post-final module (revised 25 nov)

Frameworks I Outline Modulation

Final: 13 Nov, 2007[1]

Revised: 25 Nov

 

September

Actual

 

	Session Content
Mon 4th	Introductions: Only 4 students showed up: made for a cozy introductory discussion.
Fri 7th	Introductions, full class: preliminary discussion on Eagleton prefaces and Introduction
Mon 10th	Eagleton Introduction, “What is literature”:   In four groups, and with the instructor tackling the last, we went through and discussed five different definitions offered and deconstructed.   *‘Lecture-paper’ from me circulated: a textual analysis of the Preface to the Second Edition.
Fri 14th	Addicted to War. Open discussion on the text. Not as animated as anticipated, but I think it drove home some perfunctory reflections on the close relationship between literature, aesthetics and politics; and also questions on what is and isn’t academic/reality/historical/literature.
Mon 17th	“Landscapes of History” I –instructor-led discussion *Landscapes in-class writing assignment
Fri 21st	I was unwell, absent. Students agreed to a make-up session next month (after Ramzaan)
Mon 24th	“Landscapes of History” II –instructor-led discussion *Hand-out: detailed notes, tackling the trajectory of the chapter’s development, its central arguments and analyses, and critiques of where I think the text isn’t airtight, and might be susceptible to attack.
Fri 28th	Eagleton Chapter 1. “The Rise of English” – instructor-led discussion

 

October

Actual

 

	Session Content
Mon 1st	Eagleton Ch 1 “The Rise of English”, Part II – instructor-led discussion *Handout circulated: notes, recapping previous lecture, detailing arguments and developments ahead—leaving questions at the end as a reading-discussion guide for the first half of the chapter.
Fri 5th	Eagleton Ch 1. “The Rise of English”, concluding, Part III –to have been an instructor-led discussion —scrapped: concluded with final (III) chapter handout distributed… – Last Soliloquy and Great Torch Handover –TS Eliot, “The lovesong of Alfred J Prufrock”                     – group reading
Mon 8th	Eagleton, Ch 2. “Phenomenology, Hermeneutics, Reception Theory, –Group 1 Presentation I Fantastic presentation: got all the way up to the end of phenomenology. Group 1 signed up for the other presentation on the chapter. They were permitted also have a third session if required. [This set a precedent: as many presentations as it takes to cover a chapter.]
Fri 12th	Two sessions cancelled out by Eid holidays.
Mon 15th
Fri 19th	Eagleton, Ch 2. “Phenomenology, Hermeneutics, Reception Theory –Group 1 Presentation II Group 1, for genuine reasons (as in group members were clearly prepared), requested a third session for the more formal presentation. We agreed to make this session an open discussion, which turned out to be semi-structured by the group’s homework on the chapter. The group facilitated the discussion very well, helped also by excellent recaps of ground covered so far in the chapter from outside the group.
Mon 22nd	Eagleton, Ch 2. “Phenomenology, Hermeneutics, Reception Theory   –Group 1 Presentation III   Again, much ground covered, but Group 1 could not conclude the Chapter (again, lesson: detailed textual analysis requires time), and was therefore allotted a fourth session.   *Group circulated their handout–a good draft. They’ve been given detailed feedback on it, and have promised to post the final handout on the web-page.
Thurs 25th	Eagleton, Ch 2. “Phenomenology, Hermeneutics, Reception Theory –Group 1, Presentation III and three quarters A mammoth effort. [This set another precedent: rather than the half-chapter presentations previously designed, the students asked permission for groups to tackle entire chapters—in as many presentations as it would take.]   Student presentation and peer review (Half an hour): A student took the initiative to circulate a paper, “The benefits of Ramazaan,” – and invited feedback and dialogue. The paper engendered a little healthy debate, and the class provided general and specific, predominantly constructive, feedback to the author on her text. For me, it was a tremendous individual effort met with a sincere group response.
Fri 26th	Eagleton, Ch 3. “Structuralism and Semiotics,”   –Group 3 Presentation I The group provided a good lead-in to the chapter and covered much ground. Again, proceeding textually—it is my perception that the mass majority of the class is proceeding on-board in terms of grappling with the major developments, and tracking the trajectory and aesthetics of the arguments.   First Response Paper due Saturday 27th, by the end of the night by email. Hardcopy to be submitted Monday 29th. [With three exceptions, all papers were submitted dead on the deadline. The three too missed it only by a whisker. Students have been given detailed critiques and comments, have been encouraged to schedule student conferences with me on their papers, and told that the final draft they submit, if they choose to, is the one they will be graded on (if not, the first grade will stick).] –[This was changed in the post-final modeling: now, the first draft will count as the mid-term, and the final draft as the end-term paper. For this one-on-one (or small group) conferences have been made mandatory; the papers are being scaled up. Also, in lieu of having to do two papers, the class has agreed to grid Eagleton.]
Mon 29th	Movie Screening and discussion, Dead Poets Society –We opened this up, each student was asked to bring 3 DVDs and we would decide on the day which to watch. With the choices at hand, we decided to watch DPS : ) ! Immediate responses, particularly from those who hadn’t seen it, were quite intense. Also, one fascinating if disturbing but necessary ideological one — which the student has promised to turn into an extra-credit response paper.   Coffee-tea on me! [The majority of students didn’t respond to my hospitality : (  being considerate to me I’m sure, but still!]

 

 

November

Actual up till Friday 23

Plan thereafter

 

	Session Content
Thurs 1st	Eagleton, Ch 3. “Structuralism and Semiotics” –Group 3 Presentation II Got all the way up to just before narratology – student requested half an hour before the review to complete the presentation on narratology.
Fri 2nd	Eagleton, Ch 3, Structuralism and Semiotics” –Group 3, Presentation II and a half Breezed through narratology. Generated an idea for a class assignment: practically using Genet’s framework to analyze one very short story. [Too much going on, hence this didn’t happen. But, important note for future module.]   Aesthetic Re-view: Students were asked to bring all texts covered so far, handouts, and their notes on:   Eagleton: Prefaces and Intro, Intro: What is literature? ATW. Landscapes. Eagleton: 1. The Rise of English 2. Phenomenology, Hermeneutics and Reception Theory. TS Eliot, The Lovesong of Alfred J Prufrock. Also, any other poems or short stories annexed or brought into play at any point.   Also requested to bring poster or art/drawing paper, and implements of their choosing: charcoal, pastels, markers, color pencils, crayons, paint, clay, whatever… [we were supplemented in this by material support provided by the school]   Too much Textuality; an academic review would have been overkill at this point. So, this was a much needed unwinding re-inter-pre(sen)tation session, allowing students to freely relate back to the texts and what we’ve covered creatively. The aesthetics and politics of what was created and is up on our workshop doors and walls is beautiful and inspiring (for me at least).
Mon 5th	Eagleton, Ch 3. “Structuralism and Semiotics,”   –Group 3 Presentation III   The group continued to cover much ground, with good to mixed to sometimes medium presentations, but not for lack of effort. One student requested a student conference with me before her second presentation [lesson learnt: those who are unclear about how to present or the material they’re presenting on, as individuals, or groups, may benefit from scheduling a meeting with me beforehand]. Much covered in the chapter, but much remained.
Thurs 8th	Black day. Class consensus: session postponed.   We did, however, hold two critical group meetings we had scheduled for Wednesday but were not able to convene.[2]
Fri 9th	Iqbal day, declared public holiday   I had proposed to the students, before the holiday registered, that we make it another unwinding session. Security situation permitting, I had wanted us to go to an art gallery and write reflective pieces based on whatever aesthetics drew them in (or didn’t).
Mon 12th	Eagleton Ch 3. “Structuralism and Semiotics,”   –Group 3 Presentation IV   The objective was to conclude the chapter. The group did very well, was prepared, but one component of the plan went awry. One student linking the three presentations suddenly fell unwell. That link is now dangling, and more than one student expressed the need to go through it together. Therefore, it has to be thrown forward.
Wed / Thurs	The optional session this week I agreed to cancel at the request of students and faculty (who wanted to work in their own make-up classes).
Fri 16th	20 minutes to insert missing link on Structuralism – this missing link, though adding something, started almost half an hour late and effectively usurped even getting a start on:   Eagleton, Ch 4. “Post-Structuralism,” Group 2. Presentation I, which had to be moved forward
Mon 19th	In light of the extra-ordinary socio-political environment, I begged this session off Group 2, who had been prepared to present since Friday. –In-class writing reflection on the current situation, creative or critical, from a personal point of view –Hate-Love exercise –Readings… of some remarkable reflections, in prose and poetry
Thurs 21st	Optional discussion section canceled this week too due to faculty and student requests
Fri 23rd	Eagleton, Ch 4. “Post-Structuralism,” Group 2. Presentation I Good start, recapping a consolidated critique of structuralism
Mon 26th	Eagleton, Ch 4. “Post-Structuralism,” Group 2. Presentation II
Wed 28th	Optional discussion session (If Group 2 wants an extra session to complete the presentation, they could use this discussion session space; they will also have to request the group to make the session mandatory)
Fri 30th	Eagleton, Ch 4. “Post-Structuralism,” –Group 2. Presentation III

 

 

 

December

Plan

	Session Content
Mon 3rd	Eagleton, Ch 5. “Psychoanalysis,” –Group 3, Presentation I   Draft of Final Term Paper due
Wed 5th	Open discussion
Fri 7th	Eagleton, Ch 5. “Psychoanalysis,” –Group 3 Presentation II
Mon 10th	Eagleton, Ch 5. “Psychoanalysis,” –Group 3 Presentation III
Wed 12th	Eagleton, Ch 5. “Psychoanalysis,” –Group 3 Presentation IV
Fri 14th	Review Session: Group 2 Facilitated discussion on Eagleton: 3. Structuralism and Semiotics 4. Post-structuralism, and 5. Psychoanalysis
Mon 17th	Conclusion: Political Criticism I
Wed 19th	Movie Screening, Stranger than Fiction, V for Vendetta, any other suggestions? Extended session for those who wish to discuss the movie. Coffee-tea on me!
Friday 21st	Conclusion II, Afterward, may introduce some “political science fiction,” and wrap-up   End of Term: Party?   Final Term Paper due, hardcopy submissions in class; optional posting on frameworkers by midnight.

 

 

---

[1] The constant re-modulation of the original course outline has reflected ground realities, new learning and student feedback. Though this “final” module is still flexible and open to adjustments, it is based on a class meeting (not the entire class, but all groups were represented), at which critical final decisions were made – and which are now reflected in this schedule, which we are going to do our utmost to stick to.

[2] Critical decisions made at the meeting on the course, and for the workshop website:

1.        Wednesdays 3.30 to 5 we shall hold optional group discussion sessions – this is to free ourselves from the textual bind we otherwise have to follow to complete, and absorb and debate the context around us and the theories and texts we’re studying across courses. This is a much needed element largely (not altogether) missing from the course design thus far. Therefore, we would not petition for the class to be accorded 4 instead of 3 credit hours, an option floated and discussed.

2.       Because, at the rate at which we are covering the text—which I refuse to speed up, as I see it as a critical and appropriate absorption pace—we would not have finished the text with the plan as it stood. Therefore, we had two choices: a) to drop one chapter (psychoanalysis), or b) do away with workshopping (peer reviews) the final term paper presentations altogether, or pack them into three sessions. Thank God we didn’t go for a) and or the former half of b). We decided on two 2 hour 20 minute sessions covering 6 students, and one 2 hour 40 minute session for 7. This will give 15 minutes for students to comment on one paper, and five minutes for the author to respond (plus a 20 minute break).

3.       We agreed to allocate 2 presentations to the short post-structuralism chapter, and 4 for the longer and denser psychoanalysis chapter.

4.       Website:

      a) We confirmed our decision to shift our bulk to wordpress;

      b) However, we also agreed to keep the google group going for more       technical/administrative announcements and discussions – as they are immediately mailed out to everyone;

      c) we agreed we’d schedule a half hour presentation for Sidra to guide us on using the         site, and registering anyone who is still having problems; d) we decided that if       everyone shifts their own paper onto the new site, the web team can then distribute          anything else to be shifted amongst themselves.