Reading Log for Lord of the Flies
For chapters 9, 10, 11 and 12, please do the following:
1. Read the chapter. Be familiar with what happens. For each chapter, write a paragraph (approximately 150 words) on how the events in the chapter function as allegory. Remember that allegory is “a symbolic work: a work in which the characters and events are to be understood as representing other things and symbolically expressing a deeper, often spiritual, moral, or political meaning” (Encarta Dictionary).
2. Answer the following questions:
a) Tell about a time when you had a similar dilemma to one of the characters in this chapter. Explain what some of the similarities are.
b) Could the things in this chapter happen in today’s society? Give a specific, detailed example (i.e. bullying, morality, etc.).
3. Choose one concrete detail that you feel is significant in this chapter. Write a transition, a lead in and lead out. Remember to include the page number. If you don’t include a page number, you will not receive credit for this assignment. Write two sentences of commentary that is in-depth interpretation or explanation of the CD.
Monday, October 31, 2011
Friday, October 28, 2011
The Demon Lover
The Demon Lover
Elizabeth Bowen
Toward the end of her day in London Mrs. Drover went round to her shut-up house to look for several things she wanted to take away. Some belonged to herself, some to her family, who were by now used to their country life. It was late August; it had been a steamy, showery day: At the moment the trees down the pavement glittered in an escape of humid yellow afternoon sun. Against the next batch of clouds, already piling up ink-dark, broken chimneys and parapets stood out. In her once familiar street, as in any unused channel, an unfamiliar queerness had silted up; a cat wove itself in and out of railings, but no human eye watched Mrs. Drover’s return. Shifting some parcels under her arm, she slowly forced round her latchkey in an unwilling lock, then gave the door, which had warped, a push with her knee. Dead air came out to meet her as she went in.
The staircase window having been boarded up, no light came down into the hall. But one door, she could just see, stood ajar, so she went quickly through into the room and unshuttered the big window in there. Now the prosaic woman, looking about her, was more perplexed than she knew by everything that she saw, by traces of her long former habit of life—the yellow smoke stain up the white marble mantelpiece, the ring left by a vase on the top of the escritoire; the bruise in the wallpaper where, on the door being thrown open widely, the china handle had always hit the wall. The piano, having gone away to be stored, had left what looked like claw marks on its part of the parquet. Though not much dust had seeped in, each object wore a film of another kind; and, the only ventilation being the chimney, the whole drawing room smelled of the cold hearth. Mrs. Drover put down her parcels on the escritoire and left the room to proceed upstairs; the things she wanted were in a bedroom chest.
She had been anxious to see how the house was—the part-time caretaker she shared with some neighbors was away this week on his holiday, known to be not yet back. At the best of times he did not look in often, and she was never sure that she trusted him. There were some cracks in the structure, left by the last bombing, on which she was anxious to keep an eye. Not that one could do anything—
A shaft of refracted daylight now lay across the hall. She stopped dead and stared at the hall table—on this lay a letter addressed to her.
She thought first—then the caretaker must be back. All the same, who, seeing the house shuttered, would have dropped a letter in at the box? It was not a circular, it was not a bill. And the post office redirected, to the address in the country, everything for her that came through the post. The caretaker (even if he were back) did not know she was due in London today—her call here had been planned to be a surprise—so his negligence in the manner of this letter, leaving it to wait in the dusk and the dust, annoyed her. Annoyed, she picked up the letter, which bore no stamp. But it cannot be important, or they would know . . . She took the letter rapidly upstairs with her, without a stop to look at the writing till she reached what had been her bedroom, where she let in light. The room looked over the garden and other gardens: The sun had gone in; as the clouds sharpened and lowered, the trees and rank lawns seemed already to smoke with dark. Her reluctance to look again at the letter came from the fact that she felt intruded upon—and by someone contemptuous of her ways. However, in the tenseness preceding the fall of rain she read it: It was a few lines.
Dear Kathleen: You will not have forgotten that today is our anniversary, and the day we said. The years have gone by at once slowly and fast. In view of the fact that nothing has changed, I shall rely upon you to keep your promise. I was sorry to see you leave London, but was satisfied that you would be back in time. You may expect me, therefore, at the hour arranged. Until then . . .
K.
Mrs. Drover looked for the date: It was today’s. She dropped the letter onto the bedsprings, then picked it up to see the writing again—her lips, beneath the remains of lipstick, beginning to go white. She felt so much the change in her own face that she went to the mirror, polished a clear patch in it, and looked at once urgently and stealthily in. She was confronted by a woman of forty-four, with eyes starting out under a hat brim that had been rather carelessly pulled down. She had not put on any more powder since she left the shop where she ate her solitary tea. The pearls her husband had given her on their marriage hung loose round her now rather thinner throat, slipping in the V of the pink wool jumper her sister knitted last autumn as they sat round the fire. Mrs. Drover’s most normal expression was one of controlled worry, but of assent. Since the birth of the third of her little boys, attended by a quite serious illness, she had had an intermittent muscular flicker to the left of her mouth, but in spite of this she could always sustain a manner that was at once energetic and calm.
Turning from her own face as precipitately as she had gone to meet it, she went to the chest where the things were, unlocked it, threw up the lid, and knelt to search. But as rain began to come crashing down she could not keep from looking over her shoulder at the stripped bed on which the letter lay. Behind the blanket of rain the clock of the church that still stood struck six—with rapidly heightening apprehension she counted each of the slow strokes. “The hour arranged . . . My God,” she said, “what hour? How should I . . . ? After twenty-five years . . . ”
The young girl talking to the soldier in the garden had not ever completely seen his face. It was dark; they were saying goodbye under a tree. Now and then—for it felt, from not seeing him at this intense moment, as though she had never seen him at all—she verified his presence for these few moments longer by putting out a hand, which he each time pressed, without very much kindness, and painfully, on to one of the breast buttons of his uniform. That cut of the button on the palm of her hand was, principally, what she was to carry away. This was so near the end of a leave from France that she could only wish him already gone. It was August 1916. Being not kissed, being drawn away from and looked at intimidated Kathleen till she imagined spectral glitters in the place of his eyes. Turning away and looking back up the lawn she saw, through branches of trees, the drawing-room window alight: She caught a breath for the moment when she could go running back there into the safe arms of her mother and sister, and cry: “What shall I do, what shall I do? He has gone.”
Hearing her catch her breath, her fiancé said, without feeling: “Cold?”
“You’re going away such a long way.”
“Not so far as you think.”
“I don’t understand?”
“You don’t have to,” he said. “You will. You know what we said.”
“But that was—suppose you—I mean, suppose.”
“I shall be with you,” he said, “sooner or later. You won’t forget that. You need do nothing but wait.”
Only a little more than a minute later she was free to run up the silent lawn. Looking in through the window at her mother and sister, who did not for the moment perceive her, she already felt that unnatural promise drive down between her and the rest of all humankind. No other way of having given herself could have made her feel so apart, lost and forsworn. She could not have plighted a more sinister troth.
Kathleen behaved well when, some months later, her fiancé was reported missing, presumed killed. Her family not only supported her but were able to praise her courage without stint because they could not regret, as a husband for her, the man they knew almost nothing about. They hoped she would, in a year or two, console herself—and had it been only a question of consolation things might have gone much straighter ahead. But her trouble, behind just a little grief, was a complete dislocation from everything. She did not reject other lovers, for these failed to appear: For years she failed to attract men—and with the approach of her thirties she became natural enough to share her family’s anxiousness on this score. She began to put herself out, to wonder; and at thirty-two she was very greatly relieved to find herself being courted by William Drover. She married him, and the two of them settled down in this quiet, arboreal part of Kensington: In this house the years piled up, her children were born, and they all lived till they were driven out by the bombs of the next war. Her movements as Mrs. Drover were circumscribed, and she dismissed any idea that they were still watched.
As things were—dead or living the letter writer sent her only a threat. Unable, for some minutes, to go on kneeling with her back exposed to the empty room, Mrs. Drover rose from the chest to sit on an upright chair whose back was firmly against the wall. The desuetude of her former bedroom, her married London home’s whole air of being a cracked cup from which memory, with its reassuring power, had either evaporated or leaked away, made a crisis—and at just this crisis the letter writer had, knowledgeably, struck. The hollowness of the house this evening canceled years on years of voices, habits, and steps. Through the shut windows she only heard rain fall on the roofs around. To rally herself, she said she was in a mood—and for two or three seconds shutting her eyes, told herself that she had imagined the letter. But she opened them—there it lay on the bed.
On the supernatural side of the letter’s entrance she was not permitting her mind to dwell. Who, in London, knew she meant to call at the house today? Evidently, however, this had been known. The caretaker, had he come back, had had no cause to expect her: He would have taken the letter in his pocket, to forward it, at his own time, through the post. There was no other sign that the caretaker had been in—but, if not? Letters dropped in at doors of deserted houses do not fly or walk to tables in halls. They do not sit on the dust of empty tables with the air of certainty that they will be found. There is needed some human hand—but nobody but the caretaker had a key. Under circumstances she did not care to consider, a house can be entered without a key. It was possible that she was not alone now. She might be being waited for, downstairs. Waited for—until when? Until “the hour arranged.” At least that was not six o’clock: Six has struck.
She rose from the chair and went over and locked the door.
The thing was, to get out. To fly? No, not that: She had to catch her train. As a woman whose utter dependability was the keystone of her family life she was not willing to return to the country, to her husband, her little boys, and her sister, without the objects she had come up to fetch. Resuming work at the chest she set about making up a number of parcels in a rapid, fumbling-decisive way. These, with her shopping parcels, would be too much to carry; these meant a taxi—at the thought of the taxi her heart went up and her normal breathing resumed. I will ring up the taxi now; the taxi cannot come too soon: I shall hear the taxi out there running its engine, till I walk calmly down to it through the hall. I’ll ring up—But no: the telephone is cut off . . . She tugged at a knot she had tied wrong.
The idea of flight . . . He was never kind to me, not really. I don’t remember him kind at all. Mother said he never considered me. He was set on me, that was what it was—not love. Not love, not meaning a person well. What did he do, to make me promise like that? I can’t remember—But she found that she could.
She remembered with such dreadful acuteness that the twenty-five years since then dissolved like smoke and she instinctively looked for the weal left by the button on the palm of her hand. She remembered not only all that he said and did but the complete suspension of her existence during that August week. I was not myself—they all told me so at the time. She remembered—but with one white burning blank as where acid has dropped on a photograph: Under no conditions could she remember his face.
So, wherever he may be waiting, I shall not know him. You have no time to run from a face you do not expect.
The thing was to get to the taxi before any clock struck what could be the hour. She would slip down the street and round the side of the square to where the square gave on the main road. She would return in the taxi, safe, to her own door, and bring the solid driver into the house with her to pick up the parcels from room to room. The idea of the taxi driver made her decisive, bold: She unlocked her door, went to the top of the staircase, and listened down.
She heard nothing—but while she was hearing nothing the passé air of the staircase was disturbed by a draft that traveled up to her face. It emanated from the basement: Down there a door or window was being opened by someone who chose this moment to leave the house.
The rain had stopped; the pavements steamily shone as Mrs. Drover let herself out by inches from her own front door into the empty street. The unoccupied houses opposite continued to meet her look with their damaged stare. Making toward the thoroughfare and the taxi, she tried not to keep looking behind. Indeed, the silence was so intense—one of those creeks of London silence exaggerated this summer by the damage of war—that no tread could have gained on hers unheard. Where her street debouched on the square where people went on living, she grew conscious of, and checked, her unnatural pace. Across the open end of the square two buses impassively passed each other: Women, a perambulator, cyclists, a man wheeling a barrow signalized, once again, the ordinary flow of life. At the square’s most populous corner should be—and was—the short taxi rank. This evening, only one taxi—but this, although it presented its blank rump, appeared already to be alertly waiting for her. Indeed, without looking round the driver started his engine as she panted up from behind and put her hand on the door. As she did so, the clock struck seven. The taxi faced the main road: To make the trip back to her house it would have to turn—she had settled back on the seat and the taxi had turned before she, surprised by its knowing movement, recollected that she had not “said where.” She leaned forward to scratch at the glass panel that divided the driver’s head from her own.
The driver braked to what was almost a stop, turned round, and slid the glass panel back: The jolt of this flung Mrs. Drover forward till her face was almost into the glass. Through the aperture driver and passenger, not six inches between them, remained for an eternity eye to eye. Mrs. Drover’s mouth hung open for some seconds before she could issue her first scream. After that she continued to scream freely and to beat with her gloved hands on the glass all round as the taxi, accelerating without mercy, made off with her into the hinterland of deserted streets.
Elizabeth Bowen
Toward the end of her day in London Mrs. Drover went round to her shut-up house to look for several things she wanted to take away. Some belonged to herself, some to her family, who were by now used to their country life. It was late August; it had been a steamy, showery day: At the moment the trees down the pavement glittered in an escape of humid yellow afternoon sun. Against the next batch of clouds, already piling up ink-dark, broken chimneys and parapets stood out. In her once familiar street, as in any unused channel, an unfamiliar queerness had silted up; a cat wove itself in and out of railings, but no human eye watched Mrs. Drover’s return. Shifting some parcels under her arm, she slowly forced round her latchkey in an unwilling lock, then gave the door, which had warped, a push with her knee. Dead air came out to meet her as she went in.
The staircase window having been boarded up, no light came down into the hall. But one door, she could just see, stood ajar, so she went quickly through into the room and unshuttered the big window in there. Now the prosaic woman, looking about her, was more perplexed than she knew by everything that she saw, by traces of her long former habit of life—the yellow smoke stain up the white marble mantelpiece, the ring left by a vase on the top of the escritoire; the bruise in the wallpaper where, on the door being thrown open widely, the china handle had always hit the wall. The piano, having gone away to be stored, had left what looked like claw marks on its part of the parquet. Though not much dust had seeped in, each object wore a film of another kind; and, the only ventilation being the chimney, the whole drawing room smelled of the cold hearth. Mrs. Drover put down her parcels on the escritoire and left the room to proceed upstairs; the things she wanted were in a bedroom chest.
She had been anxious to see how the house was—the part-time caretaker she shared with some neighbors was away this week on his holiday, known to be not yet back. At the best of times he did not look in often, and she was never sure that she trusted him. There were some cracks in the structure, left by the last bombing, on which she was anxious to keep an eye. Not that one could do anything—
A shaft of refracted daylight now lay across the hall. She stopped dead and stared at the hall table—on this lay a letter addressed to her.
She thought first—then the caretaker must be back. All the same, who, seeing the house shuttered, would have dropped a letter in at the box? It was not a circular, it was not a bill. And the post office redirected, to the address in the country, everything for her that came through the post. The caretaker (even if he were back) did not know she was due in London today—her call here had been planned to be a surprise—so his negligence in the manner of this letter, leaving it to wait in the dusk and the dust, annoyed her. Annoyed, she picked up the letter, which bore no stamp. But it cannot be important, or they would know . . . She took the letter rapidly upstairs with her, without a stop to look at the writing till she reached what had been her bedroom, where she let in light. The room looked over the garden and other gardens: The sun had gone in; as the clouds sharpened and lowered, the trees and rank lawns seemed already to smoke with dark. Her reluctance to look again at the letter came from the fact that she felt intruded upon—and by someone contemptuous of her ways. However, in the tenseness preceding the fall of rain she read it: It was a few lines.
Dear Kathleen: You will not have forgotten that today is our anniversary, and the day we said. The years have gone by at once slowly and fast. In view of the fact that nothing has changed, I shall rely upon you to keep your promise. I was sorry to see you leave London, but was satisfied that you would be back in time. You may expect me, therefore, at the hour arranged. Until then . . .
K.
Mrs. Drover looked for the date: It was today’s. She dropped the letter onto the bedsprings, then picked it up to see the writing again—her lips, beneath the remains of lipstick, beginning to go white. She felt so much the change in her own face that she went to the mirror, polished a clear patch in it, and looked at once urgently and stealthily in. She was confronted by a woman of forty-four, with eyes starting out under a hat brim that had been rather carelessly pulled down. She had not put on any more powder since she left the shop where she ate her solitary tea. The pearls her husband had given her on their marriage hung loose round her now rather thinner throat, slipping in the V of the pink wool jumper her sister knitted last autumn as they sat round the fire. Mrs. Drover’s most normal expression was one of controlled worry, but of assent. Since the birth of the third of her little boys, attended by a quite serious illness, she had had an intermittent muscular flicker to the left of her mouth, but in spite of this she could always sustain a manner that was at once energetic and calm.
Turning from her own face as precipitately as she had gone to meet it, she went to the chest where the things were, unlocked it, threw up the lid, and knelt to search. But as rain began to come crashing down she could not keep from looking over her shoulder at the stripped bed on which the letter lay. Behind the blanket of rain the clock of the church that still stood struck six—with rapidly heightening apprehension she counted each of the slow strokes. “The hour arranged . . . My God,” she said, “what hour? How should I . . . ? After twenty-five years . . . ”
The young girl talking to the soldier in the garden had not ever completely seen his face. It was dark; they were saying goodbye under a tree. Now and then—for it felt, from not seeing him at this intense moment, as though she had never seen him at all—she verified his presence for these few moments longer by putting out a hand, which he each time pressed, without very much kindness, and painfully, on to one of the breast buttons of his uniform. That cut of the button on the palm of her hand was, principally, what she was to carry away. This was so near the end of a leave from France that she could only wish him already gone. It was August 1916. Being not kissed, being drawn away from and looked at intimidated Kathleen till she imagined spectral glitters in the place of his eyes. Turning away and looking back up the lawn she saw, through branches of trees, the drawing-room window alight: She caught a breath for the moment when she could go running back there into the safe arms of her mother and sister, and cry: “What shall I do, what shall I do? He has gone.”
Hearing her catch her breath, her fiancé said, without feeling: “Cold?”
“You’re going away such a long way.”
“Not so far as you think.”
“I don’t understand?”
“You don’t have to,” he said. “You will. You know what we said.”
“But that was—suppose you—I mean, suppose.”
“I shall be with you,” he said, “sooner or later. You won’t forget that. You need do nothing but wait.”
Only a little more than a minute later she was free to run up the silent lawn. Looking in through the window at her mother and sister, who did not for the moment perceive her, she already felt that unnatural promise drive down between her and the rest of all humankind. No other way of having given herself could have made her feel so apart, lost and forsworn. She could not have plighted a more sinister troth.
Kathleen behaved well when, some months later, her fiancé was reported missing, presumed killed. Her family not only supported her but were able to praise her courage without stint because they could not regret, as a husband for her, the man they knew almost nothing about. They hoped she would, in a year or two, console herself—and had it been only a question of consolation things might have gone much straighter ahead. But her trouble, behind just a little grief, was a complete dislocation from everything. She did not reject other lovers, for these failed to appear: For years she failed to attract men—and with the approach of her thirties she became natural enough to share her family’s anxiousness on this score. She began to put herself out, to wonder; and at thirty-two she was very greatly relieved to find herself being courted by William Drover. She married him, and the two of them settled down in this quiet, arboreal part of Kensington: In this house the years piled up, her children were born, and they all lived till they were driven out by the bombs of the next war. Her movements as Mrs. Drover were circumscribed, and she dismissed any idea that they were still watched.
As things were—dead or living the letter writer sent her only a threat. Unable, for some minutes, to go on kneeling with her back exposed to the empty room, Mrs. Drover rose from the chest to sit on an upright chair whose back was firmly against the wall. The desuetude of her former bedroom, her married London home’s whole air of being a cracked cup from which memory, with its reassuring power, had either evaporated or leaked away, made a crisis—and at just this crisis the letter writer had, knowledgeably, struck. The hollowness of the house this evening canceled years on years of voices, habits, and steps. Through the shut windows she only heard rain fall on the roofs around. To rally herself, she said she was in a mood—and for two or three seconds shutting her eyes, told herself that she had imagined the letter. But she opened them—there it lay on the bed.
On the supernatural side of the letter’s entrance she was not permitting her mind to dwell. Who, in London, knew she meant to call at the house today? Evidently, however, this had been known. The caretaker, had he come back, had had no cause to expect her: He would have taken the letter in his pocket, to forward it, at his own time, through the post. There was no other sign that the caretaker had been in—but, if not? Letters dropped in at doors of deserted houses do not fly or walk to tables in halls. They do not sit on the dust of empty tables with the air of certainty that they will be found. There is needed some human hand—but nobody but the caretaker had a key. Under circumstances she did not care to consider, a house can be entered without a key. It was possible that she was not alone now. She might be being waited for, downstairs. Waited for—until when? Until “the hour arranged.” At least that was not six o’clock: Six has struck.
She rose from the chair and went over and locked the door.
The thing was, to get out. To fly? No, not that: She had to catch her train. As a woman whose utter dependability was the keystone of her family life she was not willing to return to the country, to her husband, her little boys, and her sister, without the objects she had come up to fetch. Resuming work at the chest she set about making up a number of parcels in a rapid, fumbling-decisive way. These, with her shopping parcels, would be too much to carry; these meant a taxi—at the thought of the taxi her heart went up and her normal breathing resumed. I will ring up the taxi now; the taxi cannot come too soon: I shall hear the taxi out there running its engine, till I walk calmly down to it through the hall. I’ll ring up—But no: the telephone is cut off . . . She tugged at a knot she had tied wrong.
The idea of flight . . . He was never kind to me, not really. I don’t remember him kind at all. Mother said he never considered me. He was set on me, that was what it was—not love. Not love, not meaning a person well. What did he do, to make me promise like that? I can’t remember—But she found that she could.
She remembered with such dreadful acuteness that the twenty-five years since then dissolved like smoke and she instinctively looked for the weal left by the button on the palm of her hand. She remembered not only all that he said and did but the complete suspension of her existence during that August week. I was not myself—they all told me so at the time. She remembered—but with one white burning blank as where acid has dropped on a photograph: Under no conditions could she remember his face.
So, wherever he may be waiting, I shall not know him. You have no time to run from a face you do not expect.
The thing was to get to the taxi before any clock struck what could be the hour. She would slip down the street and round the side of the square to where the square gave on the main road. She would return in the taxi, safe, to her own door, and bring the solid driver into the house with her to pick up the parcels from room to room. The idea of the taxi driver made her decisive, bold: She unlocked her door, went to the top of the staircase, and listened down.
She heard nothing—but while she was hearing nothing the passé air of the staircase was disturbed by a draft that traveled up to her face. It emanated from the basement: Down there a door or window was being opened by someone who chose this moment to leave the house.
The rain had stopped; the pavements steamily shone as Mrs. Drover let herself out by inches from her own front door into the empty street. The unoccupied houses opposite continued to meet her look with their damaged stare. Making toward the thoroughfare and the taxi, she tried not to keep looking behind. Indeed, the silence was so intense—one of those creeks of London silence exaggerated this summer by the damage of war—that no tread could have gained on hers unheard. Where her street debouched on the square where people went on living, she grew conscious of, and checked, her unnatural pace. Across the open end of the square two buses impassively passed each other: Women, a perambulator, cyclists, a man wheeling a barrow signalized, once again, the ordinary flow of life. At the square’s most populous corner should be—and was—the short taxi rank. This evening, only one taxi—but this, although it presented its blank rump, appeared already to be alertly waiting for her. Indeed, without looking round the driver started his engine as she panted up from behind and put her hand on the door. As she did so, the clock struck seven. The taxi faced the main road: To make the trip back to her house it would have to turn—she had settled back on the seat and the taxi had turned before she, surprised by its knowing movement, recollected that she had not “said where.” She leaned forward to scratch at the glass panel that divided the driver’s head from her own.
The driver braked to what was almost a stop, turned round, and slid the glass panel back: The jolt of this flung Mrs. Drover forward till her face was almost into the glass. Through the aperture driver and passenger, not six inches between them, remained for an eternity eye to eye. Mrs. Drover’s mouth hung open for some seconds before she could issue her first scream. After that she continued to scream freely and to beat with her gloved hands on the glass all round as the taxi, accelerating without mercy, made off with her into the hinterland of deserted streets.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Losing the Senses by Rosalyn Ostler
One - It fades intermittently--
the perfume of orange blossoms
sweet in my nostrils, then a flatline
of fragrance, until a later surprise
when your face touches mine
and the scent of your rushes in.
My skin breathes your embrace,
Hording for the times of loss.
Two – I miss the taste of blackberries,
Caramel, fresh cauliflower, of shrimp,
Fried mushrooms, root beer,
Buttered toast, Hershey’s kisses.
Three – As clouds, fluttered leaves,
and butterflies dim, my mind scrambles
to preserve them. I imprint my brain
with sunsets, waterfalls, autumn colors,
saving the most precious space
for your smile.
Four – My ears strain for last sounds
Of mockingbirds, crickets and frogs,
The creek rushing through a summer night,
Tchaikovsky and Alley Cat, laughter
Of friends, your lips whispering love.
Five – And last – oh please last,
My fingers strive to remember
Their journeys across your face,
Through your hair.
My skin craves the communication
Of your articulate hands.
When numbness cloaks my fingertips,
May every touch live in their memory.
the perfume of orange blossoms
sweet in my nostrils, then a flatline
of fragrance, until a later surprise
when your face touches mine
and the scent of your rushes in.
My skin breathes your embrace,
Hording for the times of loss.
Two – I miss the taste of blackberries,
Caramel, fresh cauliflower, of shrimp,
Fried mushrooms, root beer,
Buttered toast, Hershey’s kisses.
Three – As clouds, fluttered leaves,
and butterflies dim, my mind scrambles
to preserve them. I imprint my brain
with sunsets, waterfalls, autumn colors,
saving the most precious space
for your smile.
Four – My ears strain for last sounds
Of mockingbirds, crickets and frogs,
The creek rushing through a summer night,
Tchaikovsky and Alley Cat, laughter
Of friends, your lips whispering love.
Five – And last – oh please last,
My fingers strive to remember
Their journeys across your face,
Through your hair.
My skin craves the communication
Of your articulate hands.
When numbness cloaks my fingertips,
May every touch live in their memory.
Monday, October 24, 2011
CD and Commentary Practice
Name_________________________________Date__________________Period____________
Lord of the Flies CD and Commentary
Please choose one concrete detail from the assigned chapters and write it below. Be sure to correctly document the source (page number). Include a transition (who, what, where).
CD:
Commentary: Write four sentences of commentary that interpret or explain the CD.
Lord of the Flies CD and Commentary
Please choose one concrete detail from the assigned chapters and write it below. Be sure to correctly document the source (page number). Include a transition (who, what, where).
CD:
Commentary: Write four sentences of commentary that interpret or explain the CD.
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Reminder!!
REMINDER!!!
Please remember to read Chapters 2-4 of Lord of the Flies by Monday, October 24, 2011.
Literary Criticism
Introduction to Literary Criticism and Analysis
In general terms, literary criticism is writing that asks two questions:
What is good and bad about this text?
Why is a particular aspect of the text good or bad?
When you were younger, a teacher may have asked you to write a book review. Book reviews only have to answer the first question, what is good and bad about this text. Literary criticism goes one step further to ask why. Literary criticism is very similar to literary analysis. Literary analysis asks one main question:
Why is this text the way it is?
Several common ways of looking at that question more specifically include,
Why does this character act the way he or she does?
Why does the writer use the particular style he or she uses to convey
this text’s message?
What effect does one aspect of the text, such as the setting or a particular
trait of a character, have on other aspects of the story?
When you write literary criticism and literary analysis, you ask a lot of “why” questions. The main difference between the two is that in literary criticism, more of your opinion comes through. Literary criticism and literary analysis sometimes answer their “why” questions in recognizable ways. Those habitual ways of answering these questions are called different schools of literary theory. Literary theories are simply different ways of approaching those “why” questions. Some of those
approaches include:
Reader response theory: A text is the way it is because of how readers look at it, so any explanation of a text’s meaning needs to take into account the ways different people react to the text.
New Criticism: Texts make sense without reference to outside sources. So any question about a text can be answered by looking closely at how different parts of the text relate to each other.
Historical/biographical criticism: Texts are written by authors, who are heavily influenced by the events in their lives and in the world they live in. So any question about a text should be answered by referring to outside information about the life of the author or the history and culture in which the author lived or lives.
Feminist or gender criticism: This kind of criticism looks at the way male and female characters act in a story and analyzes how that behavior reflects the author’s cultural context and how those portrayals might affect readers’ perceptions of gender. This kind of criticism also looks at what texts leave out; for instance, if there are only stupid men in a story, a gender critic would analyze why.
A sample text:
The rain beat hard against the window, as if heaven was both sad and angry at Lisa, who sat inside, safe and dry, and buried her head in her hands.
A text review (like a book review):
This text describes a girl who is probably sad on a rainy day. It is an effective text at communicating depressing emotions.
A literary criticism:
This text describes two things: rain and a person named Lisa. The text communicates
depressing emotions effectively because it applies them not just to a person but to the weather. Lisa buries “her head in her hands,” which may indicate sadness. While rain isn’t strictly speaking sad, its similarity to tears can make it seem so. The author of this text also personifies heaven and gives it the emotions of sadness and anger to explain why it is raining. Having the weather match Lisa’s mood communicates sadness or anger in a realistic way, because when people are sad or angry they are often so emotional that they cannot see the world as anything
but an extension of those emotions.
A literary analysis:
This text describes two things: rain and a person named Lisa. It describes them both in a depressing way. The text uses personification of nature, because it gives nature the emotions “sad and angry” to explain why it is raining. Giving nature human emotions can make it seem that nature matches or even sympathizes with the person in the scene, who puts her head down in her hands, a sign that she could be sad or angry too.
Note that all three texts start with a quick summary of the text they are writing about.
Note also that both the literary criticism and literary analysis shown here are primarily New Criticism, because for the most part they rely just on the text—as well as a few literary terms—to make their points.
A historical/biographical literary analysis of this text might indicate the following:
It was raining heavily outside when the author wrote this text, and that might have helped her think of rain as a parallel for Lisa’s emotions.
**Be careful to provide cited evidence from a source for the facts you use in historical/biographical literary criticism and analysis.
In general terms, literary criticism is writing that asks two questions:
What is good and bad about this text?
Why is a particular aspect of the text good or bad?
When you were younger, a teacher may have asked you to write a book review. Book reviews only have to answer the first question, what is good and bad about this text. Literary criticism goes one step further to ask why. Literary criticism is very similar to literary analysis. Literary analysis asks one main question:
Why is this text the way it is?
Several common ways of looking at that question more specifically include,
Why does this character act the way he or she does?
Why does the writer use the particular style he or she uses to convey
this text’s message?
What effect does one aspect of the text, such as the setting or a particular
trait of a character, have on other aspects of the story?
When you write literary criticism and literary analysis, you ask a lot of “why” questions. The main difference between the two is that in literary criticism, more of your opinion comes through. Literary criticism and literary analysis sometimes answer their “why” questions in recognizable ways. Those habitual ways of answering these questions are called different schools of literary theory. Literary theories are simply different ways of approaching those “why” questions. Some of those
approaches include:
Reader response theory: A text is the way it is because of how readers look at it, so any explanation of a text’s meaning needs to take into account the ways different people react to the text.
New Criticism: Texts make sense without reference to outside sources. So any question about a text can be answered by looking closely at how different parts of the text relate to each other.
Historical/biographical criticism: Texts are written by authors, who are heavily influenced by the events in their lives and in the world they live in. So any question about a text should be answered by referring to outside information about the life of the author or the history and culture in which the author lived or lives.
Feminist or gender criticism: This kind of criticism looks at the way male and female characters act in a story and analyzes how that behavior reflects the author’s cultural context and how those portrayals might affect readers’ perceptions of gender. This kind of criticism also looks at what texts leave out; for instance, if there are only stupid men in a story, a gender critic would analyze why.
A sample text:
The rain beat hard against the window, as if heaven was both sad and angry at Lisa, who sat inside, safe and dry, and buried her head in her hands.
A text review (like a book review):
This text describes a girl who is probably sad on a rainy day. It is an effective text at communicating depressing emotions.
A literary criticism:
This text describes two things: rain and a person named Lisa. The text communicates
depressing emotions effectively because it applies them not just to a person but to the weather. Lisa buries “her head in her hands,” which may indicate sadness. While rain isn’t strictly speaking sad, its similarity to tears can make it seem so. The author of this text also personifies heaven and gives it the emotions of sadness and anger to explain why it is raining. Having the weather match Lisa’s mood communicates sadness or anger in a realistic way, because when people are sad or angry they are often so emotional that they cannot see the world as anything
but an extension of those emotions.
A literary analysis:
This text describes two things: rain and a person named Lisa. It describes them both in a depressing way. The text uses personification of nature, because it gives nature the emotions “sad and angry” to explain why it is raining. Giving nature human emotions can make it seem that nature matches or even sympathizes with the person in the scene, who puts her head down in her hands, a sign that she could be sad or angry too.
Note that all three texts start with a quick summary of the text they are writing about.
Note also that both the literary criticism and literary analysis shown here are primarily New Criticism, because for the most part they rely just on the text—as well as a few literary terms—to make their points.
A historical/biographical literary analysis of this text might indicate the following:
It was raining heavily outside when the author wrote this text, and that might have helped her think of rain as a parallel for Lisa’s emotions.
**Be careful to provide cited evidence from a source for the facts you use in historical/biographical literary criticism and analysis.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Reading Response Journal for Lord of the Flies
Lord of the Flies: Reading Response Journal
While we read Lord of the Flies, you will be required to keep a Reading Journal for each chapter. That means there will be a total of 12 typed Reading Journals. For each journal entry it is mandatory that the following information is included (you must complete all parts for full credit—25 points per entry):
Part A
Summary: In 5-6 typed—12pt font, single spaced-- lines (about 100 words) give a summary of the chapter. (No Spark Notes!)
Part B
Reflection: How did you feel when you read this chapter? What were some of the things you thought about as you read this chapter? Could you identify with the characters and their dilemmas? What part of the chapter stood out to you? Why? Did anything surprise you? Tell me about it. What did you like about the chapter? What didn’t you like about the chapter? (Grade Tip: It would be wise to answer all of these questions for each chapter, in your Reading Response Journal. As a result, your response for Part B will be the same length as the other two Part or maybe longer.)--at least 150 words.
Part C
Select a significant quote (a concrete detail) from the chapter and discuss why it is important in terms of literary quality. Make reference to setting, theme, character, symbol, simile/metaphor, or other literary device. Write a well developed paragraph, using proper MLA format—about 100-150 words. Keep in mind that your quote does not count in your word count.
While we read Lord of the Flies, you will be required to keep a Reading Journal for each chapter. That means there will be a total of 12 typed Reading Journals. For each journal entry it is mandatory that the following information is included (you must complete all parts for full credit—25 points per entry):
Part A
Summary: In 5-6 typed—12pt font, single spaced-- lines (about 100 words) give a summary of the chapter. (No Spark Notes!)
Part B
Reflection: How did you feel when you read this chapter? What were some of the things you thought about as you read this chapter? Could you identify with the characters and their dilemmas? What part of the chapter stood out to you? Why? Did anything surprise you? Tell me about it. What did you like about the chapter? What didn’t you like about the chapter? (Grade Tip: It would be wise to answer all of these questions for each chapter, in your Reading Response Journal. As a result, your response for Part B will be the same length as the other two Part or maybe longer.)--at least 150 words.
Part C
Select a significant quote (a concrete detail) from the chapter and discuss why it is important in terms of literary quality. Make reference to setting, theme, character, symbol, simile/metaphor, or other literary device. Write a well developed paragraph, using proper MLA format—about 100-150 words. Keep in mind that your quote does not count in your word count.
"We Wear the Mask"
Name____________________________Date_____________Period________________________
We Wear the Mask
We wear the mask that grins and lies,
It hides our cheeks and shades our eyes,---
This debt we pay to human guile;
With torn and bleeding hearts we smile,
And mouth with myriad subtleties.
Why should the world be over-wise,
In counting all our tears and sighs?
Nay, let them only see us, while
We wear the mask.
We smile, but O great Christ, our cries
To thee from tortured souls arise.
We sing, but oh the clay is vile
Beneath our feet, and long the mile;
But let the world dream otherwise,
We wear the mask!
Paul Laurence Dunbar (1872-1906)
1. Read through the poem twice.
2. What is the tone of the “Mask” poem?
3. What do you believe this poem is about?
4. What words indicate to you the poem’s meaning?
5. According to Dunbar, what are masks?
6. Who uses masks? Give examples.
We Wear the Mask
We wear the mask that grins and lies,
It hides our cheeks and shades our eyes,---
This debt we pay to human guile;
With torn and bleeding hearts we smile,
And mouth with myriad subtleties.
Why should the world be over-wise,
In counting all our tears and sighs?
Nay, let them only see us, while
We wear the mask.
We smile, but O great Christ, our cries
To thee from tortured souls arise.
We sing, but oh the clay is vile
Beneath our feet, and long the mile;
But let the world dream otherwise,
We wear the mask!
Paul Laurence Dunbar (1872-1906)
1. Read through the poem twice.
2. What is the tone of the “Mask” poem?
3. What do you believe this poem is about?
4. What words indicate to you the poem’s meaning?
5. According to Dunbar, what are masks?
6. Who uses masks? Give examples.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
William Golding: Lord of the Flies
William Golding (1911-1993) - in full Sir Willam Gerald Golding
English novelist, who received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1983. The choice was unexpected, because the internationally famous novelist Graham Greene (1904-1991) was considered the strongest candidate from the English writers. In many novels Golding has revealed the dark places of human heart, when isolated individuals or small groups are pushed into extreme situations. His work is characterized by exploration of "the darkness of man's heart", deep spiritual and ethical questions.
"Twenty-five years ago I accepted the label 'pessimist' thoughtlessly without realising that it was going to be tied to my tail, as it were, in something the way that, to take an example from another art, Rachmaninoff's famous Prelude in C sharp minor was tied to him. No audience would allow him off the concert platform until he played it. Similarly critics have dug into my books until they could come up with something that looked hopeless. I can't think why. I don't feel hopeless myself." (from Nobel Lecture, 1983)
William Golding was born in the village of St. Columb Minor in Cornwall. His father, Alec, was a schoolmaster, who had radical convictions in politics and a strong faith in science. Golding's mother, Mildred, was a supporter of the British suffragate movement. Golding started writing at the age of seven, but following the wishes of his parents, he studied first natural sciences and then English at Brasenose College, Oxford. Golding's first book, a collection of poems, appeared in 1934, a year before he received his B.A. in English and a diploma in education.
From 1935 to 1939, Golding worked as a writer, actor, producer, and a settlement house worker. In 1939 he moved to Salisbury, where he began teaching English and philosophy at Bishop Wordsworth's School. He married Ann Brookfield; they had two children. In his private journal Golding described how he once set two groups of boys against one another. These psychological experiments most likely inspired later his novel Lord of the Flies (1954).
During World War II, Golding served in the Royal Navy in command of a rocket ship. His active service included involvement in the sinking of the German battleship Bismarck in 1940 and participating in the Normandy invasion. Demobilised in 1945, Golding returned to writing and teaching, with a dark view of the European civilization. Recalling later his war experiences, he remarked that "man produces evil, as a bee produces honey."
In Salisbury Golding wrote four books, but did not get them published. Lord of the Flies, an allegorical story set in the near future during wartime, was turned down by twenty-one publishes until it finally accepted by Faber and Faber after substantial revisions. E.M. Forster named it Book of the Years and in the late 1950s it became a bestseller among American readers. At the time of its appearance, Golding was 44, but the success of the novel allowed him to give up teaching. In the gripping story a group of small British boys, stranded on a desert island, lapse into violence after they have lost all adult guidance. Ironically, the adult world is devastated by nuclear war.
Lord of the Flies was followed by The Inheritors (1955), which overturned H.G. Wells's Outline of History (1920) and depicted the extermination of Neanderthal man by Homo Sapiens. Neanderthals are portrayed compassionate and communal, and when they meet the more sophisticated Cro-Magnons, their tribe is doomed. The Finnish professor of paleontology, Björn Kurténhas offered in his novel Dance of the Tiger (1978) the explanation, that the Neanderthals disappeared because they fell fatally in love with their black and beautiful Cro-Magnon neighbours. In The Inheritors, which Golding himself considered his finest work, there is no understanding or love between these two races. First the events are perceived from the point of view of Lok, a semi-human creature, and after his death, the new protagonist is a Cro-Magnon, Tuami.
Golding's most widely read work, Lord of the Flies, has been translated into many languages and filmed in 1963 and 1990. It is an ironic comment on R.M. Ballantyne's Coral Island, using also the names of its characters. The story describes a group of children, who are evacuated from Britain because of a nuclear war. Their airplane crashes on an uninhabited island, and all the adults are killed. The boys create their own society, which gradually degenerates from democratic, rational, and moral community to tyrannical and cruel. "They cried for their mothers much less often than might have been expected; they were very brown, and filthily dirty." (in Lord of the Flies)
The older boys take control, a boy called Piggy, who is asthmatic and nearsighted, becomes a target of teasing and torment. Leaders emerge, two of the older boys get killed, and they begin to hunt another, just as a ship arrives. Golding's view is pessimistic: human nature is inherently corruptible and wicked. Thus the 19th century ideals of progress and education are based on false premises. Although the boys have been taught social skills, their desire to kill is unleashed when there are no strict rules of the English public-school system to control their behavior. This is the world of freedom, that is ruled by savages and the ultimate evil, the Lord of the Flies, Beelzebub, Prince of Devils, whom the boys worship in the form of a decapitated boar's head.
source: Some rights reserved Petri Liukkonen (author) & Ari Pesonen. Kuusankosken kaupunginkirjasto 2008
English novelist, who received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1983. The choice was unexpected, because the internationally famous novelist Graham Greene (1904-1991) was considered the strongest candidate from the English writers. In many novels Golding has revealed the dark places of human heart, when isolated individuals or small groups are pushed into extreme situations. His work is characterized by exploration of "the darkness of man's heart", deep spiritual and ethical questions.
"Twenty-five years ago I accepted the label 'pessimist' thoughtlessly without realising that it was going to be tied to my tail, as it were, in something the way that, to take an example from another art, Rachmaninoff's famous Prelude in C sharp minor was tied to him. No audience would allow him off the concert platform until he played it. Similarly critics have dug into my books until they could come up with something that looked hopeless. I can't think why. I don't feel hopeless myself." (from Nobel Lecture, 1983)
William Golding was born in the village of St. Columb Minor in Cornwall. His father, Alec, was a schoolmaster, who had radical convictions in politics and a strong faith in science. Golding's mother, Mildred, was a supporter of the British suffragate movement. Golding started writing at the age of seven, but following the wishes of his parents, he studied first natural sciences and then English at Brasenose College, Oxford. Golding's first book, a collection of poems, appeared in 1934, a year before he received his B.A. in English and a diploma in education.
From 1935 to 1939, Golding worked as a writer, actor, producer, and a settlement house worker. In 1939 he moved to Salisbury, where he began teaching English and philosophy at Bishop Wordsworth's School. He married Ann Brookfield; they had two children. In his private journal Golding described how he once set two groups of boys against one another. These psychological experiments most likely inspired later his novel Lord of the Flies (1954).
During World War II, Golding served in the Royal Navy in command of a rocket ship. His active service included involvement in the sinking of the German battleship Bismarck in 1940 and participating in the Normandy invasion. Demobilised in 1945, Golding returned to writing and teaching, with a dark view of the European civilization. Recalling later his war experiences, he remarked that "man produces evil, as a bee produces honey."
In Salisbury Golding wrote four books, but did not get them published. Lord of the Flies, an allegorical story set in the near future during wartime, was turned down by twenty-one publishes until it finally accepted by Faber and Faber after substantial revisions. E.M. Forster named it Book of the Years and in the late 1950s it became a bestseller among American readers. At the time of its appearance, Golding was 44, but the success of the novel allowed him to give up teaching. In the gripping story a group of small British boys, stranded on a desert island, lapse into violence after they have lost all adult guidance. Ironically, the adult world is devastated by nuclear war.
Lord of the Flies was followed by The Inheritors (1955), which overturned H.G. Wells's Outline of History (1920) and depicted the extermination of Neanderthal man by Homo Sapiens. Neanderthals are portrayed compassionate and communal, and when they meet the more sophisticated Cro-Magnons, their tribe is doomed. The Finnish professor of paleontology, Björn Kurténhas offered in his novel Dance of the Tiger (1978) the explanation, that the Neanderthals disappeared because they fell fatally in love with their black and beautiful Cro-Magnon neighbours. In The Inheritors, which Golding himself considered his finest work, there is no understanding or love between these two races. First the events are perceived from the point of view of Lok, a semi-human creature, and after his death, the new protagonist is a Cro-Magnon, Tuami.
Golding's most widely read work, Lord of the Flies, has been translated into many languages and filmed in 1963 and 1990. It is an ironic comment on R.M. Ballantyne's Coral Island, using also the names of its characters. The story describes a group of children, who are evacuated from Britain because of a nuclear war. Their airplane crashes on an uninhabited island, and all the adults are killed. The boys create their own society, which gradually degenerates from democratic, rational, and moral community to tyrannical and cruel. "They cried for their mothers much less often than might have been expected; they were very brown, and filthily dirty." (in Lord of the Flies)
The older boys take control, a boy called Piggy, who is asthmatic and nearsighted, becomes a target of teasing and torment. Leaders emerge, two of the older boys get killed, and they begin to hunt another, just as a ship arrives. Golding's view is pessimistic: human nature is inherently corruptible and wicked. Thus the 19th century ideals of progress and education are based on false premises. Although the boys have been taught social skills, their desire to kill is unleashed when there are no strict rules of the English public-school system to control their behavior. This is the world of freedom, that is ruled by savages and the ultimate evil, the Lord of the Flies, Beelzebub, Prince of Devils, whom the boys worship in the form of a decapitated boar's head.
source: Some rights reserved Petri Liukkonen (author) & Ari Pesonen. Kuusankosken kaupunginkirjasto 2008
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Lord of the Flies Anticipation Guide
Anticipation Guide for William Golding’s Lord of the Flies
In the space to the left of each statement, write “T” for true, if you agree with the statement, or “F” for false if you disagree with the statement.
_____ 1. If someone cannot “pull her weight,” she is expendable.
_____ 2. The younger we are, the more selfish we are.
_____ 3. All wars are preventable.
_____ 4. Homo sapiens were meant to be herbivores.
_____ 5. The darkness is scary because of the unknown factor.
_____ 6. Adult supervision is necessary in every context.
_____ 7. Youth is wasted on the young.
_____ 8. Every child has some form of the “Boogie Man.”
_____ 9. There should be a “pecking order” among siblings; it is healthy, productive, and proper for the older and bigger to dominate (“survival of the fittest”).
_____ 10. Mankind is the cruelest of all beasts, because when we hurt other people, we realize they are being hurt; when cats play with and eat mice, the cat has no idea that the mouse is in pain. This makes people the least respectable of all species (concept from Mark Twain’s The Damned Human Race).
_____ 11. Good authors can provide endless thinking opportunities; without them, life would be dull.
Once you have completed answering these statements, please go to this website:
Additional Lord of the Flies
On a seperate piece of paper, and with your shoulder partner discuss the statements found on this website. Give your reasoning why you choose your answer(s). Be prepared to discuss them with the class.
In the space to the left of each statement, write “T” for true, if you agree with the statement, or “F” for false if you disagree with the statement.
_____ 1. If someone cannot “pull her weight,” she is expendable.
_____ 2. The younger we are, the more selfish we are.
_____ 3. All wars are preventable.
_____ 4. Homo sapiens were meant to be herbivores.
_____ 5. The darkness is scary because of the unknown factor.
_____ 6. Adult supervision is necessary in every context.
_____ 7. Youth is wasted on the young.
_____ 8. Every child has some form of the “Boogie Man.”
_____ 9. There should be a “pecking order” among siblings; it is healthy, productive, and proper for the older and bigger to dominate (“survival of the fittest”).
_____ 10. Mankind is the cruelest of all beasts, because when we hurt other people, we realize they are being hurt; when cats play with and eat mice, the cat has no idea that the mouse is in pain. This makes people the least respectable of all species (concept from Mark Twain’s The Damned Human Race).
_____ 11. Good authors can provide endless thinking opportunities; without them, life would be dull.
Once you have completed answering these statements, please go to this website:
Additional Lord of the Flies
On a seperate piece of paper, and with your shoulder partner discuss the statements found on this website. Give your reasoning why you choose your answer(s). Be prepared to discuss them with the class.
Friday, October 7, 2011
Keynote
Sophomore Keynote Presentation for Monday, October 10, 2011
Group One: What is the significance of jungle/tropical islands?
Group Two: What are types of civilization?
Group Three: What are characteristics of boys ages 5-11?
Group Four: What are the characteristics of a utopian and dystopian society?
Group Five: Does man need authority?
Group Six: Is war necessary to have a successful society?
Group Seven: Is man innately good or evil?
The Keynote presentation must have three slides.
• Slide 1 : Definition of your topic
• Slide 2: What does it look like?
• Slide 3: Make a connection to our society.
• Use a graphic or picture for each slide.
Group One: What is the significance of jungle/tropical islands?
Group Two: What are types of civilization?
Group Three: What are characteristics of boys ages 5-11?
Group Four: What are the characteristics of a utopian and dystopian society?
Group Five: Does man need authority?
Group Six: Is war necessary to have a successful society?
Group Seven: Is man innately good or evil?
The Keynote presentation must have three slides.
• Slide 1 : Definition of your topic
• Slide 2: What does it look like?
• Slide 3: Make a connection to our society.
• Use a graphic or picture for each slide.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Argumentative Essay Checklist
Name_____________________________________Date__________________Period__________
Argumentative Essay Checklist
Opening Paragraph
General sentence introducing the topic, also called a “hook”
Outside example of topic (NOT anything about Macbeth! Think books, movies, political events, news stories, etc.)
Transition from outside example to Macbeth
Two part thesis statement (must be arguable, supportable and specific. Do not write “Macbeth kills lots of people, including Banquo and Macduff.” Thesis statement must be underlined.
First Body Paragraph
Topic sentence about the thesis position
Transition to first point of thesis (who, where, what, when)
1st concrete detail from Macbeth. Must be embedded in the sentence and include a lead-out.
Underline CD and include act and scene numbers (ex: IV, iii, 132-133)
Include a MINIMUM of two sentences of commentary. Commentary is interpretation or explanation of the CD and IS NOT summary!!
Transition to second point of thesis (who, where, what, when)
2nd concrete detail from Macbeth. Must be embedded in the sentence and include a lead-out.
Underline CD and include act and scene numbers.
Include a MINIMUM of two sentences of commentary, NOT summary!
Concluding sentence
Second Body Paragraph
Topic sentence about the thesis position
Transition to outside source (CD). Tell who said it OR the title of the article/website. (ex: Harvard professor, Dr. David Neiman, explains, “Lady Macbeth was a product of her time” and that it wasn’t her fault she was homicidal (32).
Commentary (minimum of two sentences)
Transition to second outside source (see above)
Commentary
Concluding sentence
Third Body Paragraph
Topic sentence
Counter argument – can use an outside source for this. If so, it needs to be embedded and contain a parenthetical citation.
Refutation – can use an outside source for this. There needs to be ONE outside source (minimum) for this paragraph with detailed explanation.
Concluding sentence
Closing Paragraph
Restate thesis and summarize claims. Do not just cut and paste your thesis/arguments here.
Universalize – why do we care about this topic? What does it have to do with our current lives? Do NOT use sweeping statements, i.e., “If Macbeth had only had a true friend none of this tragedy would have occurred.” Or “We should all be friendly to everyone.”
Clinching sentence – sums everything up in a powerful closing sentence.
Works Cited Page
Is on its own page
Title says Works Cited. Nothing else.
Includes Macbeth as a source
Contains three other sources that are academically sound
Is alphabetized
Is double-spaced
Left hanging margin on first line of each source. Additional lines are indented five spaces.
Double-check format of each source. You are accountable for the correct format. If you have questions, ask before the essay is due.
Organization
Cover sheet with original, creative title, your name, date and period. Must be typed.
Final essay
Works Cited page
Edited rough draft
Peer edit sheet with name of peer editor
3 Research Logs
REMEMBER:
Use third person throughout the essay
Document your sources correctly
Include a Works Cited page
Underline thesis and all CDs
Do not include questions in the essay
Argumentative Essay Checklist
Opening Paragraph
General sentence introducing the topic, also called a “hook”
Outside example of topic (NOT anything about Macbeth! Think books, movies, political events, news stories, etc.)
Transition from outside example to Macbeth
Two part thesis statement (must be arguable, supportable and specific. Do not write “Macbeth kills lots of people, including Banquo and Macduff.” Thesis statement must be underlined.
First Body Paragraph
Topic sentence about the thesis position
Transition to first point of thesis (who, where, what, when)
1st concrete detail from Macbeth. Must be embedded in the sentence and include a lead-out.
Underline CD and include act and scene numbers (ex: IV, iii, 132-133)
Include a MINIMUM of two sentences of commentary. Commentary is interpretation or explanation of the CD and IS NOT summary!!
Transition to second point of thesis (who, where, what, when)
2nd concrete detail from Macbeth. Must be embedded in the sentence and include a lead-out.
Underline CD and include act and scene numbers.
Include a MINIMUM of two sentences of commentary, NOT summary!
Concluding sentence
Second Body Paragraph
Topic sentence about the thesis position
Transition to outside source (CD). Tell who said it OR the title of the article/website. (ex: Harvard professor, Dr. David Neiman, explains, “Lady Macbeth was a product of her time” and that it wasn’t her fault she was homicidal (32).
Commentary (minimum of two sentences)
Transition to second outside source (see above)
Commentary
Concluding sentence
Third Body Paragraph
Topic sentence
Counter argument – can use an outside source for this. If so, it needs to be embedded and contain a parenthetical citation.
Refutation – can use an outside source for this. There needs to be ONE outside source (minimum) for this paragraph with detailed explanation.
Concluding sentence
Closing Paragraph
Restate thesis and summarize claims. Do not just cut and paste your thesis/arguments here.
Universalize – why do we care about this topic? What does it have to do with our current lives? Do NOT use sweeping statements, i.e., “If Macbeth had only had a true friend none of this tragedy would have occurred.” Or “We should all be friendly to everyone.”
Clinching sentence – sums everything up in a powerful closing sentence.
Works Cited Page
Is on its own page
Title says Works Cited. Nothing else.
Includes Macbeth as a source
Contains three other sources that are academically sound
Is alphabetized
Is double-spaced
Left hanging margin on first line of each source. Additional lines are indented five spaces.
Double-check format of each source. You are accountable for the correct format. If you have questions, ask before the essay is due.
Organization
Cover sheet with original, creative title, your name, date and period. Must be typed.
Final essay
Works Cited page
Edited rough draft
Peer edit sheet with name of peer editor
3 Research Logs
REMEMBER:
Use third person throughout the essay
Document your sources correctly
Include a Works Cited page
Underline thesis and all CDs
Do not include questions in the essay
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Counter-Argument Example
First, I will state my assertion. How about: Schools should make hot chocolate available to students in the morning and at lunch time.
Second, brainstorm supporting arguments: Hot chocolate contains lots of milk which is full of calcium and protein. Growing kids should have three servings of dairy each day. They can be served hot or iced, so they would be appealing both in summer and winter. They are a popular drink among older teens and adults whom students are likely to emulate. Hot Chocolate would replace sodas for lots of students, improving their nutrition. Hot Chocolate seems more ‘special’ than canned sodas or juice, so maybe it would make students feel more positive about school.
Third, decide on a couple of main arguments to include in my thesis statement: I think I’ll include the nutrition aspect and their popularity. So, my thesis might be ‘Schools should make hot chocolate available to students in the morning and at lunch time because they would improve students’ nutrition and they are popular.’ That’s kind of long. I’ll shorten it to ‘Schools should serve hot chocolate because they are nutritional and popular.’ I’ll start with that.
Fourth, identify an audience: I’ll try to convince parents.
Fifth, think of the concerns or arguments parents might raise. (These will be the counter-arguments I will answer in my paper.) Well, I know parents might argue that kids shouldn’t have too much sugar. They might think of the hot chocolate with whipped cream on top and say hot chocolate has too much fat. They might be concerned that they are messy—more likely to be spilled than a soda with a lid. No, I think that would be more of a concern if I were writing for the administrators; I’ll leave that one out. Maybe parents would worry about how expensive the drinks are.
Sixth, think of answers to the parents’ concerns and counter-arguments. Well, for the too much sugar argument, I could recommend sugar-free hot chocolate. I could also compare the amount of sugar in a hot chocolate with how much is in a soda. I could also check and see if it was the same kind of sugar: I have read that the high fructose corn syrup in sodas is worse than regular sugar. That would take a little research, but it should be easy to find out. What else? Oh, yes – fat. Everybody has heard of "skinny" hot chocolates made with non-fat milk, so I could include that in my recommendation. Now for the last one: expense. Hot chocolates are kind of expensive compared with a soda. How could I answer that concern? If students learned
to make them and ran a student stand in the cafeteria, they wouldn’t be so expensive; there wouldn’t have to be a profit built in – although I suppose the equipment is expensive. Maybe instead of some of the other prizes and awards that the parent club buys, they could pay for hot chocolate tickets to give out as incentives or awards. Ok, I think that is enough to start with.
Seventh, write down an outline. Ok. First, I have my thesis statement.
Then, my first section is going to be Improved Nutrition. Under that I can include the calcium, protein, the nutritional needs of growing kids, and the substitution for the "empty calories" in soda. I think this would be a good time to put in the counter-arguments related to nutrition. My second section will be about Popularity of Hot chocolate. I could even take a short survey of students and use a statistic to show that more kids would drink milk if it were in hot chocolate instead of a regular ol’ carton. I could put in how they can be served in summer or winter and about how kids aren’t likely to "outgrow" them because they are popular with older teens and
adults. This could be where I answer the counter-argument about expense with some ideas about kids being willing to work at a student-stand and about giving out tickets as awards. Now I need to enter the counter-arguments related to nutrition. I could say ‘Some parents might counter that hot chocolate is high in sugar, and fat. However, those arguments fail to take into consideration the fact that hot chocolate can be made with sugar-free flavorings, and non-fat milk – or even soy milk.’ I could add ‘Also, when one considers the sugar content of the sodas they will be replacing, this argument seems even weaker." Then I could I answer the counter-argument about expense with some ideas about kids being willing to work at a student-stand and about giving out tickets as awards.
And my paper is practically written at this point!
Second, brainstorm supporting arguments: Hot chocolate contains lots of milk which is full of calcium and protein. Growing kids should have three servings of dairy each day. They can be served hot or iced, so they would be appealing both in summer and winter. They are a popular drink among older teens and adults whom students are likely to emulate. Hot Chocolate would replace sodas for lots of students, improving their nutrition. Hot Chocolate seems more ‘special’ than canned sodas or juice, so maybe it would make students feel more positive about school.
Third, decide on a couple of main arguments to include in my thesis statement: I think I’ll include the nutrition aspect and their popularity. So, my thesis might be ‘Schools should make hot chocolate available to students in the morning and at lunch time because they would improve students’ nutrition and they are popular.’ That’s kind of long. I’ll shorten it to ‘Schools should serve hot chocolate because they are nutritional and popular.’ I’ll start with that.
Fourth, identify an audience: I’ll try to convince parents.
Fifth, think of the concerns or arguments parents might raise. (These will be the counter-arguments I will answer in my paper.) Well, I know parents might argue that kids shouldn’t have too much sugar. They might think of the hot chocolate with whipped cream on top and say hot chocolate has too much fat. They might be concerned that they are messy—more likely to be spilled than a soda with a lid. No, I think that would be more of a concern if I were writing for the administrators; I’ll leave that one out. Maybe parents would worry about how expensive the drinks are.
Sixth, think of answers to the parents’ concerns and counter-arguments. Well, for the too much sugar argument, I could recommend sugar-free hot chocolate. I could also compare the amount of sugar in a hot chocolate with how much is in a soda. I could also check and see if it was the same kind of sugar: I have read that the high fructose corn syrup in sodas is worse than regular sugar. That would take a little research, but it should be easy to find out. What else? Oh, yes – fat. Everybody has heard of "skinny" hot chocolates made with non-fat milk, so I could include that in my recommendation. Now for the last one: expense. Hot chocolates are kind of expensive compared with a soda. How could I answer that concern? If students learned
to make them and ran a student stand in the cafeteria, they wouldn’t be so expensive; there wouldn’t have to be a profit built in – although I suppose the equipment is expensive. Maybe instead of some of the other prizes and awards that the parent club buys, they could pay for hot chocolate tickets to give out as incentives or awards. Ok, I think that is enough to start with.
Seventh, write down an outline. Ok. First, I have my thesis statement.
Then, my first section is going to be Improved Nutrition. Under that I can include the calcium, protein, the nutritional needs of growing kids, and the substitution for the "empty calories" in soda. I think this would be a good time to put in the counter-arguments related to nutrition. My second section will be about Popularity of Hot chocolate. I could even take a short survey of students and use a statistic to show that more kids would drink milk if it were in hot chocolate instead of a regular ol’ carton. I could put in how they can be served in summer or winter and about how kids aren’t likely to "outgrow" them because they are popular with older teens and
adults. This could be where I answer the counter-argument about expense with some ideas about kids being willing to work at a student-stand and about giving out tickets as awards. Now I need to enter the counter-arguments related to nutrition. I could say ‘Some parents might counter that hot chocolate is high in sugar, and fat. However, those arguments fail to take into consideration the fact that hot chocolate can be made with sugar-free flavorings, and non-fat milk – or even soy milk.’ I could add ‘Also, when one considers the sugar content of the sodas they will be replacing, this argument seems even weaker." Then I could I answer the counter-argument about expense with some ideas about kids being willing to work at a student-stand and about giving out tickets as awards.
And my paper is practically written at this point!
Counter-Argument Activity Directions
Counter-Argument Activity
I. Once you are in a group, identify a topic about which you know enough to take and support two or more positions. Here are some possible idea-starters:
• Community issues involving bike paths, bus routes or schedules, parks, recreation opportunities for teens, etc.
• School issues such as electives, schedules, lunchroom conditions or offerings, extra-curricular programs, social groups or activities, behavioral or discipline issues, rules, policies, etc.
• Individual issues such as health, leisure, career planning, etc.
In the River’s Edge Park example, the topic is Developing a Park.
II. When you have picked a topic, ask questions about it until you come up with at least two positions you can support with reasons today. (In your argumentative essay on Macbeth you have had the opportunity to do research to build your support.)
• You might start by asking questions that begin with “How can we ...?” or “What should we do about …?” These will result in several possible positions.
• Questions that begin simply “Should we …?” will result in only two positions -- for and against.
In the River’s Edge Park example, the question was “What kind of development should take place?” or “What kind of a park should it become?” Although only one position is presented, we can guess that other positions might have been: It should become a sports-oriented park; it should appeal to a wide variety of users; it should attract the greatest number of users possible; it should reflect the history of the area, etc.
III. Next, divide your group into half. We’ll call these two half-groups Thesis Teams. Each team will take a different position on the topic. Your team will write a thesis and outline the support you would use in a argumentative paper, including anticipating counter-arguments.
Steps for the Thesis Group
1. Formulate your position on the issue.
2. Brainstorm possible evidence you could use to support your position. (Turn this in too).
3. Decide on two or three main supporting arguments and incorporate them (and your position) into a thesis statement.
4. Identify the audience you want to persuade. (e.g. parents, teachers, coaches, etc. No “preaching to the choir” allowed!)
5. Brainstorm possible counter-arguments or concerns your audience might have. (These would be their “Yeah, but…” responses.)
6. Jot down possible answers to your reader’s counter-arguments.
7. On a piece of paper, write a brief outline of a paper, incorporating your supporting arguments and your answers to the reader’s counter-arguments.
8. Turn in your completed outline (2 outlines for 1 group—remember you’ve split yourselves into 2 teams at this point) to your Period’s In-Box in the classroom, or email to MrsLarson322@gmail.com
I. Once you are in a group, identify a topic about which you know enough to take and support two or more positions. Here are some possible idea-starters:
• Community issues involving bike paths, bus routes or schedules, parks, recreation opportunities for teens, etc.
• School issues such as electives, schedules, lunchroom conditions or offerings, extra-curricular programs, social groups or activities, behavioral or discipline issues, rules, policies, etc.
• Individual issues such as health, leisure, career planning, etc.
In the River’s Edge Park example, the topic is Developing a Park.
II. When you have picked a topic, ask questions about it until you come up with at least two positions you can support with reasons today. (In your argumentative essay on Macbeth you have had the opportunity to do research to build your support.)
• You might start by asking questions that begin with “How can we ...?” or “What should we do about …?” These will result in several possible positions.
• Questions that begin simply “Should we …?” will result in only two positions -- for and against.
In the River’s Edge Park example, the question was “What kind of development should take place?” or “What kind of a park should it become?” Although only one position is presented, we can guess that other positions might have been: It should become a sports-oriented park; it should appeal to a wide variety of users; it should attract the greatest number of users possible; it should reflect the history of the area, etc.
III. Next, divide your group into half. We’ll call these two half-groups Thesis Teams. Each team will take a different position on the topic. Your team will write a thesis and outline the support you would use in a argumentative paper, including anticipating counter-arguments.
Steps for the Thesis Group
1. Formulate your position on the issue.
2. Brainstorm possible evidence you could use to support your position. (Turn this in too).
3. Decide on two or three main supporting arguments and incorporate them (and your position) into a thesis statement.
4. Identify the audience you want to persuade. (e.g. parents, teachers, coaches, etc. No “preaching to the choir” allowed!)
5. Brainstorm possible counter-arguments or concerns your audience might have. (These would be their “Yeah, but…” responses.)
6. Jot down possible answers to your reader’s counter-arguments.
7. On a piece of paper, write a brief outline of a paper, incorporating your supporting arguments and your answers to the reader’s counter-arguments.
8. Turn in your completed outline (2 outlines for 1 group—remember you’ve split yourselves into 2 teams at this point) to your Period’s In-Box in the classroom, or email to MrsLarson322@gmail.com
Counter Argument: Park Planning
Criteria for Good Thesis Statements
1. Arguable – Reasonable people could disagree
2. Supportable – Can be backed up with evidence, reasons
3. Specific – Not vague, not too general, not too broad
4. “Maps out” the paper – Gives the reader a guide to the organization of the argument
5. Third person – No “I” or “me” in the paper
Park Planning for River’s Edge Park
Tucked away among neighboring houses along the Willamette River is a small pocket of nature: Blackberries ripen under the great trees; ivy runs down the bank, obscuring the remnants of trails down to the gravel bar; an osprey lifts off from its nest in a dying treetop. This is River’s Edge Park, a small parcel of mostly overgrown land, forgotten for decades by most of the city. Now, plans are being made to develop this corner as part of a master planning process for all of the city parks. The question is, What kind of development should take place? Taking into consideration the size and natural features of the park and the interests of the immediate neighbors, it is clear that the best plan is for a relatively undeveloped, mostly naturalized park with limited amenities and parking.
The size and physical features of the park are the most limiting factor. Barely 10 acres, only the top half of the park is flat and well above the annual winter high water. Only this area is suitable for siting any permanent structures, and its small size argues for the simplest of amenities: A picnic table or two, benches, a viewing platform, a play structure, and a small lawn will fill the area. Some may insist on adding more parking spaces here. However, to do so would require either removing the spreading maples that give the park its character and beauty or eliminating the lawn and picnic area.
Down a steep and unstable bank lies the other half of the park. This is gravel bar, flooded each winter and overgrown with young willows. This part is best left to nature. Some may argue that this is the jewel of the park and should be cleared and made more accessible. However, while a trail may be cleared to the water each spring, any attempts at developing this part will be thwarted each year by the high water. A winter channel cutting close to the bank creates an island of the lower half. Each year’s flood chokes the area with massive debris. Since heavy equipment is not allowed in such a riparian area, the effort and expense of clearing it each year would exhaust the Park Department’s maintenance budget – as well as its personnel.
Finally, the park is currently and will continue to be designated a neighborhood park – not a city or regional park. So, the interests of the neighbors should weigh most heavily in any decisions. Their preferences range from leaving it exactly as it is to adding small improvements. They favor one or two tables, a play structure, and clearing back the brush on the upper level. Any grand ideas for changing this park aren’t coming from the people who actually use it.
In conclusion, River’s Edge Park is already very close to what it should become: A natural area where people can picnic in view of the river, neighborhood children can play, and the adventurous can traipse down the bank and skip stones or wade. And perhaps we can help nature along a bit by adding a nesting pole for the osprey against the day that the winter storms take down that dying fir tree.
DIRECTIONS:
In a Google Doc, highlight the thesis. Underline the counter-arguments.
ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS:
1. How does the writer support his position? Explain.
2. How is each counter-argument answered or refuted? Explain.
1. Arguable – Reasonable people could disagree
2. Supportable – Can be backed up with evidence, reasons
3. Specific – Not vague, not too general, not too broad
4. “Maps out” the paper – Gives the reader a guide to the organization of the argument
5. Third person – No “I” or “me” in the paper
Park Planning for River’s Edge Park
Tucked away among neighboring houses along the Willamette River is a small pocket of nature: Blackberries ripen under the great trees; ivy runs down the bank, obscuring the remnants of trails down to the gravel bar; an osprey lifts off from its nest in a dying treetop. This is River’s Edge Park, a small parcel of mostly overgrown land, forgotten for decades by most of the city. Now, plans are being made to develop this corner as part of a master planning process for all of the city parks. The question is, What kind of development should take place? Taking into consideration the size and natural features of the park and the interests of the immediate neighbors, it is clear that the best plan is for a relatively undeveloped, mostly naturalized park with limited amenities and parking.
The size and physical features of the park are the most limiting factor. Barely 10 acres, only the top half of the park is flat and well above the annual winter high water. Only this area is suitable for siting any permanent structures, and its small size argues for the simplest of amenities: A picnic table or two, benches, a viewing platform, a play structure, and a small lawn will fill the area. Some may insist on adding more parking spaces here. However, to do so would require either removing the spreading maples that give the park its character and beauty or eliminating the lawn and picnic area.
Down a steep and unstable bank lies the other half of the park. This is gravel bar, flooded each winter and overgrown with young willows. This part is best left to nature. Some may argue that this is the jewel of the park and should be cleared and made more accessible. However, while a trail may be cleared to the water each spring, any attempts at developing this part will be thwarted each year by the high water. A winter channel cutting close to the bank creates an island of the lower half. Each year’s flood chokes the area with massive debris. Since heavy equipment is not allowed in such a riparian area, the effort and expense of clearing it each year would exhaust the Park Department’s maintenance budget – as well as its personnel.
Finally, the park is currently and will continue to be designated a neighborhood park – not a city or regional park. So, the interests of the neighbors should weigh most heavily in any decisions. Their preferences range from leaving it exactly as it is to adding small improvements. They favor one or two tables, a play structure, and clearing back the brush on the upper level. Any grand ideas for changing this park aren’t coming from the people who actually use it.
In conclusion, River’s Edge Park is already very close to what it should become: A natural area where people can picnic in view of the river, neighborhood children can play, and the adventurous can traipse down the bank and skip stones or wade. And perhaps we can help nature along a bit by adding a nesting pole for the osprey against the day that the winter storms take down that dying fir tree.
DIRECTIONS:
In a Google Doc, highlight the thesis. Underline the counter-arguments.
ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS:
1. How does the writer support his position? Explain.
2. How is each counter-argument answered or refuted? Explain.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)