Essay due Friday, April 18

Slaughterhouse-Five Essay

Choose one of the following writing prompts.

· In Slaughterhouse Five how does Kurt Vonnegut’s novel use the elements of fiction to develop the idea that life is absurd? And what effect—think tragicomedy—does this development have on the reader?

To address this question you might consider such things as tone, narrative perspective, narrative voice (including diction and syntax), narrative structure, events, motifs, characterization, etc. You might also consider the novel’s exploration of the many forms of life’s absurdity: absurd cruelty, absurd beauty, absurd irony, absurd humor, absurd circularity, absurd interrelationships, etc.

· How does Kurt Vonnegut characterize Billy Pilgrim and how does this characterization contribute to the work as a whole? Does Vonnegut present him as a sympathetic “Everyman,” behaving as common people do in circumstances beyond their control? Does Vonnegut reveal Pilgrim to be a failure, someone who instead of possessing traditional heroic attributes is an anti-hero? Explain how. (Think of direct and indirect characterization. Also, consider the significance of the character’s name.) While thinking about the significance of Vonnegut’s characterization of Billy Pilgrim, consider why Vonnegut chooses not to place his protagonist on a heroic pedestal, unlike many war novels and films that do. Consider how Vonnegut uses Billy Pilgrim to say something about war and about human beings.

· Explore why Vonnegut writes his novel in a way that blurs the line between reality and fantasy. Does Kurt Vonnegut intend for the reader to believe that Billy Pilgrim imagines that he becomes “unstuck in time” and is abducted by Tralfamadoreans or that he does, in fact, travel through time and space? How do you know? What are the hints? If Vonnegut provides hints that Billy is neither unstuck nor abducted why does he choose to write the novel from the perspective of a narrator who is credulous? In this essay you will explore how and why the novel is constructed to blur the line between reality and fantasy.

Your responses should address the writing prompt clearly, thoroughly, and deeply. Your responses should show an understanding of the necessary supporting details. Your responses should be well-organized and well-written. Most importantly, your responses should show an understanding of the prompt and its relationship to the novel. (In other words prove to me that you understand the prompt and that you understand Vonnegut’s novel.)

Slaughterhouse-Five

In class I had you pick out scenes from the book that stood out to you for some reason. They were poignant, sad, funny, strange, enlightening, well-written, strangely written, seemingly important, etc.

Discuss at least two scenes you have chosen. Respond to what someone else has said about a third scene. You may write about anything you want--character, characterization, imagery, motifs, historical references, your personal emotional or intellectual reaction, links to other literature we have studied, etc.--as long as you are specific and insightful. (We haven't talked much yet about the novel's motifs but looking at what images, ideas, and phrases are repeated is an excellent clue to what matters in the novel (in any novel, as you probably realize by now).

In addition to writing about what you want, I'd like for you to comment on how the scene (and perhaps the book as a whole) is written. You might deal with the narrator, the narrative voice, the juxtaposition of scenes, the diction, the syntax, etc. Quote directly from the text to illustrate your ideas about the novel!!! "300 words or more" is a good rule of thumb for length. This weekend I'll post another Slaughterhouse-Five assignment and will await your comments. The next post will ask you to think about the novel as a whole.

Waiting for Godot

Comment insightfully and specifically about Waiting for Godot and about your peers' responses to the play. You may comment all at once or over the course of the week. The comment period will be closed whenever at midnight on Friday, April 4.

Consider writing about the style and form of the play. Consider the minimalist structure. Consider the language.

Consider the stage directions. Consider the label "tragicomedy". Consider the play's relationship to vaudeville comedy. Consider the play's relationship to Theatre of the Absurd.

Consider the play's allusions to Christianity and Christian figures (God-ot, Christ, the thieves, Adam, Cain, Abel, etc.) and to other literature (especially but not exclusively Hamlet).

Consider writing about themes: hope and hopelessness, repetition and variation, sense and senselessness, power and powerlessness, masters and slaves, fate and choice, isolation and connection, waiting and acting (as in action but also as in playing), staying and going, being and not being, and so on.

Consider Samuel Beckett's treatment of the themes in Godot in relation to other author's treatment of the themes in other works you have read and studied.

Consider versions of the scenes from the play in the video bar or explore YouTube on your own. There's a lot there. (Aside: in a professional production of the play that uses Beckett's own production notes, Godot is pronounced GAW-doh and not gud-OH, and Pozzo is pronounced POT-zo not PO-zo. Thought you might be curious.)

Consider your own reaction to the play and explore the reasons for this reaction by remembering our reading of it and by examining the text. Also, push yourself to go beyond your initial reaction.

The best responses will respond to issues we have already discussed and will open up new ground for discussion.
Your response (or responses) should be at least 300 words in length.

King Lear/Kind Leer Final Thoughts

Final Work
1. Post again in the thread of comments below. Explore themes. Discuss literary techniques. Quote the text. Make connections to other works of literature. Respond to peers and to ideas from class. Be as thoughtful, insightful, and specific as you would be in a thesis driven paper but allow yourself to be a bit more open and exploratory. (300 words or so.) Due Friday, March 21 by B-block.

2. Write a personal essay on an aspect of King Lear. Start with a quotation. Start with a character. Start with a relationship. Start with an image. Start with a scene. Then reflect on the meaning of this aspect of King Lear in your own life. Be thoughtful. Be specific. Invent an engaging narrative voice and an appropriate essay structure. Observe standard American English writing conventions. I want you to use this essay as an opportunity to fine-tune your sense of composition (a.k.a organization) and your use of language (a.k.a. stylistic resourcefulness and observation of conventions). (600 words or so.) Complete workshop draft due Wednesday, March 26. Final draft due Monday, March 31.

King Lear Acts Four and Five

For your final posts on King Lear I'd like for you all to engage in an "open but guided forum".
So, comment on whatever aspects of the play interest you: characters and characterization, plot and plot design, motifs and themes, imagery and figurative language, poetic form (blank verse, rhyming couplets), comparisons to other works we have studied, performances and staging (in the Brian Blessed King Lear that we have been watching or in the clips from the Laurence Olivier King Lear found in this blog's Video Bar). Be specific. Be insightful. Cite specifics. Think of the whole.

Now here comes the "guided" part: Make sure your name (not just your screen name) is at the beginning of your commentary, deal with at least two direct quotations from the play in your commentary (identify the quotation by referring to act, scene, and lines in this manner: act.scene.lines (e.g. 1.2.33-44), respond substantively to at least one peer in your comments meaning: go beyond saying "I like what x said"), and comment at least twice.

I will grade the commentary according to a slightly modified version of the discussion rubric that we used earlier this year.

The comment period will close at the beginning of B-block on Wednesday, March 19. (I changed my mind about the due date to give you some more time and with the expectation that your comments will be of a high quality. And in case you are thinking "why B-block?" that will be my last opportunity to read comments before class on Wednesday.

King Lear Acts Two and Three

Consider the motifs below and more...
sight (eyes, blindness) and other senses (touch, smell {noses}); fools, madness, and wisdom; duty and betrayal; naturalness and unnaturalness; animals and humans; storms and calms; age and youth; parents and children; rank and status; nothingness, loss, nakedness...& self...

Comment on at least two interrelated motifs. Your comments should refer to at least two specific passages (at least one passage for each motif). Demonstrate your understanding of the play so far by linking the motifs and the passages to each other and to the overall events and themes. Again, we're using close attention to small particulars in order to illuminate the whole.

At the beginning of your post include your name, name the motifs, and quote the passages (include act.scene.line). Your insightful well-supported commentary comes next.

These comments are due by the beginning of class (12:00pm) on Thursday, March 13.

King Lear Act One

Respond to at least one of the following in the comments box:
The theme of identity (especially change and disguise) in act one
The theme of nature and naturalness in act one
The motif of "nothing[ness]" in act one
The parallels in the plot and subplot in act one
The use of dramatic irony in act one
The dynamic between parents and children, nobility and servants
or something else you've notice in act one