will be better than average, but you may have overlooked or not

acknowledged or interrogated the assumptions that inform it. The claim/idea is ambitious and, for that reason, may have gotten away from you. You will be rewarded for being ambitious even if you fall a bit short.

Organization: Your organization will be strong, but the signaling might still be a bit

Awkward; you may find yourself using a lot of directional phrases because your argument doesn't flow naturally. (Ex. "As I said earlier..." "Firstly, secondly, thirdly...") Here too the organization will match the content rather than being formulaic.

Style: It's clean, readable, there's a consistent sense of voice, and there aren't any places

where a reader has to go back and reread a sentence just to understand its structure.

Grammar/Mechanics: Very few (almost no) errors of a rudimentary nature.

" C":

General Qualitative Description: Competent, Average, Fine.

Conception: Your idea for your paper should reflect that you have read, thought about, and paid

attention to the way we have talked in class about similar issues. Your main point should be

clearly stated and defended with appropriate evidence. You should remain focused on your topic

throughout your paper, and you should have thoroughly examined the aspects of your topic from

your perspective. Your ideas should be internally consistent. There won’t be anything terribly surprising, daring, or unusual here.

Organization: Your paper should have a logical, clearly identifiable organization. Each

paragraph should address only one aspect of your topic, and when you change aspects, you start

a new paragraph. Transitions between paragraphs should be competently handled. Your strategy,

that is, how you manage the interweaving of your idea and your organization, should be standard

and straightforward. For instance, if you follow a traditional pattern of an introduction that

includes a flagged thesis statement ("in this paper I will..."), then proceed with evidence and

close with a restatement of the initial problem. That's a standard, straightforward

organization--a C strategy.

Style: Your style should be clear and readable.

Grammar and Mechanics: Your paper should not contain many distracting errors in grammar or

mechanics. Minimally, you should have run a spell-check program, and you should know the

difference between a complete sentence, a fragment, and a run-on.

"D":

General Qualitative Description: Incompetent, Inadequate, Below Average.

Conception: Your idea will be immediately obvious to a casual reader--a no-brainer—yet it will be presented as news. It will likely also be not quite clear what it is that you are really saying. Split focus on more than one thesis or issue is likely.

Organization: Perhaps you split your focus (which means you start out talking about one thing

and shift to another) which means that you are covering several or many issues in short paragraphs. You jump from one idea to the next with no logical strategy or transitions. If there is no plan, or if you don't stick to the plan, this is faulty organization. It may be evident that there wasn’t ever really a structural strategy at all.

Style: Unclear language, usually. This may also be a matter of using the wrong words for your ideas. Simply put, the language is in bad shape.

Grammar/Mechanics: Consistent problems in sentence structure with little sign of proof-reading.

"F":

General Qualitative Description: Unacceptable.

(The most common cause of an F is a failure to adequately address the assignment. For instance,

if I specify that this assignment is to be researched, or if it is to address a certain topic

in a certain way, you have to at least complete the assignment.)

Conception: No clear idea governs the words on the page.

Organization: No plan is evident, much less achieved.

Style: Incomprehensible most or all of the time.

Grammar/Mechanics: Consistent problems with rudimentary mechanical matters.

*******************