Responses to Course Material

So far, our classroom discussions have revolved mainly around two things: close reading and Theater of the Absurd (with some existentialism thrown in for good measure). I think that mainly what both of these things have helped strengthen us in is analysis. DIDLS (diction, imagery, details, language, syntax) gives us guidelines on how we can analyze things, and starting with the Theater of the Absurd presents with an immediate analytic challenge, given the strangeness of the works. Close reading can be used to find connections and meanings in works and TOTA works like American Dream make it hard to find connections and meanings with all of the random parts and moments that are so profound due to their lack of meaning. Personally, I quite like the challenge that American Dream has presented and have found Albee's works (I ended up reading The Zoo Story too) very interesting and thought-provoking. I think after getting through TOTA, other stories we read won't be nearly as hard to analyze.

Why no Yes in the Rock Hall

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2010/12/why_no_yes_in_the_rock_hall.html

I'm already biased in the case argued by the author. As a fan of Yes, I most definitely believe that they should be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. But I think that even if I weren't a huge fan of Yes and the genre they represent, that I would support them being inducted after reading this article. The author uses diction, detail and syntax to great affect in order to get his point across.

The article is very accessible because the diction is very casual, colloquial. But the diction is also used to highlight Yes and progressive rock as a whole in a positive light. "Yes and other prog bands of the 1970s had enormous success and substantial influence" is one of the many quotes that emphasizes the high level of fame the band achieved. The diction conjures up feelings of grandness and importance when it comes to Yes, which supports the author's original position.

The detail provided by the author is also critical in how the point of the article comes across. "It's not only Yes who has been consistently passed over by the Rock Hall: Jethro Tull; Emerson, Lake & Palmer; King Crimson; The Moody Blues; and Procol Harum are all still outside looking in". Is it necessary for the author to list all of these other progressive rock bands? No, it isn't. But it enforces the idea that it's not just one fanboy upset that his favorite band has been snubbed. It shows that the problem is large and scale, with Yes just being one of the most notable examples. The author uses a wide array of details to show all of the credentials Yes has: popularity, artistry, musicianship, and influence. The author also leaves out any and all details that might strengthen the case of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. In fact, when the Hall itself is brought up, detail is used to discredit it's decisions, noting that its decision to shut out most of progressive rock "fatally undercuts the credibility of the institution".

Finally, syntax in the article is put to great use in areas where the author wants emphasis. Questions are used to make you think about the case yourself, but usually with the author's slant in mind. For instance one of the questions makes you ask yourself if "the fact that it's not only Yes that is passed over, but also most of the other '70s prog bands, point to a pervading prejudice that undercuts the credibility of the entire Rock Hall enterprise?" Most people aren't going to read that question and say no, they'll think of various reasons why the answer is yes (the author makes use of the rest of that paragraph to give you more reasons). The author also keeps key information until the end of the sentence so that it really sinks in. In this instance: "It's almost as if these folks think they can dictate history with no explanation or supporting argument: rock history by fiat." the last four words have the most impact because they're at the end of the sentence, and it works well because that's the main point the author is getting at in the sentence.

Poetry Problems

I already knew what my biggest problems were with poetry going into the poetry multiple choice section of the book, and my thoughts have only been reinforced. There are two things in poetry that spell doom for me. The more a poem fulfills one of these two categories the more trouble I'll have with it. Firstly, is old English. The older the poem the harder the English is for me to understand. The Keats poem wasn't old enough where this was too much of an issue, but whenever there's a word that's asterisked, I typically have to look and see the definition provided. Different prepositions also make things harder. But having read plenty of Shakespeare in my schooling, old English isn't as difficult as it used to be. Now my biggest problem with poetry is digging through all of the figurative language to dissect the plot and meaning of the poems. Unlike book, poems don't just tell you what's happening. Books tell you what's happening and then provide description and detail. Poems tend to be very heavy on detail and leave you on your own to use that detail to figure out what's happening, and I don't like having to piece those things together myself. The less clear a poem is in its plot and meaning, the more trouble I'll have with it.

Peterson's AP English Diagnostic Test - Reflection

Going into the test, I thought I would do pretty well on it. Literature tests are typically the kind of tests that I excel at. But I didn't do as well in some areas and I think the biggest thing I need to expand on is my knowledge of lit terminology. Most of the questions that asked about what type of poem or story the passage was I didn't know what a few of the choices meant. For example, I got question nine wrong because I didn't know what a Lyric was. Questions regarding knowing what happened in the passages is easy for me, and since those type of what-does-this-line-mean, what-is-the-author's-point and what-does-this-person-want questions came up a lot in the Pride and Prejudice passage and in the last passage (historical, I love history), I did well in those sections of the test. And since poems aren't as literal and often use language that mires and obscures what the work is about, I have more trouble on those. The poem about the white mares at the break of dawn was followed by several questions where I had to figure out what the heck was being talked about. Having to pick apart poems one word at a time to try to interpret what an author is saying is not something I enjoy doing, largely in part because I find difficulty doing that. I ended up doing moderately well on that section of the test but it ended up taking a lot more time than all of the other sections. That's something that I'll most likely need to improve this year.