Thursday, November 10, 2011
Short Story Terms--study for exam
Plot
In medias res
Flashback
Exposition
Rising Action
Conflict
Foreshadowing
Protagonist
Hero/Heroine
Antagonist
Climax
Resolution (a.k.a. denouement)
Characterization
“Showing” Dramatic Characterization
“Telling” Narrative Characterization
Motivation
Plausible Characterization
Consistent Characterization
Absurdist literature
Antihero
Dynamic character
Static character
Foil
Flat character
Stock character
Round character
Setting
Point of view
Narrator
Omniscient narrator
Editorial narrator
Neutral narrator
Limited omniscient narrator
Stream-of-consciousness technique
Objective point of view
First-person narrator
Unreliable narrator
Naïve narrator
Symbol
Conventional symbol
Literary symbol
Allegory
Theme
Style
Diction
Tone
Irony
Verbal irony
Sarcasm
Situational irony
Dramatic irony
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
SS in-depth study
In-Depth Author Study
Objectives:
· Observe style and common use of elements in an author's works
· Use research strategies to gather information
· Correctly document sources in MLA style
· Develop a group presentation on the selected author and his/her writing
The Assignment:
· Read three stories written by a chosen author
· Complete a formal reading journal for one of the stories
· Write a one-page, typed, thoughtful, formal response for each of the other two
· Research the author’s biographical information
· Read several articles of professional criticism
· Write a one-page summary and response of your criticism
· Correctly document research sources with an MLA works cited page
· Present information as a group, informing the class of the author info and
sharing summaries of the stories and analysis of the author as a whole
Author Choices:
Rank your top four choices for authors. Keep in mind that the idea is to expand your literary horizons.
Nathaniel Hawthorne
Flannery O’Conner
Alice Munro
James Joyce
Mark Twain
Henry James
Monday, October 24, 2011
Ind Rdg Booktalk
Assignment:
Prepare and give a 10-minute booktalk in which you give a BRIEF synopsis of your book, analyze an element of the book, and show how the author uses that element to create his/her theme. This should be essentially what you did for your first process paper, only you’re doing it orally. This means you still need evidence. Rather than having to write, go through the process, and be confined by word count, you’re challenged with the task of making it comprehensible to your peers in only 10-15 minutes. Therefore, focus on ONE aspect of the novel, just as you did in your lit analysis essay.
Objectives:
- Continue working on lit analysis (theme, analysis of an element, and evidence to back claims)
- Apply critical lenses to a novel
- Demonstrate excellent public speaking skills
- Title and author
- BRIEF plot synopsis
- Analysis of the element you’ll be focusing on
- Argument of the theme of the book and how your element contributes to it
- Evidence from the text to back up your claims
To help deepen your analysis, you’ll also need to apply critical lenses to your reading of the text. EVERYONE will be using reader response (you can’t avoid it) and formalist (because this is AP Lit and ALL interpretations MUST be grounded in the text). In addition, you should consider your novel from another perspective: historical, biographical, feminist, psychological, Marxist, etc. Use the lens to help you better understand the argument the author is making by considering the context or what he/she may be saying about society.
In order to do this well, you may need to do some brief research on your author, the time period, psychology, etc. If you use outside sources to help deepen your understanding and to give more credibility to your analysis, you should cite your sources ORALLY during your booktalk.
Grading
I will grade you using the rubric found here.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
RJ Conferences
Remember that any claims you make about yourself in a reading journal conference must be BACKED UP with evidence from your reading journal. If you say you're great at noticing details, then show in your RJ where you picked up on important details. If you say you reread a lot, then show what you were able to better understand after rereading. If you say that you don't do a very good job with the dictionary, then show where you misread or misunderstood something in your RJ because you didn't know what a word meant in that context.
What to cover in your reading journal conference:
- Where you are as a critical reader according to Nabokov's rules. Which rules are you following (your strengths)? Which rules are you ignoring (your weaknesses)? Show evidence from your RJ to back up these claims about yourself.
- How comfortable do you feel with poetry at this point? Have you improved? In what way? Where are you still struggling?
- Set one or two specific goals for 2nd quarter to help you become a better critical reader. These can be specific rules you're going to work on (i.e. rereading) or related areas (i.e. time-management).
How will I grade this? If you sit down with me, have your RJ, cover what you need to thoroughly but concisely--showing evidence from your completed RJ--you get an A. If you don't have much in the way of specific evidence, you'll get an A-. If I have to prompt you to make sure you cover it all or have very little evidence, you'll get some type of B depending on how much prompting you require or how sparse the evidence is. If you require prompting but can't even answer what I'm asking for OR you clearly don't have a completed RJ OR you just have absolutely no evidence for your claims, you'll end up in the C range.
Friday, October 7, 2011
Groups and Poets
Emma, Donald, Hannah, and Jessie S: Theodore Roethke
Dan, Zitxw, and Zach: William Blake
Ryne, Taylor, and Sam: e.e. cummings
Krista, Shannon, and Cameron: Emily Dickinson
Kim, Amber J, and Naty: Margaret Atwood
Amber H, Kaitlin, and Natalie: Gwendolyn Brooks
Peter, Ben, and Tyler: Keats
Ally, Jessica I, and Katie: Elizabeth Bishop
AP Lit In-Depth Poet Study
- You've already chosen your poet. See the previous blog posting for your assignment.
- Read a representative sampling of the poet's work--that means enough that you can see the kind of poetry your poet writes, including the various motifs and poetic devices your poet explores. This is all about increasing your exposure to poetry--the more exposure you have, the more practice you get working with all the poetic devices you just learned about, the more experience you have in analysis, the more comfortable you will feel when presented with it in the future.
- Discuss the poems you read with your group. Work together to understand them, to analyze them, to bounce ideas for interpretation off of each other. You all know by now how helpful class discussion can be for any piece of literature, so use your group to help you better understand your own ideas.
- Individually, complete a formal write-up that synthesizes the poet's background, literary importance, and style. Also include the poetic devices, forms, etc. (all the stuff we covered in your textbook) the poet seems to use, favor, etc. Also include common motifs and/or themes they write about. Make sure you cite examples from their various poetry as evidence of these claims. There is no length requirement for this write-up. Your criteria is that it be long enough--long enough to do a good job, make a comprehensive study, and cite evidence for your claims.
- Conduct research to help you accomplish the write-up above--biographical, critical, literary contributions--and compile a works cited page that documents those sources.
- As a group, present your findings to the class. Be prepared to share with the class some of the poet's work and your synthesis as the experts on that poet. You will have 15-20 to present your poet as experts and everyone in your group should contribute equally to the presentation.