English 12 Spring 2005

1. While I think that many of you have made a great deal of progress with your thesis statements, one habit I see a lot of people falling into is simply juxtaposing a couple of formal aspects of the piece (i.e. color, shape, line, etc.) with some sort of broad comment about the piece (it's nostalgic, chaotic, etc.) and joining them with a generic verb like "uses" or "does" rather than really making an argument about how the formal aspects of the work contribute to these interpretations of the piece. Give the author's thesis statement another go-round. Does s/he fall into this pattern? If so, how can s/he push the thesis statement to be clearer about what the formal aspects of the piece are actually doing?

2. By now you probably should have added research to your papers. Does the author have the appropriate amount of research? Is the research substantial (i.e. from academic sources) and is it used substantially in the paper (i.e. not just dropped in)? If not, how might the author improve his or her use of research to better meet the demands of the assignment?

3. Does each paragraph contain a strong topic sentence and stick to that topic sentence without wandering for the entire paragraph? If not, suggest ways in which the author might improve the organization of his or her paper into paragraphs (note: throughout the semester paragraphing has consistently been the dividing line between successful and unsuccessful papers in this class!).

4. In our model draft workshops the distinction between description and analysis keeps coming up. Assess whether the author has struck the appropriate balance of description and analysis, noting specific examples.

I'm about halfway through grading your Unit 2 portfolios (though I won't be done by Wednesday) and I must say that the general level of commitment evident in your unit 2 portfolios is much lower than what I saw in your Unit 1 portfolios. As a result, of course, the grades are a bit lower than they were for Unit 1 and I'm sure many of you will be scrambling to make up for this with a good grade on your Unit 3 portfolio. Kind and generous soul that I am, I'm offering you a chance to get some extra credit. Read this article from the New York Review of Books and write a comment to this post with your thoughts about it (the more intellectually stimulating the comment, the more credit you'll receive). If you really want to impress me, you might speculate about how the findings outlined in the article might help us understand the Jackson Pollock painting that we looked at in class last week.

1. Has the author concentrated his or her analysis on just one formal aspect of the piece? What is this aspect? Why has the author chosen this aspect of the piece rather than any other? Would any other have worked just as well?

2. What is the author's thesis statement? If there isn't one, then what kind of argument is the author trying to make about the piece? If there isn't a thesis or an argument, then do you see an argument the author is making implicitly?

3. Has the author completed the assignments requirement of "exploring in detail how this aspect of the piece contributes to its overall message or aesthetic?" What is the piece's overall message or aesthetic as you believe the author understands it? Could the author's idea be pushed any further to be more specific, detailed or original?

4. Cite at least one place in the paper where you would like to see more explanation or detail. Explain why you chose the passage you chose.

Sorry, folks, blogger has been acting up so I didn't get a chance to post blog assignments this week. Enjoy your reprieve and bask in the glow of having completed unit 2 for one more weekend!

This is due by class time on Friday, April 29.

Your last blog assignment is short and sweet. I just got my teaching contract for next year and I will be teaching this course again next spring. Every time I teach a class things get changed around somewhat, so I'd like to know what is the one thing that you would not change about this class. It can be something you had fun doing, something that helped you learn about your writing or about something else... whatever you like.

These are due by class time on Friday, April 22.

1. If you had to choose another piece of art in the Ackland Museum on which to write a paper, what would it be? Explain why, and if you can include a jpeg of the piece of art in your post (this link will help).

2. Do you think that neuroscience will be important to the study of art history at any time in the future? Why or why not? In what ways can you picture it being used?

These are due by class time on Friday, April 15:

1. What's your favorite thing about spring?

2. Hopefully you've made some progress in making the jump from description toward analysis over the past couple of weeks. Assuming you have, what has helped you make that transition? A specific way of thinking about a piece of art? Something that was said on one of your draft workshop forms? Let me know what has helped you grow as a critic.

1. We talked on Wednesday a great deal about the difference between description and analysis. Identify at least two or three parts of the author's paper that you believe could be pushed toward more of an analytical tone. Be harsh! If you let entire sections of your partner's paper that are merely descriptive slide by you'll be doing him or her a real disservice.

2. How is the author's analysis organized? Does s/he move you from the left side of the painting to the right? From the foreground to the background? Chronologically through the creation of the piece? If you can't identify a coherent scheme suggest one for the author given the information that seems most important to his or her thesis.

3. How is the paper framed? Do the introduction and conclusion work together? Are the intro and conclusion generic or inventive? Suggest ways the author could improve the framing of his or her paper.

1. Even if the paper is not currently too shot, imagine that it does not reach the assignment's length requirement. Identify idea or section of the paper that you think should be expanded and give the author a hint of how you believe s/he should accomplish that expansion.

2. Does the author support his or her analysis of the artist's thought process with concrete details? If not, explain where the author could add these details. If so, pull out one or two details that you think were particularly effective.

3. One of the most difficult things to master in writing about the humanities is the difference between description and analysis. Is the tone of the author's paper more descriptive or analytical? If one or the other, how might the author fix this? You might also want to include a few words about how you envisioned the tone of the paper given the assignment.

4. Does the paper fulfill the demands of the assignment? Why or why not?

As promised, here is a detailed schedule of what will be expected of you over the next two weeks of class:

Friday, March 25: Class does not meet, though your week 10 blog assignments are due by class time.

Monday, March 28: Introduction to Unit 3. Read the pdf document called "unit_3" in the Course Documents section of the blackboard site. In addition, imagine that you are the editor of an academic art history journal, and the two student papers in the pdf file have been submitted to your journal for publication. Choose one of the two papers and write a rejection letter to the author and post it to your blog before class on Monday. Your criticisms of these papers will be the basis of much of our discussion on Monday. (Note: We'll also revisit Ratey one more time before the end of the course.)

Wednesday, March 30: We will do 2 model draft workshops that were originally scheduled for April 1. The two of you whose papers will be modeled (one is Maria; I can't remember just now who the other person is) will need to send me your Feeder 3.1 assignments via email by Wednesday morning.

Friday, April 1: Since I'll be at my conference, class will not meet. However, each of you is required to complete an editing workshop using the paramedic method on a section of one of your group members' papers. Post your group member's original paragraph and your edited version to your blog by Friday evening.

Monday, April 4: Unit 2 Portfolios due. Portfolios should include your Feeder 2.1 assignment, the longer paper that comprises your Feeder 2.2 and Unit project and the data sheets you filled out over spring break. If you have any questions about this please bring them up in class on the 28th or 30th of March.

Sorry about the hectic schedule, everyone! Please let me know if any of this is unclear.