The Western: Cowpunchers, Gunslingers, and BeyondFall 2016

Jacob Burgburgja@brandeis.eduOffice: Rabb 224Office Hours: TW – 11-12, and by appointment

Class Schedule:MW – 12-12:50

Shiffman 120

Course Description: Riders mounted atop painted horses stride across a bleached landscape. They herd cattle, or chase outlaws, or war with indigenous peoples. These are the figures of American folklore – some are historical, others are fictional, but each shapes and reflects an aspect of the nation’s popular imagination. With roots reaching back nearly two centuries, the Western genre is arguably America’s most influential cultural product, as well as its most enduring vehicle for the transmission of ideology. However, as with any artistic genre, it has passed through cycles of popularity and undergone many transformations in form and content. In this writing course, we will interrogate the narrative qualities that have granted the Western its enduring relevance in order to develop students’ writing. The semester will be organized around three required essays: first, students will write a close reading in order to deconstruct the genre’s essential language; second, students will place the Western in conversation with a theoretical text so as to deepen their understanding of its powerful influence on perceptions of race, sexuality, class, and gender; finally, students will conduct a research project to examine what the various incarnations of the genre have had to say about the historical period they depict, the eras of their production, and our present moment.

Success in this 4 credit hour course is based on the expectation that students will spend a minimum of 9 hours of study time per week in preparation for class (readings, papers, discussion sections, preparation for exams, etc.).

Our Assumed Roles, and How We Can Change Them:My intention is that our classroom will always serve as a space for dialogue(s). My expectation is that we each bring our own interests, perspectives, and questions to an ongoing conversation that will begin our first day (that began, in fact, before you even started reading this), and which will hopefully continue long after the semester is over. Our conversation will take many shapes and cover many topics, and it is important that we spend some time each class thinking about how and why our conversation has taken the shape it has. In part, this will be done with writing, which is not a reproduction of thinking, but thought itself. At other times, this reflection will occur as we ask each other questions.

Although we assume certain roles in the classroom (me: instructor, you: student), these are only initial positions. My hope is that you will teach me (because you can) just as much as – if not more than – I teach you. If by the end of the semester we share new interests and can ask new questions, I will consider this course a success. I invite you to think about what you believe

will make your time in this classroom a success both for you individually, and for you as a member of our broader community.

Required Texts (available in bookstore):

1. Cormac McCarthy, All the Pretty Horses (ISBN – 978-0679744399)2. Course packet (Leonard, Proulx, Anzaldúa, and Slotkin)3. Write Now! (A collection of essays written in last year’s UWS

classes).

Note: If you have difficulty acquiring any of these materials, for whatever reason, please let me know as soon as possible.

UWS Learning Goals:

Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing Use writing and discussion to work through and interpret complex

ideas from readings and other texts (i.e. film). Critically analyze your own and others’ choices regarding language and

form. Engage in multiple modes of inquiry (i.e. field research, library-based

inquiry, journal searching, web searching). Incorporate significant research into writing that engages a question

and/or topic and uses it as a central theme for a substantive, research-based essay.

Use writing to support interpretations of text, and understand that there are multiple interpretations of any given text.

Consider and express the relationship between your own ideas and the ideas of others.

Processes Use written, visual, and/or experience-based texts as tools to develop

ideas for writing. Understand that writing takes place through recurring processes of

invention, revision, and editing. Develop successful, flexible strategies for your own writing through the

processes of invention, revision, and editing. Experience and understand the collaborative and social aspects of

writing processes. Learn to critique your and other’s work. Be reflective about your own writing process.

Knowledge of Conventions Understand the conventions of particular genres of writing. Use conventions associated with a range of dialects, particularly

standardized written English (but not necessarily limited to it). Recognize and address patterns in your writing that unintentionally

diverge from patterns expected by your audience(s). Practice using academic citation systems (i.e. MLA) for documenting

work.

Course Assignments and Policies:

Essay 1: Close Reading – In this assignment you will formulate an argument about one or more short stories from the course packet.

Essay 2: Lens Essay – In this assignment you will place Cormac McCarthy’s All the Pretty Horses in conversation with one of the two assigned critical texts in order to create a new claim within an ongoing scholarly conversation regarding nature, race, nationality, sexuality, or another clearly focused topic.

Essay 3: Research Argument – In this assignment, you will select an ongoing critical conversation (either about a film or a scholarly field) that interests you. Given the direction of that conversation, you will make an argument that contributes to it by refocusing, redefining, or otherwise altering a belief that reader(s) currently hold.

Portfolio – At the end of the semester you will assemble all of your work (including pre-draft assignments, rough drafts, final drafts, and peer review sheets) and email them to me, together with a letter describing how your understanding of yourself as a writer has changed over the course of the semester. This means that you need to electronically save all of the writing that you do throughout the semester.

Drafting:There are four components that lead up to the final drafts of each essay:

1. Pre-draft Assignments – Each essay will be preceded by two or three pre-draft assignments. They will be short pieces of writing designed to help you develop your ideas. These assignments will receive constructive feedback and will factor into the grade for your final draft. You can rework and resubmit any of the work done within these assignments until the end of the unit.

2. First Drafts – You are required to turn in a first draft of each paper. These drafts are important opportunities for you to receive feedback not only from me, but from your peers as well. These drafts will need to be complete in order for your readers to have the best sense of your argument, and in order for you to have the best chance of shifting their perspectives on your topic.

3. Peer Review – After the first draft of each paper is due you will form a group with two of your classmates and read each other’s drafts. In class you will give your partners constructive and descriptive feedback. I will collect these peer review letters and they will also count toward your overall grade. These activities are meant to increase your sense of audience awareness and give you an opportunity to reflect on the concepts we have discussed in class.

4. Conferences – Each student will have four twenty-minute conferences with me over the course of the semester: one to discuss each first draft. Attendance is required. Missing a conference is equivalent to missing a class. Sign-up sheets will be distributed in class.

Grade Breakdown:Class Participation – 15%Close Reading Essay – 15%Lens Essay – 25%Research Essay (includes presentation) – 25%Portfolio (includes Latte posts, pre-drafts, and peer reviews) – 20%

Class Participation:Your consistent participation in class sessions is the most critical component of a successful course. Please be prepared to discuss the assigned readings as well as each other’s work on a daily basis. Arrive on time and ready to engage in thoughtful conversation and writing.

Laptops:Unless otherwise specified or unless you have a documented disability, please do not bring your laptops to class. If printing copies of your assignments and work ever becomes an issue, please let me know.

Attendance:You are allowed three absences. For each additional absence your final grade will drop by one third of a letter grade (ex. A to A- to B+). Seven or more absences will result in a failing grade. Please contact me in the event of an emergency.

Late Work, Extension, and Minimum Page Requirements:Given the amount and frequency of writing that we will be doing in this course, it is important to stay on top of each assignment. If you feel as if you have fallen behind because your ideas are not working out for one reason or another, notify me two days in advance of the final due date and we can discuss a possible extension. If you do not have an extension, late work will be penalized by a third of a letter grade per day for the final paper. Additionally, final papers that do not meet the required minimum will be penalized by a third of a grade for each missing page.

Academic Honesty:You are expected to be honest in all of your academic work. The work you hand in should be your own, and properly cited. The University policy on academic honesty is distributed annually in section 5 of the Rights and Responsibilities handbook. Instances of alleged dishonesty will be forwarded to the Office of Campus Life for possible referral to the Student Judicial System. Potential sanctions include failure in the course and suspension from the University. If you have any questions, please ask.

Accommodations:If you are a student with a documented disability on record at Brandeis University and wish to have a reasonable accommodation made for you in class, please see me right away.

Schedule of Classes:

Unit 1: Close Reading – What Makes a Western?Week 1

Jan 18 (W) Class: Introductions; Core Questions; Diagnostic writing

Week 2

Jan 23 (M) Read: “You Never See Apaches” by Elmore Leonard (course packet)

Write: LATTE post – What are the main features of a Western? What passage in Leonard’s story fits your model Western and why? Also, select your favorite sentence in the story. Post by no later than 10pm the night before (Jan. 22).Class: Free-write; Discuss story; Close reading (skills vs.

practices)

Jan 25 (W) Read: “People in Hell Just Want a Drink of Water” by Annie Proulx

Write: LATTE post – Compare and contrast Proulx’s story to Leonard’s from last class. Use one quote from each story.Class: Discuss story; Audience – Who are “they” and how do we construct and engage with them?

Week 3

Jan 30 (M) Read: “The Colonel’s Lady” by Elmore Leonard (course packet)Write: Pre-Draft Assignment 1 – Close Reading a PassageClass: Discuss story; Thesis and Motive – Get Reader from A to

B

Feb 1 (W) Read: NoneWrite: Pre-Draft Assignment 2 – Thesis StatementClass: Workshop theses; Introductory Paragraphs – What are we “supposed” to get done vs. what do we need to get done?; Preparing to write first drafts

Week 4

**Conferences to Discuss Close Reading Essay This Week and/or Next**

Feb 6 (M) Read: Close reading essays from Write Now!Write: Work on First DraftsClass: Free-write; Discuss drafts-in-progress

Feb 8 (W) Read: “The Discourses of Nature” by Kate Soper (course packet)

Write: First Draft w/ Cover Letter Due

Class: Discuss scholarly article; Exchange papers with peer reviewer

Unit 2: Lens Essay – Who or What Does the Western Empower?

Week 5

Feb 13 (M) Read: Peer’s essayWrite: Peer Review Letters – Email to peer by Sunday, Feb.

12Class: Discuss review letters; Entering a Critical Conversation – Where do I find one? How do I do it?

Feb 15 (W) Read: Chapters 1 and 2 by Gloria Anzaldúa (coursepack)Write: Work on Revisions of EssayClass: Discuss scholarly article; Definition of a border?

*Revisions of Close Reading Essay w/ Cover Letter due Friday, Feb. 17 by 10pm*

Week 6

Feb 20 (M) NO CLASSRead: All the Pretty Horses by Cormac McCarthy (pgs. 1-50)

Feb 22 (W) NO CLASS Read: All the Pretty Horses (pgs. 51-100)

Week 7

Feb 27 (M) Read: All the Pretty Horses by Cormac McCarthy (pgs. 1-100)Write: NoneClass: Discuss novel; Return to Anzaldúa and Soper through McCarthy; Summary and paraphrase activity

March 1 (W) Read: All the Pretty Horses (pgs. 100-151)Write: Pre-Draft Assignment 1 – Summarizing Scholarly Article Class: Discuss novel; Review Anzaldúa and Soper; Revisiting

audience

Week 8

March 6 (M) Read: All the Pretty Horses (pgs. 153-217 – Chapter III)Write: Pre-Draft Assignment 2 – Mini-Lens AnalysisClass: Discuss novel; Quotations – How do we speak when we’re not the ones speaking?

March 8 (W) Read: Lens Essays from Write Now!Write: None

Class: Discuss novel; Writing exercise TBD

Week 9

March 13 (M) Read: Finish All the Pretty Horses (pgs. 219-end – Chapter IV)

Write: Pre-Draft Assignment 3 – Thesis and MotiveClass: Discuss novel

March 15 (W) Read: NoneWrite: NoneClass: Discuss novel; Revisit thesis, motive, audience, and

structure

March 16 (Th) Read: NoneWrite: Draft of Lens Essay w/ Cover Letter Due Friday,

March 17Class: Scholarly Sources – What do academic journals look like? Where do we find them?

Week 10**Conferences to Discuss Lens Essay on Monday and Tuesday**

March 20 (M) Watch: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (1966)Write: Peer Review Letters – Email to peer by Thursday,

March. 23rdClass: Discuss film; Medium Specificity – How do we close read

a film?

March 22 (W) NO CLASS

Unit 3: Research Essay – Revising the Western

Week 11

March 27 (M) Read: “Chapter 11” by Richard Slotkin (course pack)Watch: Unforgiven (1992)Write: Work on Revision of Lens EssayClass: Discuss film; Revisionist Western – How and why have the genre’s tropes changed?; Cultural Analysis – What is culture? How do we produce and consume it?

March 29 (W) Read: One journal article (from journal of your selection)Write: Revision of Lens Essay w/ Cover Letter DueClass: Library Session 1 – Meet in TBD by 12pm**

Week 12

**Conference #1 to Discuss Research Essay This Week**

April 3 (M) Read: Two journal articles (from journals of your selection)Write: Pre-Draft Assignment 1 – Research ProposalClass: Scholarly Sources Revisited; Continue film discussions

April 5 (W) Watch: Brokeback Mountain (2005)Write: LATTE Post – Close read one scene from either Unforgiven or Brokeback Mountain. What Western trope is being revised in your scene? Post by no later than 10pm on Tuesday (April 4).Class: Discuss film; Politics of sexuality meets popular culture

Week 13

April 10 (M) NO CLASS Read: Begin research for paper

April 12 (W) NO CLASS Read: Continue research for paper

Week 14

April 17 (M) NO CLASS

April 19 (W) Watch: The Homesman (2014)Write: Pre-Draft Assignment 2 – Developing Research ThesisClass: Discuss The Homesman; Introduce Annotated Bib. & MLA

Citation

Week 15

**Conference #2 to Discuss Research Essay This Week Or Next**

April 24 (M) Write: Pre-Draft Assignment 3 – Annotated BibliographyClass: Library Session 2 – Meet in TBD by 12pm

April 26 (W) Write: First Draft of Essay 3 w/ Cover Letter DueClass: Research Presentations

Week 16

May 1 (M) Write: Work on revisionsClass: Research Presentations; Portfolio instructions

May 3 (W) Write: Work on revisionsClass: Research Presentations; Course Recap – Where are we now and how did we get here?

**Portfolio w/ Final Revision of Research Essay Due May 8th by midnight**

Assignment Sequences:

Close Reading UnitDuring this first unit, we will begin a semester-long discussion about how to read closely – in other words, how to perform a careful analysis of the language, style, and content of a text. We will also discuss how to produce an interpretation – that is, how to make an argument (not just observations) about a text, and how to support that argument with solid and persuasive evidence.

Assignment (5-6 pages):

For this essay, make an argument about the relationship between violence and morality in any of the four short stories we’ve read so far. Simply put, which forms of violence are acceptable (perhaps even encouraged), which are prohibited, and why is this the case? Make sure that your essay accounts for how the narrative defines and represents this complex relationship. Pay attention to when, where, and how violence is committed, as well as to the identity markers of the perpetrators and victims.

Some other questions that might help your thinking (you do not need to explicitly answer them): Is there some form of “regeneration through violence” that takes place in the story? Are there clear divisions between social groups? If so, along which lines are they divided (cultural, sexual, racial, etc.)? And are these boundaries ever blurred? From whose perspective is the story told? Does this impact our understanding of the story’s explicit and/or implicit moral code?

Learning Goals:

Develop a compelling, non-obvious thesis. Complexity, nuance, and engaged debate are at the core of any worthwhile thesis. Begin by

posing a question or problem, rather than devising a statement that pre-determines the claims your essay is capable of making. Remember, you are entering into a larger (scholarly) conversation, and the point is to make thought-provoking claims that cause others to respond. As you read, be on the lookout for opportunities to stake an intellectual claim – and be willing to take risks. While your initial reactions to images, moments, and characters’ actions will not be sufficient to sustain an entire essay, they will serve as fantastic starting points.

All interpretations require evidence; all evidence requires analysis. Remember, summary (presentation of facts or paraphrase of what is happening in the text) is very different from analysis (an explanation of how the details you identify are meaningfully linked and contribute to your interpretation). Summary is useful almost exclusively for providing context for your analysis (situating your readers so they can follow along with your interpretation), and even then must be used sparingly. Your analysis drives your essay.

Structure the essay according to your argument. Avoid organizing your essay as a barely connected – or unconnected – sequence of points (think of the stale five-paragraph model). Your essay should be driven by the evolution of your ideas, which will draw connections between various pieces of evidence. Imagine that each claim (and the evidence to go with it) is an instrument in a band – they must all play together and harmonize, with each section building upon the work performed by the previous one. Also, avoid simply restating the same idea from your thesis again and again (if each section of your essay plays the same note, the song will not be much of a song). While you will want to include necessary context for your reader, this essay will mainly consist of close reading – analysis of specific words, phrases, images, and themes.

Use consistent and appropriate citation. Although you will only be quoting from your selected story, it is important to get in the practice of proper citation. For this essay, please use MLA in-text citation for all quotations. If you are unclear on the details of this format, please ask.

Pre-Draft 1.1: Close Reading a Passage (1-2 pages)

The purpose of this assignment is to process your first impressions of the text, and then turn those impressions into a set of coherent observations and questions that will eventually build to an analysis. To that end, select one passage that helps you construct an argument about the relationship between violence and morality. Think about the following questions as you examine the language, imagery, and ideas of your passage:

How does a specific word, image, or phrase help us to understand the passage? In what ways do these small pieces relate to the story as a whole?

How is violence represented in the passage? What sort of moral code is stated by the characters or implied by their actions and words?

What is the main tension or conflict in your passage? Person vs. person, person vs. nature, and/or person vs. self?

What are the possible ways to interpret your evidence? Which side of this imagined debate seems most compelling to you?

Pre-Draft 1.2: Developing a Thesis Statement (approx. 80 words)

According to Katherine O. Acheson, a thesis “is a summary of your argument…[that] describes the evidence you are using, states your interpretation of this evidence, and brings those insights together into a conclusion that is about the way literature works, what it means, or how and why it has the emotional impact that it does.” (from Writing Essays About Literature)

Your thesis should be true, but also arguable. If it is too obvious, then your essay will lack motivation – after all, why argue for a position that everyone already agrees is true? Therefore, think of your thesis as contributing to a larger conversation that consists of other people’s ideas, existing research on morality and culture, current judicial and ethical policy, etc. Your reason for entering this larger conversation is your motive. It provides a context for your ideas – basically, why they should be of interest to more than just you and your professor.

For this assignment, begin to develop an interpretive thesis for your upcoming close-reading essay. First, start with a question about the text that compels you to seek an answer(s). Second, establish your motive – your thesis is a response to hypothetical readers, a commonly held view, an obvious first impression, or a problem within the text. The structure of this assignment is as follows:

Question: [what aspect of the text you want to know more about]Motive: [who or what are you responding to – the starting point of your argument]Thesis: [your insight into the text; the central claim that guides your essay]

We will workshop this assignment in class, paying particular attention to the following concerns: What is the thesis responding to? How clear is this motive? Is the thesis a proper argument, or merely an observation? Is the scope of the thesis large enough to sustain a 5-6 page essay?

First Draft and Cover Letter (attach to front of draft)Please write a brief cover letter (about one single-spaced page) to go with your first draft, addressed to your readers. In this letter, you should answer the following questions and any other thoughts you may have:

1. Summarize your essay in two to three sentences. What are the key points of your argument? What is your motive?2. What are your essay’s strengths?

3. What elements of your essay need further attention (thesis, organization, use of evidence, conclusion, etc.)?4. What would you like your peers to focus on in their comments?5. Where will you focus your attention when it comes time to revise? How will you do so?

Peer Review LettersWriting is a process, and rewriting is central to that process. Your goal during peer review is to offer the writer constructive comments that will help them revise (literally “see again” – rethink) their essay from a fresh perspective, not just make minor surface corrections. As you carefully read each essay, mark it up in the following manner:

Underline unclear word usage. Offer a different suggestion if you can. Box sentences or phrases whose meaning or syntax is confusing. Write notes in the margin if there are confusing leaps in thought, gaps

in logic, claims that require (more) evidence, or repetitive insights. How might you “fix” these puzzling areas?

Note organizational issues. And of course, star sentences or sections that work well! Add

additional comments for why that section was particularly compelling/persuasive.

After you have read your peer’s essay twice and marked it up, write a brief letter in which you address the following questions:

1. Thesis and Motive: State in your own words the writer’s thesis and motive. How compelling (original and complex) is the thesis? Is it arguable, or simply a series of factual observations? Offer suggestions for how the thesis might be strengthened.2. Evidence and Analysis: Does the writer offer appropriate and specific evidence to support the thesis? Is each piece of evidence (quotation) sufficiently explored? Does each piece of evidence connect back to the writer’s thesis?3. Structure: Can you identify the important “steps” in the writer’s argument? Does each point develop sufficiently, building from the previous point and gesturing toward the next? Or is the thesis simply restated in slightly different terms again and again? Does the writer engage and effectively refute counter-arguments?4. Writer’s Questions: Answer the questions the writer asks in the cover letter.

Be prepared to discuss your feedback with the writer in class, keeping in mind to be as specific and concrete at all times.

Revised Draft and Cover Letter (attach to front of revised essay)

Each time you hand in a revision, you will also hand in a cover letter (about one single-spaced page). Within this cover letter, please answer the following questions, and discuss any other concerns you might have:

1. What revisions have you made and why?2. What pleases you most about this revision?3. What was most challenging about the drafting and/or revising process?4. Was your peers’ feedback helpful? What was most helpful?5. If you were to continue revising this essay, what other changes would you make?

Lens Analysis UnitDuring this unit, we will begin the practice of placing multiple texts in conversation in order to see how they speak to one another. Essentially, we will focus on how the exchange of ideas between multiple texts illuminates aspects of each one that otherwise would not be visible. The central purpose of a lens is to see things clearly and differently. Along those lines, it will be important to avoid turning either text into a “straw man” or “magical key” – an easily torn down counterargument to your position or the answer to every problem you pose.

Assignment (7-8 pages):

For this second essay you will analyze Cormac McCarthy’s All the Pretty Horses by placing it in illuminating conversation with either Kate Soper’s “The Discourses of Nature” or Gloria Anzaldúa’s Borderlands/La Frontera. Whichever theoretical text you select, your goal is to apply it to McCarthy’s novel in order to produce an interpretation that you could not have made through a close reading alone. Basically, examine how the theoretical text adds to, challenges, or complicates an aspect of the novel, and vice versa.

Some things to consider: How does McCarthy’s novel seem to define border? How might

Anzaldúa’s definition help evaluate McCarthy’s construction of borders? Does Anzaldúa’s definition exhaust the possible meanings of that term for McCarthy?

What insights can Anzaldúa offer us into the complex dynamics of the cross-cultural relationship between John Grady Cole and Alejandra?

Which characters most clearly occupy a border space? How do they do so? Do their actions and beliefs within this border space demonstrate some quality that Anzaldúa has not fully considered?

How does the relationship between human and nature represented in McCarthy’s novel add to, refute, or complicate Soper’s analysis of how we talk and think about nature (the discourse of nature)?

There are various forms of nature depicted in McCarthy’s novel. What are they, how are these forms represented, and how are they related? What motivates this change in how nature is perceived and

represented? How do the various forms of nature exemplify Soper’s distinctions?

What connections between natural forms and human productions are suggested by McCarthy’s novel and Soper’s essay? With these connections in mind, how would you define geographical/national borders?

This assignment presents you with a number of new challenges: You will be transferring your close reading skills from one text

(fictional) to another (theoretical). Although each is its own genre of writing, the techniques you applied in the first unit will serve you well in this second unit.

Keep in mind that both Soper and Anzaldúa’s ideas are positions – they are not fixed truths. Take the time to engage and wrestle with their ideas, developing your own response to why you might agree or disagree with their claims, and how useful their theories are when applied to literary texts.

Learning Objectives:

Open with an engaging introduction that makes your motive clear. How will you enter the scholarly conversation? What are you responding to (someone else’s view, a conventional view, a problem with the text, a gap in knowledge, or an existing debate)? Effectively, you should convey why your thesis is not obvious and why someone besides you or your professor might want to read your essay or hear about your topic.

Create a dialogue between two texts. Remember that the lens should go both ways: the theoretical text will offer a way to look at the novel, and the novel will also suggest a way to look at the theoretical text. Seek out the tensions between these two views of the world: where do they not align, and what can this “gap” tell us about the concerns that each text does share? Interpret the story and reflect on the lens. As always, close readings of specific passages are required to support and/or complicate the argument that emerges out of placing two texts in conversation with one another.

Grapple with the selected theory’s central ideas, rather than taking isolated passages out of context to support your claims. It is important that you demonstrate a firm understanding of whatever theoretical text you choose to use. Whenever you apply a theoretical text to your analysis, your essay will be evaluated not only on the merits of your own ideas, but on how accurately you represent and make use of the theoretical lens. Even when you disagree with the theorist, you must explain why you disagree, and how the other text helps support your position. In order to do this, you must deal with the core concepts of your theoretical text, rather than a peripheral example or claim that does not seem that important to the theorist.

Use consistent and appropriate citation. Now that you are dealing with more than one text, it is especially important that you use proper citation. For this essay, please use MLA in-text citation for all

quotations, and then include a formatted “Works Cited” page at the end of your essay. If you are unclear on the details of this format, take a look at the following link: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/02/. If this does not help, please do not hesitate to ask for further clarification.

Pre-Draft 2.1: Summarizing the Lens Text (1-2 pages):

In college your will be asked to read and recall copious amounts of primary and secondary texts. Therefore, a crucial skill for any academic discipline is the ability to assimilate, clarify, and summarize what other scholars have written in order to develop your own ideas and responses. The purpose of this assignment is to pull out the key terms and concepts from your selected theoretical text.

Steps to writing your summary:1. Read your selected theoretical text at least one more time, particularly passages that you found vague or difficult the first time you read the article.2. Search for ideas that seem to come up again and again (even if they are phrased in slightly different language). These will be your core terms and concepts.3. Define these key terms and ideas in your own words. Do not quote whole sentences or phrases, because then you are still letting the text’s author do most of the work.4. Arrange these terms and concepts in an outline so that you can keep track of how they all interact with each other and develop together.5. Be sure to offer context about the theoretical piece and its author – pay particular attention to the author’s area of expertise and their motive or critical intervention.

Pre-Draft 2.2: Mini Lens Analysis (2-3 pages):

Lens analysis asks you to put two texts in conversation in order to produce a reading you couldn’t have through close reading alone. After reading and considering your two texts in detail, you will find points of conversation between them that will open up into a new and original insight. These points of conversation can vary in kind. Baseline readings catalogue one-to-one matches between lens and focal text, while readings “with a twist” notice more nuanced and complex interactions. For this assignment, take your two texts and find three points of conversation, and remember to base these matches directly on evidence drawn from each text:

1. Obvious baseline match. Find a moment from All the Pretty Horses that directly speaks to a key concept from Anzaldúa’s or Soper’s essay.2. Non-obvious baseline match. Find a moment from the novel that matches with your selected theoretical text, but that requires a deeper insight to fully recognize and understand.3. Mismatch “with a twist.” Find a moment from the novel that your selected theoretical text cannot account for. That is, you are looking for a mismatch – a tension – between the two texts. Each must be speaking to the

same theme or concept, but they consider this theme or concept in different ways.

Pre-Draft 2.3: Motive and Thesis:

For this assignment, begin to develop a motive and thesis for your lens essay. Remember that your motive should be a response to something – to the theoretical lens, hypothetical readers, a commonly held view, a first impression or obvious interpretation, or a problem within the text. You only need to write a few sentences.

First Draft and Cover Letter (attach to front of draft):

Please write a brief cover letter (about one single-spaced page) to go with your first draft, addressed to your readers. In this letter, you should answer the following questions and any other thoughts you may have:

1. Summarize your essay in two to three sentences. What are the key points of your argument? What is your motive?2. How well does your thesis generate a conversation between All the Pretty Horses and your selected theoretical lens?3. How accurately have you represented the main ideas of your theoretical text? Do you meaningfully use that text throughout your essay, or only at the beginning?4. What elements of your essay work well and what elements need further attention (thesis, organization, use of evidence, conclusion, etc.)?5. What would you like your peers to focus on in their comments?6. Where will you focus your attention in revisions?

Peer Review Letters

Remember, your goal during peer review is to offer the writer constructive comments that will help them revise (literally “see again” – rethink) their essay from a fresh perspective, not just make minor surface corrections. As you carefully read each essay, mark it up in the following manner:

Underline unclear word usage. Offer a different suggestion if you can. Box sentences or phrases whose meaning or syntax is confusing. Write notes in the margin if there are confusing leaps in thought, gaps

in logic, claims that require (more) evidence, or repetitive insights. How might you “fix” these puzzling areas?

Note organizational issues. And of course, star sentences or sections that work well! Add

additional comments for why that section was particularly compelling/persuasive.

After you have read your peer’s essay twice and marked it up, write a brief letter in which you address the following questions:

1. Introduction: State in your own words the writer’s thesis and motive. How compelling (original and complex) is the thesis? Is it arguable, or simply a series of factual observations? Offer suggestions for how the thesis might be strengthened, paying particular attention to how well the thesis engages with both the theoretical lens and the novel.2. Lens: Does the essay give an accurate representation of the chosen theoretical text’s main ideas? Does a productive, interpretive conversation emerge, or are the core theoretical terms and concepts only superficially referenced? Does it seem like the presence of the theoretical text is absolutely necessary in order for the essay to make the argument that it does?3. Evidence and Analysis: Does the writer offer appropriate and specific evidence to support the thesis? Is each piece of evidence (quotation) sufficiently explored? Does each piece of evidence connect back to the writer’s thesis? Does the writer discuss any mismatch between the chosen theoretical text and All the Pretty Horses? How effectively is this “mismatch with a twist” explored?4. Writer’s Questions: Answer the questions the writer asks in the cover letter.

Be prepared to discuss your feedback with the writer in class, keeping in mind to be as specific and concrete at all times.

Revised Draft and Cover Letter (attach to front of revised essay)

Within this cover letter, please answer the following questions, and discuss any other concerns you might have:

1. What revisions have you made and why?2. What pleases you most about this revision?3. What was most challenging about the drafting and/or revising process?4. Was your peers’ feedback helpful? What was most helpful?5. If you were to continue revising this essay, what other changes would you make?

Research UnitA research paper is an argumentative essay in which you interpret evidence to draw broader conclusions about your topic. Research papers should always be an argument – direct quotes, facts, or statistics will likely be needed in your paper, but they are used to support your position. Use these pieces of evidence to guide your critical thinking, but keep in mind that sources often disagree, so it will be your job to synthesize what others have argued in order to create your own unique intervention into an ongoing conversation. Not everyone will (or should) agree with your argument, which is why your job is to know your reader and persuade your reader that your interpretation is more significant and/or compelling than others.

Assignment (10-12 pages):

For this assignment, select one contemporary “revisionist Western” and examine the film closely by placing it in a larger historical, cultural, and/or critical context. In order to do this, you will conduct research to locate 5 or more sources (academic articles: film theory, film criticism, cultural criticism, historical scholarship, etc.) that illuminate the context of your selected film. Think of this assignment as an extension of our lens unit. Once again, you will be asked to place multiple texts in conversation with one another in order to see what new insights can be produced.

First, you will read an article or two from a specific scholarly field (possible options listed below) in order to get a sense of a current debate and/or question. Then you will want to devise a unique position about your revisionist Western in relation to your scholarly field’s debate or question. However, as you continue your research, allow your opinion to change and develop according to what you learn. A few possible scholarly fields include:

Cultural Studies Critical Race Theory Ecocriticism Film Studies Queer Theory Sociopolitical History

Additionally, here are some framing devices that may help anchor your argument:

Time period of your film’s release. What major historical events (wars, economic collapse, new political movements, etc.) were taking place that might have influenced the film’s content, themes, aesthetics, and/or sense of morality? How does the film seem to reflect its time period, but also how does it seem to fight against this period’s norms?

Cultural-political movements. How is your film connected to a specific cultural movement (example: third-wave feminism)? How does it seem to respond to the concerns of a specific group of people?

Film’s reception. What was the reaction of audiences and film critics at the time of the film’s release? Has it changed since then? And if so, how? Consider box office results and reviews, but also reach wider and deeper for your sources. For example, you can investigate whether or not there was a particular region of the country or the world in which the film performed better.

Hollywood history. What other films (Westerns or otherwise) seem to be important conversation partners for your selected film? What influences are apparent and which are less obvious? What motivations might the producer, director, and actors have had for making the film at the time that they did?

Please remember to use MLA citation and attach a Works Cited page.

Learning Objectives:

Formulate a nuanced, cohesive argument, which is both meaningful and contestable. Please do not approach the research paper as a book report or a summary of what other sources have said about a given topic. Make an argument that is yours, one that the research you have conducted helps you to make.

Create a dialogue between multiple texts. Similar to your lens essay, the research paper will be all about recognizing that sources both agree and disagree with one another, and that the most interesting and productive arguments are those that attempt to work through disagreements, rather than simply repeating agreed upon analysis. Seek out the tensions between these views of the world: where do they not align, and what can this “gap” tell us about the concerns that each text does share?

Consider your reader. Think about who your reader is and what your reader believes. This will help you to decide what is important in your argument. What elements of your argument will best help the reader to transition from whatever position they hold at the start of your paper, to the position you want them to hold by the paper’s end? You can assume that your reader has some knowledge of the primary film you are analyzing, but it is important to think about what context and set-up you will need to provide in order for your reader to understand your claims.

Structure your argument sensibly. Make sure that each point builds on the last and that your reader can follow the progression of your paper. A successful research paper incorporates a variety of different sources into the framework of a larger argument, rather than piling one source on top of another without clearly explaining the connections.

Use consistent and appropriate citation. Now that you are dealing with more than one text, it is especially important that you use proper citation. For this essay, please use MLA in-text citation for all quotations, and then include a formatted “Works Cited” page at the end of your essay. If you are unclear on the details of this format, take a look at the following link: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/02/. If this does not help, please do not hesitate to ask for further clarification.

Pre-Draft 3.1: Research Proposal (approx. 1 page):

The proposal is the first formal step when designing a research project. Think of this pre-draft assignment as your opportunity to 1) identify a larger issue within a scholarly field and 2) begin to figure out how your selected film connects with that larger issue. Across the various disciplines, a research proposal is typically a plan that outlines your questions and objectives for conducting research, describes the methods you intend to use (what you will need to do in order to complete your project), and suggests the possible implications of your work (how it might answer an ongoing question or issue within the scholarly field you selected). Being able to articulate a research

question is crucial to your project’s success, because in-depth questions demand investigative answers. Writing a proposal will help you narrow down your topic and generate more ideas and questions that you might later choose to address in your paper’s final version. A typical proposal (usually one to two paragraphs) answers the following questions:

What questions are motivating your research? What questions do you want to answer? What ideas do you want to develop?

What is the critical and relevant issue or question within the larger scholarly field you have selected?

If you have a preliminary position on your topic, indicate what that position is.

Explain your interest in your project and why others should read it. It is very important that you choose a topic that can sustain your interest for several weeks. If you’re bored, your readers will be too.

How will you go about answering your research questions? What scholars or articles seem connected to the initial “root” article you read?

Pre-Draft 3.2: Developing a Research Thesis

For this assignment, begin to develop an interpretative thesis for your research project. First, start with an analytical question about the film(s) that compels you to seek answers. Second, in order for you to develop your motive, you need to know how others in the field have or have not addressed your question. Thus you will need to have conducted some research, and your motive will do one of the following: 1) fills a gap in knowledge or answers a thus far unasked question 2) corrects a misconception or highlights an inconsistency 3) builds upon, challenges, or complicates others’ research 4) tests a hypothesis.

Your Pre-Draft must follow this structure:

Question: [your attempt to answer this question will require 10-12 pages of research]Motive: [who or what you are responding to; the starting point of your argument]Thesis: [your insight into the film(s); the governing claim of your project]

Pre-Draft 3.3: Annotated Bibliography A bibliography is an alphabetical list of all the texts a writer has read or cited during the research process. An annotated bibliography includes a brief evaluative summary (an “annotation”) after each bibliographic entry, which describes the following: the topic of the text, the writer’s motive and purpose, key claims or thesis, and (sometimes) the writer’s intended audience. Each annotation also evaluates the usefulness and reliability of the text for the researcher’s project. As such, annotated bibliographies not only present citation information for the sources consulted, but they also provide a basis for deciding whether or not the text will be used in the final project.

For this assignment, create a short version of an annotated bibliography using three sources (you will eventually need at least five in your final essay). Your sources need to be books or scholarly articles, not random websites or blog entries. Do not include primary texts (your film) in this assignment. You may, however, use any of the critical/theoretical texts that we have read as a class so far. List each source in alphabetical order by the author’s last name, including bibliographic details (MLA style). Each entry should be followed by 4 to 5 sentences summarizing the author’s motive, core ideas, and most importantly how the source might contribute to your research.

First Draft + Cover Letter (attach to front of draft)

Write a brief cover letter (no more than one single-spaced page), addressed to your readers. Address the following questions and discuss any other concerns:

1. Summarize your research essay in two to three sentences. What knowledge or whose ideas are you responding to? How does your thesis contribute to the scholarly discourse? Why would other scholars want to read it?

2. Discuss how you structured your essay, and your reasoning behind it.3. Evaluate how well you analyzed your film in terms of cinematic

devices. What was easy or difficult about this process?4. Which aspects of your essay need attention (thesis, organization, use

of evidence, conclusion, etc.)?5. Which questions would you like your peers to address in their reviews?6. Where will you focus attention when it comes to revision?

Peer Review Letters

After you have read and marked up your peer’s essay, please write a letter that addresses the following:

1. Restate and evaluate the writer’s thesis and motive. Are they clearly presented?

2. Address some of the essay’s strengths.3. Does the essay have enough ideas to justify its length?4. Are there areas of contradiction that need supporting evidence or

clarification?5. How effectively does the writer use and engage with sources? 6. How well does the structure of the essay develop and advance the

thesis? Were there enough ideas to sustain the length of the paper?7. Does the writer examine the issue from multiple points of view?8. Offer the writer your top suggestion(s) for strengthening the essay,

and one question to further the writer’s investigation.

Revision + Cover Letter (attach to front of revised essay)

Please answer the following questions in your cover letter:1. How has your thesis or motive changed from draft to revision?2. What other changes have you made? Why?3. What pleases you most about this revision?4. What was most challenging about the research assignment? How did

you tackle those challenges?5. Is there more you could or would want to say about your topic?6. What feedback was most helpful to you?