due 4/9/13 by 11:00 a.m., submitted to BB Assignments
The Situation
By now you realize that, while there are no guarantees about how any text will be valued, several factors help us to theorize about how some texts can be read, interpreted, or received. But when texts are defined by multiple, often complex aims, how do we determine the most viable possibilities for them?
The Assignment
For this assignment, I ask you to consider how the writers of your texts influence the reader's attitude or behavior towards change. You will need to consider how your text functions in situ -- that is, for
a specified audience, time, occasion, discourse situation -- in order
to consider its influence(s), which may be explicit or implicit. However, rather than just use this assignment to answer that simple
question, I’d like you to use that question as a prompt--a starting
place--to help you come to a more nuanced discovery about the concepts or our class as a result of your analysis or comparison. Please
choose one of the following writing tasks:
- deep analysis of Linzey’s “Why Animals Deserve Special Moral Solicitude.” You will want to browse the Fall 2009 edition of AV Magazine online, which was a special issue on animal ethics, for more context.
- comparative analysis of Lung’s “Question of Civility: Open Letter to Hu Jintao” with Kalman’s blog post “E Pluribus Unum.” You can search The New York Times for “Lung Ying-Tai” to learn more about her, and you can browse Kalman’s other posts for background.
- comparative analysis of Kalman’s blog post “Can Do” with Mann's essay on life expectancy (BB). You can browse Kalman’s other posts for background.
Please use at least two of our critical readings from this unit in your analysis to consider how the authors elicit, influence, question or induce. As always, you might look for the stases on
which the argument is conducted (Fahnestock/Secor); how writers
complicate terms or buzzwords (Lazere);
whether they appeal to time, place, or reasoning (Killingsworth; Corbett/Eberly); how they complicate identity (Gates); or how they make use of the medium and remediation (Hood; Rettberg; Miller/Shepherd; Ridolfo/DeVoss). Ultimately, your analysis should lead you to a unique realization or
claim--something not obvious, but meaningful and
significant.
Note: While you might use Style, Winterowd, or Bazerman to demonstrate small points in your analysis, these won’t be sufficient as your main critical texts.
Citations for Genre Samples
- Kalman, Maira. “Can Do.” The New York Times. And the Pursuit of Happiness, 30 July 2009. Available at <http://kalman.blogs.nytimes.com/>.
- Kalman, Maira. “E Pluribus Unum.” The New York Times. And the Pursuit of Happiness, 29 October 2009. Available at <http://kalman.blogs.nytimes.com/>.
- Linzey, Andrew. “Why Animals Deserve Special Moral Solicitude.” AV Magazine (Fall 2009): 8-10. Available at <http://www.aavs.org/images/AVFall2009.pdf>.
- Lung, Ying-tai. “A Question of Civility: An Open Letter to Hu, Jintao.” 24 January 2006. Available at <http://www.zonaeuropa.com/20060127_1.htm>. Published simultaneously in the China Times (Taipei), Mingpao (Hong Kong), Xing-zhou Daily (Malaysia), and the World Journal (United States).
- Mann, Charles C. “The Coming Death Shortage.” The Best American Science and Nature Writing 2006, Ed. Brian Greene. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 2006. 157-171.
Evaluation Criteria
Audience Construction –
Although I am the first evaluator of the essay, you should compose it
for an audience somewhat broader than me. Assume a skeptical reader
who needs to be convinced of your careful handling of textual and
contextual evidence. You can assume some familiarity with our critical
texts, but you should still find a way to implicitly communicate your
reasons for writing and you should help your reader(s) understand the
dilemma that prompts you to write.
Thesis & Argument –
Your essay should be guided by a thesis statement (or statements) that
demonstrates the complexity of your unique realization or claim, is not
simply a summary of the texts’ main purpose or theme, and does not
simply state the obvious about the texts you are reading. Think of this
as your stasis—the question that you set out to answer. If you are
comparing two texts, your thesis may involve discussing how they work
together or what you learn about one from analyzing it alongside
another.
Focus & Scope –
Your analysis should make a unique claim—preferably, not too broad or
general that it cannot be sufficiently supported, and not too narrow
that it cannot be sufficiently developed. Your essay should demonstrate a
knowledgeable (and even sophisticated) use of the concepts we are
learning. If page length helps you get a sense of scope, then plan on ~3 single-spaced pages, not counting “Works Cited.”
Organization & Coherence – How
you organize your analysis should ultimately reflect the claim you want
to support. Your thesis may act like a “thread” for your main
and supporting points. This includes an engaging introduction and
conclusion, useful transitions, and adequate development of each point.
Offer your realization near the beginning of your essay, and consider
your conclusion a synthesis rather than a summary.
Evidence & Justification – Above
all, your claim should be relevant and valid to the context in which
the text was written. It should provide reliable and specific
examples from the genre sample(s) you examine, the critical texts we
have read in class, and other relevant texts if you find you need them.
It should adequately set up or introduce any quoted passages, explain
outside references, and put these passages and examples into genuine
conversation with each other (beyond just referencing key terms). Please
cite specific incidents, images, and other textual details, using
parenthetical citations when you paraphrase or quote from any source.
Please avoid extensive block quoting.
Language & Style – Your
analysis can be confident and still carry a balanced tone, with neutral
language and strong sentences. Your use of terms should be thoughtful,
even elegant. You should not need to rely on excessive metadiscourse, “I
think/feel/believe,” or “In my opinion” statements to carry your
argument forward. It should always be clear who is saying what. Try
putting dense or complicated language into your own words, and be sure
to report names and titles accurately. No patterns of sentence- or
paragraph-level error should get in the way of meaning. Spelling and
punctuation should be checked.
Discourse Conventions – In
addition to following MLA style for your parenthetical citations and
Works Cited, please format your essay so that it is easy for me to
read, including 11- or 12-pt. font, and standard 1” margins. Titles are
paramount for foreshadowing your analysis and establishing common ground
with an unfamiliar reader. The title of your analytical essay should
engage us while also reflecting the argument you will ultimately make.
Remember to cite or attribute visual components.
Please
feel free to ask me if any part of the assignment is unclear or if
you’re stuck while working through an idea. Start early!
