|
MoarFoarYoarTenbux posted:You drat well better give someone an A for doing A-level work. If they don't give him their best writing it isn't A-level work. Evaluating writing is subjective (whether it's a professor grading or you casually saying that a particular Op-Ed sucks). Brainworm sounds like he handles this well by expressing clear standards for his students and offering opportunities to rewrite, and I think that is more than fair. Plus, as someone who teaches writing a large university, I can promise you that people always get the grade they deserve in the end (just like Brainworm said). For example, I had a student this semester who was complaining because he got a B on a (pretty good) paper he obviously half-assed. It just wasn't as good as his previous stuff and had almost no revision from his rough draft, even though he knew the rough draft needed work. So he was complaining and his friend from class walked up and said, "Dude, he just wants you to turn in a better paper next time." His next two papers were excellent and he is reworking one of them for a local essay contest. He also got an A in the class. Brainworm posted:You've also got to remember that I grade a process, not a product. I can't stress this enough. It isn't about being able to churn out writing that seems good on the surface. It is about showing the professor (through drafts and revisions and final product) that you understand the process. Even with a crappy swing, you can still hit a stellar golf shot every now and then. But if someone pushes you to constantly improve your swing, you can hit that shot consistently (and with less effort). Brainworm posted:Most of the time, bad writing by good students has real process problems rather than clear product problems -- that is, you get a solid piece of writing where there's a clear research gap or little improvement between drafts -- rather than a process-immaculate piece that I somehow intuit isn't up to a student's native abilities. So when I say I'll hit the best paper in the class with a B or lower, that's generally where it comes from; the product might be nice, but the process could be hosed. This is pretty much it.
|
#
¿
May 20, 2009 19:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 02:46 |
|
|
Brainworm posted:All good hearted people love the Oxford comma. All good hearted people do love the Oxford comma. It got omitted because newspapers were concerned with character counts and column spacing. On old-school presses, the plate for a comma would take up as much space as a capital F plate, so dropping every Oxford comma could save significant space in a newspaper (this is why the AP style guide still says not to use the Oxford comma). Word processors correct for spacing issues now (try to line up two lines of Times New Roman text in Word using the space bar), but people still insist on dropping the Oxford comma. It is a holdover from a defunct printing practice that got taught as a "rule" and so it sticks around. edit: It is the same reason some people say not to split infinitives. Some 16th century Oxford grammarians decided English should be more like the language of God. They decided since we can't split infinitives in Latin (because they are one word), then obviously we shouldn't in English! It got taught enough times as a rule so people still adhere to it today, despite it being a silly grammatical justification. The Last 04 fucked around with this message at 05:28 on May 27, 2009 |
|
#
¿
May 27, 2009 05:14
|
|
|
How do you spend your summers? Are you pretty free to work on pet projects and the like? Do you have administrative work or obligations to committees you sit on? I taught summer school last year and it was a bear (6 week sessions are rough when you require 6 papers). I decided to take this summer to work on some side projects, do a few summer institutes/conferences, and get some articles ready to send out. Basically, I'm getting caught up on things the semester doesn't allow for (but that are still expected of me) and lining a few things up for fall. I just worry that this kind of freedom will vanish after grad school, so give me the scoop. Also, are senior faculty good about mentoring/giving advice to younger profs at your college? If so, how do they help? Would they look over a book manuscript? Help you with contacts?
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2009 02:30
|
|
|
You've talked a lot about tropes (especially synecdoche and metaphor). Have you ever read Kenneth Burke's A Grammar of Motives and are you familiar with his master tropes? It might interest you if nothing else because you seem to have similar views on language use. Maybe you should have been a rhetorician?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2009 16:56
|
|
|
Brainworm posted:the death of this short story form, and maybe of the short story more generally. I think a major reason for this (at least in contemporary fiction) is economic: publishers just won't publish collections of short stories unless the author already has a (successful) novel (or two) that the collection can piggyback off of marketing-wise. Small presses sometimes take a chance, but the fact is that very few people buy short stories, especially from unestablished authors, so publishers just don't bother with them anymore. I'm finishing my MFA right now (poetry, not fiction), but the word on the street from the fiction folk I know seems to line up with the death of the short story more generally (though I suspect it will always be a staple for intro lit anthologies). That said, short stories are still important for journals, but even then I can think of only one other person in this thread who probably reads fiction journals regularly. And authors rarely get paid for contributions to journals, so most short stories written now are for the love of the game. I think I'm being too negative 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2009 03:21
|
|
|
Brainworm posted:That's about the size of it. Though I can't imagine that, as a poet, you're shedding many tears for the short story writers who can't get a steady paycheck out of their writing. Ha, poetry is about as "love of the game" as it gets right now, so no, not too many tears (though a lot of sympathy). I'm gearing up for a PhD in Rhet/Comp--so about half of my coursework and teaching is rhetoric related--because poetry is awesome (and an awesomely bad way to ever make a cent). To be fair, I planned this coming into grad school, so it wasn't an "Oh God, no money in poems!" thing. And yes, creative journals are way too expensive. My rhetoric journals don't cost much at all, but the poetry adds up big time. Our library went digital-only with about a third of our English journals. Pissed off a lot of old-schoolers, but it makes my life way easier. edit: I guess it's not so much the price of creative journals as the sheer number I need to read regularly to feel up to speed. With rhet/comp there are three or four and the rest I skim at the library. The Last 04 fucked around with this message at 05:30 on Jul 10, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2009 05:22
|
|
|
Paladin posted:It's now been two years since I did undergrad. I know I want to go to grad school. I majored in Psych because the super-small English program at the school I went to was kind of bland to me at the time. I've spent the last two years either doing ESL abroad or test-prep in the states. Since I am doing both right now, I'm going to thread-hijack. Here is the simplified version: the MFA is shorter, usually not funded, and definitely won't land you a tenure-track job after graduation. You take workshops, write a lot of poems/stories/essays, submit to journals, go to readings, then write a creative thesis that you hopefully turn into a book. The PhD is longer, is more likely to be funded (albeit modestly), and only probably won't land you a decent job after graduation. You take seminars, write a lot of papers, submit to journals and go to conferences in your area, take a bunch of tests somewhere in the middle, then spend a few years researching and writing a dissertation that you hopefully turn into a book. My question for you is, why do you want a graduate degree in English? As someone in the middle of both worlds, I can give you a more detailed response if I know more about your plans. What would you do your PhD in? What genre would your MFA be in? What do you want to do afterward? Do you want to be a professor? Also, you should read our discussion about MFA programs here.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2009 22:42
|
|
|
Paladin posted:The big help there was Brainworm's advice on walking away. I mostly just want as much time to dedicate towards writing as possible, though I'd enjoy the instruction and guidance. An MFA seems good if I get into one of the ones with funding, I'm using various funding tracking blogs to find ones that have that. If I can't get good funding this year, I'll just go back to teaching in Korea and try again. I think this is the right way to approach it. I wouldn't be doing an MFA if I wasn't funded. Neither degree is worth going into debt for, but since an MFA won't improve your job/pay opportunities anywhere, it really isn't worth it. Just keep writing and start sending things out--you don't need a degree to do that! And when a program does offer you a fat 3-year fellowship you can write without fear of the insurmountable debt you'd otherwise be accruing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2009 04:00
|
|
|
Brainworm posted:Last: The biggest leap I think intro students can make in terms of scriptreading is thinking in terms of motivations rather than emotions. I think this is true of reading any good writing. Your boy E.B. White said, "Shocking writing is like murder: the questions the jury must decide are the questions of motive and intent." Motivations are more interesting anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2009 01:16
|
|
|
Grouco posted:Could you recommend any books on rhetorical analysis, trope, scheme, and figure of speech identification? I can point out the basic stuff like anaphora, epanadiplosis, chiasmus, etc., but I'm not nearly as competent as I'd like. Reading PL is really driving this deficiency home. You want Edward P.J. Corbett's Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student. It is pretty much the standard for classical rhetoric texts (I think it's in its fourth edition, if that's any indication of its longevity). Sure, there are probably newer treatments, but this one is still the most commonly assigned one I see and for good reason. Corbett also wrote a short book called Style and Statement that is very good and might be more in line with what you're looking for. It is basically chapter four of Classical Rhetoric and focuses mainly on the topics, schemes, and tropes. It's more of a "pocket guide" than a textbook, which means you can probably find a copy used for under $5. It isn't as detailed as the other, but I use it regularly as a quick reference (just as a note, I'm working on a PhD in rhetoric and only know about 3/4 of the schemes and tropes off the top of my head--it just isn't worth it to memorize all of them when you can just look one up. This opinion might change as comps approach, however). Also, Silva Rhetoricae is the best online resource for classical rhetoric terms and whatnot. Pair it with a good primer on rhetorical analysis like Patricia Roberts-Miller's Understanding Misunderstandings and you're set! You could also just slog through Aristotle's Rhetoric and Poetics (everyone should at least once). The Last 04 fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Aug 16, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2009 00:50
|
|
|
Brainworm posted:Were I building a course unit on that kind of reading and interpretation, I'd bolt Turco to Hollander's Rhyme's Reason and Hoagland's Real Sofistikashun, and practice, practice, practice. I've heard good things about Real Sofistikashun. Do you think it's worth a look (I imagine so, since you'd use it in a course)? I guess a better question is "Exam copy or worth the purchase?" I'm teaching poetry in the spring so I'm on the lookout.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2009 01:42
|
|
|
Brainworm posted:A bit. Most of the academic work I read on education has to do with writing and working with writers. So Peter Elbow, David Bartholomae, Nancy Grimm, Lad Tobin, and so on, they're who I think about when I think about writing classes. So who do you lean towards--Elbow or Bartholomae? Also, do you go to the CCCCs, cause we should catch a drink if you'll be there. It's in bourbon country this year!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2009 03:10
|
|
|
Brainworm posted:I'm going to try to go this year, but I don't think I'll be presenting. So I'm totally up for figuring that out. I was in Louisville over the Summer for a while. Absolutely worth the trip, conference or no. Sweet. I think my panel is at noon on the first day of panels, so I'll be done early and can relax. I'll PM you when things get closer.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2009 02:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 02:46 |
|
|
elentar posted:your recommendations, which should come from professors who will attest to your ability to meet whatever challenges are thrown at you. AbdominalSnowman, elentar's advice is good, and I want to emphasize the statement above. This will sound crass and people will disagree, but DO NOT underestimate the power of a strong recommendation. Think of it like this: if I'm about to invest some serious money in a horse, should I go with the unproven horse I've never heard of that looks good on paper or the horse my friend (who is a horse expert) says has been consistently awesome for the last four years of horse undergrad? Ideally, you want to be the horse that looks good on paper AND comes highly recommended by my friend. Then you look like a sure-fire return on their investment, which leads to my next point: Don't pay for a graduate degree in English. Like elentar said, any worthwhile program will fund you fully and completely, whether it be through a fellowship, TAship, RAship, or some combination of the three. If nothing else, in English there are always freshman composition classes to be taught--do not pay! It's like dating: do you really want to be with someone who can't buy you dinner? A PhD is 6-8 years of your life--the least they can do is feed you. Finally, in English the GRE isn't a huge deal from what I can tell. It can hurt if you suck and help if you are amazing--otherwise, just take it and don't gently caress up. I would take a few practice tests and review a bit, but it is basically a glorified (and computerized) version of the SAT used to weed out completely unqualified applicants (note: there are some programs that still give a poo poo, but most just want you to have a score that proves you are sentient).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2009 05:49
|
|