Thursday, 10/26

Agenda

1. Capstone Project–quick review and questions
2. For next class:
   • Read Carmilla, p. xvii-xxvi and p. 3-18
   • Bring a single-sided hard copy of revised Essay 2 draft to class (with revised conclusion)–you will not be able to participate in the in-class workshop without a printed, single-sided version of your paper, so plan accordingly.
   • Decide on which text you want to work with for your podcast–remember, you can do ANY text on our syllabus except Shelley’s Frankenstein, including one of the readings  we have not gotten to yet.
3. SMDC session on recording and using Garageband

Tuesday, 10/24

Agenda

1. Announcements–please reply “yes” or “no” to Rosenbach email ASAP
2. Twilight
3. Introductions and Conclusions
4. Capstone Project
5. Next class: On Thursday, we are meeting in the Morris Library Student Multimedia Design Center, Room B (on the lower level)–please arrive at the Library by 8am so we can walk down together when the Library opens and begin by 8:05am. To prepare for this session, review the Capstone Project assignment sheet and listen to 1-2 episodes of different podcasts to get a feel for the genre. You should also consider which text you might want to work with for your own podcast, and be ready to discuss those ideas in class.

 

Twilight

[If time: play 2:36-end]

1. What ideas about monstrosity/humanity does Twilight explore?
2. How are the vampires in this novel different from and/or similar to some of the monsters we have discussed before?

 

Introductions and Conclusions

1. What is the purpose of the introduction/conclusion of an essay?
   • What are some things NOT to do in an introduction or conclusion?
   • What are some strategies for writing GOOD introductions and conclusions?
2. Evaluate your current introduction based on our discussion and make some notes for revision.
3. Evaluate your tentative conclusion and make some notes for revision based on one of the models provided.

Thursday, 10/19

Agenda

1. Midterm survey
2. Workshopping Essay 2, Draft 1
3. Reviewing requirements for SW8
4. Next class: bring revised Essay 2 draft to class (with added conclusion) and read Twilight passages on Canvas

 

Peer Review–Workshopping Essay 2, Draft 1

As before, please follow the directions for WORKSHOPPING found in the Peer Review Guidelines file posted on Canvas. Even though these drafts are incomplete (and may be quite rough), I want you to take your time carefully reading each other’s drafts, compiling as much helpful feedback as you can, and asking/answering questions in your groups. This process should take about 60 minutes (about 20-25 minutes to read your group members’ drafts and then about 10-15 minutes of discussion per paper), so plan accordingly. You should not begin writing SW8 at this point.

Other things to keep in mind:

• Offer constructive criticism to help move the other person’s draft forward–remember, being too nice or vague is just as unhelpful as being too critical or nit-picky. Really think about what is working so far and what your partner needs to work on next.
• Focus more on the ideas of the essay rather than grammar/wording–consider what the writer is trying to do. Consider the strength of your partner’s thesis, how they present the context and support for their argument, etc. Ask them about what they hope to accomplish in the essay as a whole, what other information/sources they hope to add/find, etc.
• Refer to the Essay 2 assignment requirements and guidelines when reading and making your comments–after all, these are the standards the writer will be graded on.
• Annotate (write notes/questions, underline, highlight, etc.) the draft as you are reading–this will help you to better sum up your overall thoughts on the essay and pinpoint particular areas you might want to comment on for your SW8.

 

Reviewing requirements for SW8

Please follow the directions for RESPONDING found in the Peer Review Guidelines file posted on Canvas. As you did for SW4, make sure you re-upload your comments on your peer’s drafts back into your group’s folder as Word docs.

Tuesday, 10/17

Agenda

1. Essay 2, Draft 1 (at least 1st 3 pages) Due by 8am on Thursday–upload to the “10-19 Essay 2 Peer Review” folder in your Peer Group files before the in-class peer review workshop on Thursday. You DO NOT need to read Jekyll & Hyde p. 190-194 for Thursday.
2. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
3. Thesis Workshop, Part II
4. Outlining Workshop

 

A double-exposure photo of English stage actor Richard Mansfield as both Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde in the 1887 stage adaptation

 

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

Fastwrite: Where does the horror come from in this story? (consider both Jekyll’s narrative and the reactions/testimony of others)

 

Thesis Workshop, Part II

In groups of 3-4: Read your current thesis statement aloud. Group members should consider:

• Does the thesis have tension and a clearly-defined stance on the topic?
• Is it specific and contextualized?
• What could be reworded, omitted, or added for greater clarity?
• Does this statement need to be split into two sentences or condensed into one?

Give each writer feedback that addresses these questions. Writers then rewrite your current thesis based on this feedback.

 

Outlining Workshop

Now that you have a more polished statement of your argument as it currently stands, where do you need to go from here?

• Making lists of “chunks” and a scratch outline: Ask yourself, what are the “chunks” of information that you know you want to or have to include in order to make a strong argument? Think about your main ideas, the different part of the issue you are covering, your sources, etc.
• For example, here is the “chunk” list and scratch outline of a student writing a researched argument on mandatory public service for young adults:

• Writing Task: Open a new Word document and add the current version of your thesis below the heading. Based on this thesis, type up a “chunk” list, and then create an initial scratch outline for your topic as it is now. You will need to complete all three to receive credit for SW 7 (due by EOD today).

Thursday, 10/12

Agenda

1. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
2. Thesis Workshop
3. For next week: continue reading Jekyll & Hyde; continue gathering sources and thinking about the possible argument you want to make in Essay 2.

 

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

In groups of 2-3: Discuss today’s reading overall, making sure to cover the following questions.

• What more do we discover about Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde’s relationship?
• How does evidence work in this section?

 

Thesis Workshop

What are the traits of a good thesis?

• Thesis Statement mini-workshop–type or write out your current thesis statement (or a sentence or two you think best exemplifies your argument at this point) into a new Word doc or into your notebook. You’ll then test out different ways to frame your research question(s).

Tuesday, 10/10

Agenda

1. Announcements
   • Midterm grades will be posted on UD-SIS by EOD 10/13
   • Rosenbach field-trip on 10/28 is officially confirmed and funded! Later today, I will contact those of you who said on last month’s survey that you would be willing to drive a UD mini-van to ascertain how many of you are still willing/able to do so (I will drive one van and will need two other drivers).
2. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
3. Scholarly vs. Not-Scholarly Sources; Evaluating Sources (continued)
4. Essay 1, Draft 2 due by EOD today–review submission procedures

 

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

Robert Louis Steveson, ca. 1880

1. Brief intro to Robert Louis Stevenson (1850-1894) and the context of The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
2. What jumps out at you about the setting and narration of this story?
3. In what ways do this book’s characters embody ideas about the “monstrous” or monster stories that we have discussed before?
4. In what ways is Mr. Hyde similar/different from a monster like the one in Frankenstein, the Supernatural “Monster Movie” episode, the Lore episode “The Beast Within,” etc.?

 

Scholarly vs. Not-Scholarly Sources

What characteristics might a source need to be considered “scholarly”? How is this different from being credible? Why might it be beneficial to include/draw from scholarly sources in your papers?

• To practice, in pairs: Examine the sources each of you brought in today and then try to determine whether they are scholarly (or not) and why. Refer to the Guide to Scholarly Sources under the Unit III Module on Canvas.
• A good non-UD database for scholarly material: Google Scholar

Thursday, 10/5

Agenda

1. SW 6 Blog posts
2. Lore and audio storytelling
3. Evaluating Sources
4. Scholarly vs. Not-Scholarly Sources
5. Review Essay 1 submission guidelines and rubric

 

SW 6 Blog Posts

In groups of 3-4: Share with your group members your overall impression of the Special Collections session and the specific item you chose to focus on in your post (you may read from your blog post or summarize). Discuss: what were the BEST parts of this experience? What was the most interesting thing you learned? What do you wish you could have done/seen more of?

 

Lore and audio storytelling

• What were some things you noticed about the format, content, style, etc.?
• In what ways did the experience of listening to this episode differ from the other sorts of texts we have read/seen so far?
• What sorts of new information/context about monsters does this episode give us?

 

Evaluating Sources

Reliability vs. Credibility

Credibility Run-through

Goals:

1. Locate sources on the web
2. Determine credibility
3. Pick out convincing reasons why they are credible **Remember that credibility has to do with context and HOW you might use them (anonymous user comments are credible examples of certain types of reasoning)

Example: “horror podcasts and storytelling”

On your own: Google search using some of your keywords/search terms. Try to find at least 1-2 credible web sources you might consider including in your paper.

Eesha Ahmed- Special Collections

Visiting University of Delaware’s special collections in the library was a much more interesting experience than initially anticipated. Not only was the material vast and dating back centuries, but the curator gave so much insight and information into all the items. What was extremely helpful was how much the curator knew about everything that was there; from the date it was created to the content of the books, which was especially useful for the many books that were not in English. What I found interesting about the collections themselves were how well they were preserved, and as the curator told us, will remain to be preserved as most of the books actually will stay in a fairly sturdy state for centuries. Furthermore, the amount of monsters integrated with real animals was astonishing, and we were all left to wonder whether or not the people in that time truly believed in those make-believe creatures or not.

What particularly interested me was the novel The Time Machine by H.G. Wells, and it was almost entirely because of the short yet intriguing description of the novel given by the curator. The novel is essentially about a man who time travels into the future, into a time where there are friendly and normal humans on top of land, and monsters underground. It was written in 1895, and this novel, as well as many other novels and texts from the collection, gave an interesting insight on the time back then. Many people in that time seemed to either genuinely believe in monsters entirely, or thought of their potential existence to be enough to integrate in not only numerous fiction novels, but also scientific texts on zoology. After seeing all of the ideas people in the past had about the future, specifically the idea Wells had on various points of the future, it gave me a new perspective on different time periods and makes me wonder what assumptions we are making today that will either be spot-on in a couple centuries or entirely false.

Jacob Campbell: Special Collections

I’ll be quite honest, when I was told that we would be making a visit to the library’s Special Collections I was not expecting much in terms of wow factor. However, my doubts were quickly erased upon seeing the selection of books and other pieces laid out for us. I was very surprised by the number of unique and very rare items that are  actually housed in the library. I did not expect for instance so many early versions of such well known texts such as Dracula and Frankenstein. As a book lover I felt right at home with the old texts that the library was kind enough to display for us. On the more amusing side of the items laid out for us were certainly the books of zoology which depicted not only some real world animals but also illustrated and described monstrous creatures which the ancient world believed to exist. But I’d have to say my overall takeaway from the experience with the special collection can not be summed up by just amusement or simply surprise. Rather it made me consider how far we have come as a society, from believing in these improbable creatures to understanding that they are nothing more than our own creations.

It is for this reason that I was most excited about one item in the collection, the first edition printing of Bram Stoker’s Dracula from 1897. I have always loved monstrous literature and Dracula is by far my favorite monster novel. For those of you who may be unfamiliar with Dracula, it is the story of how, Count Dracula, attempts to move from his home in Transylvania to England so that he may find a new source of blood and spread his undead curse, and of how a small group of men and women were led by Professor Abraham Van Helsing to kill the monster. The reason this item held my attention above all other items was that due to my personal connection and love of the book I was amazed at the fact I was able to hold a first edition copy for myself. The item for me was in a way more than just a book, it was a connection to the past as someone who has come before held that book and felt the same emotions as me, fear but also a love of horror.

Archival Item

Overall my first intake was the vast array of monster collections. The delicacy each book was given to preserve them was absolutely fascinating. On a side note, I thoroughly enjoyed the description given by the speaker from the Special Collections about each novel. I was shocked by the detail and length of each book due to the large difficulty in crafting them as they had to be handmade and drawn. Moreover, the originality of everything was refreshing. A quick glance over the hand drawn pictures confirmed that there were vast amounts of inaccuracies on ‘scientific’ novels. On par with this idea, it was weird yet fascinating that the people back then seemed fixated any monster or creature part human would indicate a human head rather than a human body. My overall take-away was that mythological ideas can withstand time and so can false information.

When I first held upon the book, The Island of Dr. Moreau, by H.G. Wells, part of the Famous Fantastic Mysteries, the first thing I realized was the sheer weight of it, or the lack thereof. In addition, there was an interesting smell that resembled an old wooden attic, not displeasing in the slightest. The english was harder to read than normal horror books in our time, or at least the ones I have been introduced to. Out of all the books shown during this Special Collections class, this one was the most colored. What interests me the most was that it looked like a news advertisement with a few short novels in it. It made me think of a man in a beige wool suit, sitting on a coal pumped train, reading this book on his way to the fast growing city.. Its intended purpose is a light read because it is small and easy to carry around.