While I'm not sure how many of you will read this before the test, I thought it might help everyone to keep a few topics in mind to study for the test. So here are a few potential questions (feel free to post your own):
How did Deism play a role in the ideologies and statements made by Franklin, Jefferson, and the authors belonging to the Neoclassic school of thought?
How do Wheatley's and Freneau's compositions vary from those of Franklin, Henry, Jefferson, and Paine in both structure and intent?
What is the the goal of each individual author?
How did nationalism play a role in each author's work(s)?
What new ideologies resulted from the pendulum of thought swinging from Puritanism to Neoclassicism? How did they exhibit themselves in the authors studied? What are the authors' persuasive intents and how are their works constructed? Are the arguments effective?
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Monday, February 11, 2008
February 11
We are going to be starting our term papers soon, so today in class we took notes on the way we will be working. We will be using the Toulmin Model of Argument, created by British philosopher Stephen Toulmin.
The Toulmin Model does not allow any absolutes. Instead, it uses qualifiers, specific conditions under which the argument would be correct.
Following the Toulmin Model, any realistic argument consists of six parts: data, claims, warrants, qualifiers, rebuttals, and backing.
We don't know much about the term papers (such as a topic), but it will be out of 1000 points and we will be required to make 100 notecards when the time comes.
The Neoclassicism test is on Thursday.
The Toulmin Model does not allow any absolutes. Instead, it uses qualifiers, specific conditions under which the argument would be correct.
Following the Toulmin Model, any realistic argument consists of six parts: data, claims, warrants, qualifiers, rebuttals, and backing.
We don't know much about the term papers (such as a topic), but it will be out of 1000 points and we will be required to make 100 notecards when the time comes.
The Neoclassicism test is on Thursday.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Class Summary
HEY! It's Paige, and it's my turn to post for the class.
On friday we discussed Frenou. We mentioned his use of spears in his poetry to represent bravery under some circumstances, yet primitiveness under others. Although he is a classic he also was a preromanitc and it shows through his use of nature in his work. We discussed how in his writing he spoke of the innate hardworking nature of Native American Spirits. This was dissimilar to the common thinking that the Native Americans were all barbarious and didn't have souls. Many people associated them with simplistic animals or beasts. Fernou obviously had a begrudging respect for the culture of the Native Americans.
We also had a very delightful discussion of Yankee Doodle. We spoke of whether or not the phrase was offensive, and Mr. Lazarow discussed that although it seemed weak to our ears, it was in a fact an insult to the colonies. We discussed the taboo of certain words and symbols such as the n-word and swastikas, that are maintained due to their intensely negative connotations.
We spoke of "Ring Around the Rosie" and it's true meaning about those who die from plague. Then we transitioned into "Yankee Doodle" once more discussing whether it was an innocent children's song or if we should avoid letting youngsters sing this tune because of it's original nature.
We discussed the phenomenon of language and how words can be turned around and embraced positively.
Lastly we spoke briefly of music and it's affects during wartime. Cristy and I spoke of recent uses of music for soldiers during the war on Iraq, and Deirdre mentioned how her Grandfather still listens to old wartime propaganda music. Music used to help to unite the fighting force such as during the civil war, yet now it seems to serve the purpose of detachment from the evils of wartime.
Well that about sums about what we did on friday, I hope we can continue such interesting discussions in the following weeks!
On friday we discussed Frenou. We mentioned his use of spears in his poetry to represent bravery under some circumstances, yet primitiveness under others. Although he is a classic he also was a preromanitc and it shows through his use of nature in his work. We discussed how in his writing he spoke of the innate hardworking nature of Native American Spirits. This was dissimilar to the common thinking that the Native Americans were all barbarious and didn't have souls. Many people associated them with simplistic animals or beasts. Fernou obviously had a begrudging respect for the culture of the Native Americans.
We also had a very delightful discussion of Yankee Doodle. We spoke of whether or not the phrase was offensive, and Mr. Lazarow discussed that although it seemed weak to our ears, it was in a fact an insult to the colonies. We discussed the taboo of certain words and symbols such as the n-word and swastikas, that are maintained due to their intensely negative connotations.
We spoke of "Ring Around the Rosie" and it's true meaning about those who die from plague. Then we transitioned into "Yankee Doodle" once more discussing whether it was an innocent children's song or if we should avoid letting youngsters sing this tune because of it's original nature.
We discussed the phenomenon of language and how words can be turned around and embraced positively.
Lastly we spoke briefly of music and it's affects during wartime. Cristy and I spoke of recent uses of music for soldiers during the war on Iraq, and Deirdre mentioned how her Grandfather still listens to old wartime propaganda music. Music used to help to unite the fighting force such as during the civil war, yet now it seems to serve the purpose of detachment from the evils of wartime.
Well that about sums about what we did on friday, I hope we can continue such interesting discussions in the following weeks!
Friday, February 8, 2008
Where Have the 'Brothers' Gone?
Before class ended today we had been discussing music, and its effect on war. We likened the effectiveness of listening to music in battle, to running or doing a sport while listening.
I totally agree that music does aid some people when they are running or doing a difficult task, but most of the sports we mentioned were not team activities. We referred generally to snowboarding and running, neither of which have a direct need for camaraderie.
This year during crew we are no longer allowed to listen to our ipods while we run, and we listen to a CD player/radio as a team when we are on the ergs. At first, people were really upset. I always used to run with my ipod, and I dreaded running without it. However, as the weeks went by, our team bond began to grow. We started talking while we ran which strengthened our lungs, and the team started to function as a productive unit.
This is all speculation, but perhaps some of the camaraderie and brotherhood is lost when soldiers are off in their own little world trying to disassociate themselves from their actions. You always hear about the deep bonds between men who fought in
Another interesting topic I figured I would mention is the effect of music when it is AGAINST war. A perfect example would be
Thursday, February 7, 2008
February 7th Class Post
Today in class we discussed the poems of Philip Freneau, a neoclassic and pre-romantic poet. We first discussed the two poems titiled, "To the Memory of the Brave Americans" and "The Indian Burial Ground". In the first, Freneau writes specifically about General Green, a general of the American Revolution who fell in battle in South Carolina in 1781. We discusssed in class how the author romanticizes Greene by describing him as a hero and his motivations as valiant and noble. We specifically referenced the spear mentioned in the fifth stanza. This spear has two possible meanings, either referring to a bygone age when knights in shining armor used spears, or two a barbaric present. In class, we also discussed specifically the Parthian mentioned in the next to last stanza. The Parthians were a civilization in Iran that were famed for their prowess on horseback and with archery, and Freneau likens the retreating British to the Parthians, who could fire backwards in the saddle
We also discussed "The Indian Burial Ground". In it, Freneau describes the burial ground of a long dead Indian. He specifically incoroporates several examples from nature such as the elm, the rock, etc. At first, there was somewhat of a disagreement in the class whether this poem was positive or negative towards native americans. We first came to the conclusion that the poem was clearly pre-romantic, as shown clearly by reasons submission to emotion in the final stanza. Also, it became clear that Freneau was proposing something new when it came to Indians, that they actually had a soul and could go to heaven. Running contrary to previous European thought, this concept would eventually evolve into the idea of the noble savage.
After this lengthy discussion, whe also discussed "The Wild Honey-Suckle" and "The Republican Genius of Europe". In "Honey-Suckle", we discussed how Freneau clearly had romantic leanings as he was describing a simple flower in nature. In "Republican Genius", he writes in a much more agressive style, describing the genius as a vengeful and wrathful god bearing down upon those in Europe clinging to monarchical ideas, a style that is very different from the placid manner of the earlier poems.
Throughout class, we discussed romanticism, its failing, its development, and its applicability to the poems. We were told that romanticism originates from urbanization, nationalism, and industrialization, and dies with war. Romanticism was the farthest swing of the pendulum when writers become convinced that man is essentially good. Furthermore, there were three distinct flavors of romanticism - early romantics, romantics concerned with the human mind, and transcendentals. Romanticism played a crucial role in our discussion and will continue to do so.
We also discussed "The Indian Burial Ground". In it, Freneau describes the burial ground of a long dead Indian. He specifically incoroporates several examples from nature such as the elm, the rock, etc. At first, there was somewhat of a disagreement in the class whether this poem was positive or negative towards native americans. We first came to the conclusion that the poem was clearly pre-romantic, as shown clearly by reasons submission to emotion in the final stanza. Also, it became clear that Freneau was proposing something new when it came to Indians, that they actually had a soul and could go to heaven. Running contrary to previous European thought, this concept would eventually evolve into the idea of the noble savage.
After this lengthy discussion, whe also discussed "The Wild Honey-Suckle" and "The Republican Genius of Europe". In "Honey-Suckle", we discussed how Freneau clearly had romantic leanings as he was describing a simple flower in nature. In "Republican Genius", he writes in a much more agressive style, describing the genius as a vengeful and wrathful god bearing down upon those in Europe clinging to monarchical ideas, a style that is very different from the placid manner of the earlier poems.
Throughout class, we discussed romanticism, its failing, its development, and its applicability to the poems. We were told that romanticism originates from urbanization, nationalism, and industrialization, and dies with war. Romanticism was the farthest swing of the pendulum when writers become convinced that man is essentially good. Furthermore, there were three distinct flavors of romanticism - early romantics, romantics concerned with the human mind, and transcendentals. Romanticism played a crucial role in our discussion and will continue to do so.
Specification or Embellishment?
(before I start anything, this post is NOT just about the American Dream)
Our discussion in class today reminded me of a book I read about a similar topic. The first person recorded to use the term, ‘The American Dream’, was James Truslow Adams in his 1931 book titled The Epic of America. He defines this dream as “that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement. It is a difficult dream for the European upper classes to interpret adequately, and too many of us ourselves have grown weary and mistrustful of it. It is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position." (P.214-215)
First of all, I didn’t originally intend to critique this. However, this definition is so abstract (how the heck can you define someone’s innate capability?) that he could be talking about a plethora of other topics rather than the one that seems to be at hand. Also, there is a definite Romantic element in this, kind of like the ole ‘life is amazing’ idea we discussed; he states, “life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone”, which is basically purr word after purr word.
Here’s another point of view that is quite similar: Thomas Wolfe said, "…to every man, regardless of his birth, his shining, golden opportunity ...the right to live, to work, to be himself, and to become whatever thing his manhood and his vision can combine to make him,” referring to what America had to offer to humanity. Again, it seems when people attempt to provide the definition for what it is to be American, their words become progressively generalized and abstracted, all of which is tied with a Romantic ribbon of the perfect, peaceable, and lovely world we live in.
I don’t really think I disagree with the techniques of these two men, particularly if the purpose was propagandistic in its intention. After all, if the definitions of the American Dream were more specific, they would not be as applicable to all the people they are appealing to, which would probably not be as effective in bringing people (workers) over to the new country, or in Adams’ case, the glorification of America.
So, I guess my point is, in something as important as the goal of a nation, do you think it is more effective to lay out the facts (regardless of what eyes are upon them) in the pursuit of being informative, or is it better to simply embellish the beauty and appeal of a notion for the sake of more converts?
Steph
Our discussion in class today reminded me of a book I read about a similar topic. The first person recorded to use the term, ‘The American Dream’, was James Truslow Adams in his 1931 book titled The Epic of America. He defines this dream as “that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement. It is a difficult dream for the European upper classes to interpret adequately, and too many of us ourselves have grown weary and mistrustful of it. It is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position." (P.214-215)
First of all, I didn’t originally intend to critique this. However, this definition is so abstract (how the heck can you define someone’s innate capability?) that he could be talking about a plethora of other topics rather than the one that seems to be at hand. Also, there is a definite Romantic element in this, kind of like the ole ‘life is amazing’ idea we discussed; he states, “life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone”, which is basically purr word after purr word.
Here’s another point of view that is quite similar: Thomas Wolfe said, "…to every man, regardless of his birth, his shining, golden opportunity ...the right to live, to work, to be himself, and to become whatever thing his manhood and his vision can combine to make him,” referring to what America had to offer to humanity. Again, it seems when people attempt to provide the definition for what it is to be American, their words become progressively generalized and abstracted, all of which is tied with a Romantic ribbon of the perfect, peaceable, and lovely world we live in.
I don’t really think I disagree with the techniques of these two men, particularly if the purpose was propagandistic in its intention. After all, if the definitions of the American Dream were more specific, they would not be as applicable to all the people they are appealing to, which would probably not be as effective in bringing people (workers) over to the new country, or in Adams’ case, the glorification of America.
So, I guess my point is, in something as important as the goal of a nation, do you think it is more effective to lay out the facts (regardless of what eyes are upon them) in the pursuit of being informative, or is it better to simply embellish the beauty and appeal of a notion for the sake of more converts?
Steph
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
February 6th Class
Well today was a glorious day filled with mind expanding discussions and very unusual weather for the sixth of February…
We were given a new assignment in our Literature for Composition books. It begins on page 1094 called “American Dreams and Nightmares”. It is mandatory that we read the four essays, and the segment on page 1182 about the Star Spangled Banner. All of the other readings would be helpful as well but are not ‘mandatory’. We will be finishing up Neoclassicism by the end of this week, and there will most likely be a test sometime next week.
Mr. Laz started out the discussion today by acknowledging that we don’t doubt ‘rags to riches’ stories, but asked if we felt they were a form of propaganda. (It worked for me so it will work for you…)
Ashley and I felt that people who have achieved the ‘rags to riches’ status are more critical about those who cannot pull themselves out of the ‘rag’ stage. Ashley made reference to sports, describing that no matter how many times you hit the gym after practice you just might not be cut out to be the star player.
Ian felt that the American Dream itself was an advertisement, but disagreed with the notion that ‘rags to riches’ stories are advertisements. Amy noted that not many people, out of the thousands of ‘rags’ make it to ‘riches’ and that it is a small portion of people that can accomplish that task, and Mr. Laz responded to that by saying that we want to believe that it happens/will happen.
Ben started a new train of thought by saying that he felt some of the advantages of the underprivileged (affirmative action etc) makes it easier for them to succeed in some areas (acceptance into college). A few people disagreed with that statement.
It was Paige who then brought up the idea that perhaps all of these ‘rags to riches’ stories were actually having a negative effect on the morality of our society. Mr. Laz and I agreed wondering when does being competitive cross the line into being cutthroat. Amy felt that competition was what allowed progress. Mr. Laz agreed to some extent but then gave an example of when competition actually hinders progress.
Overall the topic of discussion was the validity of the ‘rags to riches’ stories and the impact they have on the decisions we make and our competitiveness.
So that pretty much sums it all up I guess…have a wonderful evening everybody. Woooo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)