Paper #1: Close Reading Fiction Using Gender/Political Criticism

You are writing an essay (of at LEAST 4 pages, double-spaced, 1 inch margins, 12 point font in Times New Roman) in which you will closely read and analyze small sections of a short story. You will provide readers with a full, well-supported explanation of your analysis and conclusions.

           Choose one of the following stories:

• “The Birthmark” by Nathanial Hawthorne (258-268)
• “A Sorrowful Woman” by Gail Godwin (Canvas)
• “Sweat” by Zora Neale Hurston (202-210)

Research:

You will NOT be using outside sources for this essay. Rely solely on the text. There are no right or wrong readings. As long as you can logically support your conclusions with specifics in the text, you will be applying close reading and gender/political criticism correctly.

You will, however, be using specific words/lines from the text. You must cite in proper MLA style. 

Audience/Rhetorical Context:

This essay should be written for a college audience who know the story you are analyzing. Aim at people who are educated at levels of first-year students to professors. Your language, style and tone should reflect your audience and purpose. Be careful NOT to give too much summary—remember, you are supposed to analyze the text, not provide a detailed account of the events in the story. Your job here is to convince the reader to accept your interpretation of the story.

Look back over the stories and decide which one you feel most comfortable with.  Reread it again, noting in particular passages that you could read closely and come up with something interesting to say about it.  Most importantly, find several passages that relates to the story’s main conflicts and/or themes in it, particularly in reference to gender/political criticism.

Here’s a short list of questions to get you thinking about the story. Make sure you think about these ideas in way that you can make an argument using gender/political criticism:

1. What conflict/theme is present in the passage? For example, you might find the struggle of dealing with certain questions/problems (or possible problems) in relationships.
2. Are there any tensions present? Between which characters? For example, between husband and wife or having to make a difficult decision.
3. Are there any ambiguities or words/phrases/actions that allow for more than one interpretation?  Do they contribute to the theme in any way?
4. Is there any irony in the passage, a place where things are not what they seem or a character/author says one thing but means another?
5. Is there anything interesting or revealing about the tone, point of view, setting, or images that are in the particular passage?
6. Don’t forget a title for your essay

https://www.d.umn.edu/~tbacig/cst1010/chs/ggodwin….

Thank you for agreeing to draft the annual report for Express Tours. Before you begin you’re work. Let me outline the initial steps. First, its essential for you to include brief profiles of top management. Early next week, I’ll provide profiles for all managers accept Samuel Heath, who’s bio information is being revised. You should edit these profiles carefully, than format them according to the enclosed instructions. We may ask you to include other employee’s profiles at some point. Second, you should arrange to get complete financial information for fiscal year 2021 from our comptroller, Richard Chang (Helen Boyes, to, can provide the necessary figures.) When you get this information, precede according to the plans we discuss in yesterday’s meeting. By the way, you will notice from the figures that the sale of our Charterhouse division did not significantly effect net profits.Third, you should submit first draft of the report by July 1. Of coarse, you should proofread you writing. I am quiet pleased that you can take on this project. If I or anyone else at Express Tours can answers questions, don’t hesitate to call.

can format the Email above to a similar format below

To: Huff employee

From: J. A. Cannes, Department Head
Subject: Low Productivity for Second Quarter
Date: May 21, 2021

Over the past few months, many of you have not been putting in the required eight-hour day (see Employee Handbook, section 3). Some of you are:

• coming 10 to 30 minutes late
• arriving on time but then eating breakfast in the cafeteria
• taking long lunch hours, or leaving 20 to 30 minutes early

As a result, our company’s productivity for the second quarter is down 35% from a year ago. We need your cooperation to get next quarter’s output back on track to prevent any layoffs. If you have any questions, you can reach me at ex. 667.

This assessment method is designed to help you see how logic is used (or misused) in everyday life, and thereby appreciate the importance of good reasoning. You are asked to do some fieldwork related to logic. In particular, you are asked to document an argument “in the wild,” that is, an argument someone makes during a debate, a dispute, or a disagreement as you witness it in everyday life. The argument cannot be taken from a book or an article. You may use various mediums to document this “argument in the wild,” such as text, image, audio, or video. Then you should analyze the argument using the logical tools we learn throughout this course. For the fourth Argument in the Wild, you should write the argument in canonical form and then evaluate it, that is, determine whether the argument is valid or invalid, using a proof. If the argument is valid, determine whether it is sound or unsound.

Here is an example of what an “Arguments in the Wild 4” submission should look like:

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/9wdqkq/the-colbert-r…

In this video, Stephen Colbert makes the following argument: “The boys are signing, ‘You don’t know you’re beautiful. That’s what makes you beautiful’. But they’ve just told the girl she’s beautiful. So since she now knows it, she’s no longer beautiful.”

Colbert’s argument in this video can be reconstructed in canonical form as follows:

P1: If what makes one beautiful is ignorance of one’s beauty, then one stops being beautiful when one is told that one beautiful.

P2: It is not the case that one stops being beautiful when one is told that one is beautiful.

Therefore,

C: It is not the case that what makes one beautiful is ignorance of one’s beauty.

Reconstructed in this way, Colbert’s argument is valid; that is, if P1 and P2 are true, then C would have to be true as well. In particular, it has the following logical form:

???I?S

???S

?????I

Where I stands for the sentence “What makes one beautiful is ignorance of one’s beauty,” and S stands for the sentence “One stops being beautiful when one is told that one is beautiful.”

This logical form is known as modus tollens, which is valid as the following proof demonstrates: 

(check the picture shows the table)

Since the argument is valid, the question is whether the premises are in fact true. Is the argument sound? Colbert’s argument is a reductio ad absurdum. It is supposed to show that the idea that what makes one beautiful is not knowing that one is beautiful is absurd. This idea is absurd because it has an absurd consequence, namely, it implies that one stops being beautiful when one is told that one is beautiful. Since that is clearly absurd, it follows that being beautiful cannot be a matter of knowing whether one is beautiful or not.

For these reasons, Colbert’s argument is valid and sound (and funny).

This, then, is how your fourth “Arguments in the Wild” assignment should look like. That is, you should use the tools of Sentential Logic (in particular, proofs) to analyze an argument in the wild. You should determine whether the argument is valid or invalid by means of a proof. If valid, you should determine whether the argument is sound or unsound.

This assessment method is designed to help you see how logic is used (or misused) in everyday life, and thereby appreciate the importance of good reasoning. You are asked to do some fieldwork related to logic. In particular, you are asked to document an argument “in the wild,” that is, an argument someone makes during a debate, a dispute, or a disagreement as you witness it in everyday life. The argument cannot be taken from a book or an article. You may use various mediums to document this “argument in the wild,” such as text, image, audio, or video. Then you should analyze the argument using the logical tools we learn throughout this course. For the first Argument in the Wild, you should write the argument in canonical form and then evaluate it (that is, determine whether the argument is sound or unsound).

Here is an example of what an “Arguments in the Wild 1” submission should look like:

In this video, Ted Cruz makes the following argument: “…climate change is not science; it’s religion. Look at the language where they call you a denier. ‘Denier’ is not the language of science.”

Senator Cruz’s argument in this video can be reconstructed in canonical form as follows:

P1: Scientists who use religious language are not doing science.

P2: Climatologists (or “global warming alarmists” in Cruz’s words) use religious language (e.g., the term ‘denier’).

Therefore,

C: Climatologists are not doing science. (In other words, “climate change is not science.”)

Reconstructed in this way, Cruz’s argument is valid; that is, if P1 and P2 are true, then C would have to be true as well. The question, then, is whether the premises are in fact true. Is the argument sound? It is not clear that P1 and P2 are actually true. As far as P1 is concerned, scientists use what might be characterized as “religious language” all the time. For example, cosmologists and astrophysicists talk about creation when they talk about the origin of the universe and the Big Bang. Does that mean that cosmology and astrophysics are not science?

As far as P2 is concerned, the term ‘denier’ is not necessarily a “religious” term. In a court of law, for instance, a defendant might say that s/he denies the charges pressed against him/her. Does that mean that one is using “religious language”?

Since there are doubts about whether P1 and P2 are in fact true, although Cruz’s argument can be reconstructed as a valid argument, it cannot be said to be sound.

This, then, is how your first “Arguments in the Wild” assignment should look like. That is, you should use the tools of informal logic (in particular, canonical form) to analyze an argument in the wild. You should determine whether the argument is valid or invalid. If valid, you should determine whether the argument is sound or unsound.

Please submit your work on the due date before class. In class, you will be asked to share your “argument in the wild” with the class.

Take a look at the wing design of this C-17. Based on what you know about aerodynamic terminology and the term “moment”, explain why you think the wing was designed the way it is. How does this compare to similar size commercial air carrier aircraft? Is there another design that you think might be better, since this aircraft was designed in 1970? Explain. In order to complete this question thoroughly, you will need to research anhedral/dihedral. 

JhonThe Boeing C-17 has a somewhat unusual wing design which NASA refers to as a “super critical” wing. According to NASA a super critical wing is an advanced airfoil type that allows many benefits to the mission of a C-17. The design “enhances the range, cruising speed, and fuel efficiency of jet aircraft by creating weaker shockwaves that create less drag and permit high efficiency” (NASA). Another major design feature of the C-17 wing is the fact that they are anhedral as opposed to the more common design of dihedral wings. An anhedral wing is one where the wings are sloped downwards towards the ground rather than dihedral wings which slope upwards. According to Colin Cutler from Bold Method, dihedral wings provide a more stable aircraft and a plane with dihedral wings will have the natural tendency to return to wings level whereas a plane with anhedral wings will not. In terms of the Boeing C-17, the decreased stability of the anhedral wing was worth the performance gained from NASA’s supercritical wing design. In most cases, there is more benefit in a dihedral wing which is why most modern commercial aircraft share this design. However for the mission needs of the C-17 I do not believe that there is a better design than the anhedral super critical wings that are currently in use by them.

chris

When it comes to military aircraft, the government doesn’t skimp out on the design/functionality of the aircraft. They want the best when it comes to aircraft that are defending and providing transport for this country, so why not build the best. With a wingspan of 169 feet and 10 inches, data provided by Boeing, the C-17 is an absolute unit of an aircraft. With that big wingspan and heavy fuselage, it would need a descent amount of thrust to generate enough lift to carry this big bird into the skies. On this aircraft are 4 Pratt & Whitney engines producing a total of 40,500 pounds of thrust, which generate the necessary amount of lift required to lift the aircraft off the ground. Not only did Boeing design and manufacture this beast, but NASA also contributed to the designs of the C-17. The C-17 wings are anhedral, which displaces a negative degree slope from the wing base. An anhedral wing will also induce roll instability and improve roll maneuverability. With having an aircraft with such a big fuselage, which is going to be carrying tons of weight, it’s important to go with a wing design that has a good center of gravity. When it comes to the United States Air Force, maneuverability is everything. For instance, the C-17 has to be able to perform tactical maneuvers, landings, and takeoffs to suite the needs of the Air Force. Therefore, having an anhedral wing design would be best for this aircraft since it not only thrives on range and performance, but maneuverability as well. 

Rewrite the following and add any information needed. Use the correct format for the email and business letter (full block format).

• Real email (rewrite the following)

Thank you for agreeing to draft the annual report for Express Tours. Before you begin you’re work. Let me outline the initial steps. First, its essential for you to include brief profiles of top management. Early next week, I’ll provide profiles for all managers accept Samuel Heath, who’s bio information is being revised. You should edit these profiles carefully, than format them according to the enclosed instructions. We may ask you to include other employee’s profiles at some point. Second, you should arrange to get complete financial information for fiscal year 2021 from our comptroller, Richard Chang (Helen Boyes, to, can provide the necessary figures.) When you get this information, precede according to the plans we discuss in yesterday’s meeting. By the way, you will notice from the figures that the sale of our Charterhouse division did not significantly effect net profits.Third, you should submit first draft of the report by July 1. Of coarse, you should proofread you writing. I am quiet pleased that you can take on this project. If I or anyone else at Express Tours can answers questions, don’t hesitate to call.

–

change it to something similar to this

–

Memo 1(example 1)

To: Buck and Buck Inc. Employees
From: Sam Brown, Manager
Subject: Social Media Training Program
Date: May 19, 2021

To promote a more professional online image, the company has created a new social media training program for all employees. This program will familiarize you with quality standards expected from company-affiliated content posted online. We believe this will improve our customer relations and our company image. The mandatory training program will meet during work hours on Monday, May 24, and last two hours. It will cover the following topics:

• Blog and Wiki writing style standards
• Twitter etiquette
• YouTube video editing

If you have any questions, please contact me at ex. 999.

This assessment method is designed to help you see how logic is used (or misused) in everyday life, and thereby appreciate the importance of good reasoning. You are asked to do some fieldwork related to logic. In particular, you are asked to document an argument “in the wild,” that is, an argument someone makes during a debate, a dispute, or a disagreement as you witness it in everyday life. The argument cannot be taken from a book or an article. You may use various mediums to document this “argument in the wild,” such as text, image, audio, or video. Then you should analyze the argument using the logical tools we learn throughout this course. For the second Argument in the Wild, you should write the argument in canonical form and then evaluate it, that is, determine whether the argument is valid or invalid, using a Venn diagram. If the argument is valid, determine whether it is sound or unsound.

Here is an example of what an “Arguments in the Wild 2” submission should look like:

In this video, Trevor Noah discusses the following argument, which is made by the CEO of CBS, Les Moonves: “The money’s rolling in… This is going to be a very good year for us. Sorry, it’s a terrible thing to say, but, bring it on, Donald.”

Moonves’ argument in this video can be reconstructed in canonical form as follows:

P1: Anything that brings in money is good for CBS.

P2: Trump’s presidential bid brings in money.

Therefore,

C: Trump’s presidential bid is good for CBS.

Reconstructed in this way, Moonves’ argument is valid; that is, if P1 and P2 are true, then C would have to be true as well. Indeed, the argument is an AAA-1 categorical syllogism.

S: Things identical with Trump’s presidential bid

P: Things that are good for CBS

M: Things that bring in money

All M are P.

All S are M.

All S are P.

Since the argument is valid, the question is whether the premises are in fact true. Is the argument sound? If the only thing that CBS cares about is the bottom line, then it would follow that Trump’s presidential bid is good for CBS, given that it is good for CBS’s bottom line. However, it might be argued that CBS, as a major source of news, has a journalistic responsibility to the American public. If the American public loses trust in CBS, upon finding out that CBS reports only the news that bring in money, then that could also hurt CBS’s bottom line.

Since there are doubts about whether the premises are true, although Moonves’ argument can be reconstructed as a valid categorical syllogism, it cannot be said to be sound.

This, then, is how your second “Arguments in the Wild” assignment should look like. That is, you should use the tools of Categorical Logic (in particular, Venn diagrams) to analyze one argument in the wild. You should determine whether the argument is valid or invalid by means of a Venn diagram. If valid, you should determine whether the argument is sound or unsound.

Is there a difference between the Backside of the Power Curve and the Region of Reverse Command? Explain. Under what condition(s), if any,  it is possible that an airplane  requires the application of more power in order to fly slower? 

POST 1

I believe there is a difference between both the Backside of the Power Curve and the Region of Reverse Command. First of all, when it comes to this we have to factor in that drag is evident in all scenarios. Second of all, what is Region of Reverse Command?”Flight in the region of reversed command means flight in which a higher airspeed requires a lower power setting and a lower airspeed requires a higher power setting to hold altitude” (Flight Literacy). With that being said being in the region of reverse command, you are needing to add power in order to maintain your current flight level. Basically slow flight is a maneuver we do in the region of reverse command because we are trying to get the airplane as slow as possible and the only way to gain altitude is to use more power, but to gain airspeed we must gently bring the nose down to the horizon.

When it comes to a difference between the backside of the power curve, there is a bit of evidence that supports why there is a difference. The back side of the power curve is pretty much a stall. Bringing the aircraft to slow flight is putting the aircraft right on the edge of stalling but not quite. I believe that the only difference between the two would be that reverse command is saying that you are only reversing the input of different things in flight. As stated before, slow flight is a maneuver that is in reverse command.

POST 2

As we went through lectures in last week’s classes, we learned about the region of normal command as well as the region of reverse command. The region of normal command or front side of the power curve is when pitching back and raising the nose is indicative of altitude gain. As you pitch the nose down, this represents a descent and altitude loss (AOPA). Region of reverse command is encountered during low-speed phases of flight such as coming into land or on an approach. Essentially, to achieve the region of reverse command, a decrease in airspeed must be accompanied by an increased power setting which will make steady flight maintainable.

There is a condition when aircraft fly with more power to fly slower. This is known as slow flight. When in slow flight, the pilot pitches to maintain airspeed and power to maintain altitude. This is a maneuver you learn during your first few lessons as a private pilot. It is used to demonstrate the region of reverse command and how flight controls are used for different things especially when set up in a landing configuration. Flying on the backside of the power curve is rather indicative of how the aircraft will operate. The controls reverse, which is seen in slow flight. This alerts and allows pilots to understand stalls and spin and what to look out for when one is approaching.

In a separate document (MS Word, Google Docs, etc.), please write your responses to the following prompts in full sentences, starting a new paragraph for each prompt. You should write at least 6-8 sentences in response to each prompt.

Be thoughtful in your responses and draw on personal examples and illustrations. Worry less about writing a “right answer” and more about discussing your own thoughts and opinions based on what you learned this semester. You will be graded according to the rubric provided below.

Do not use bullet points or number the paragraphs. Format like a regular paragraph essay and include your name somewhere at the top. Review the Tips for the Final Reflection page for pointers, and ask Mrs. Stripling if you have questions.

You are not required to cite outside sources for your reflection. But, if you decide to include information or quotes from an outside source, you must provide a citation in APA Style.

Final Reflection Prompts:

How has what you learned in this course challenged your perception of research? What will be different about your approach to your next research project? What have you learned in this course that you can apply next semester? ( in the attached files you find the purpose of this course and outcomes )

Remember from Week 2 and Week 3: as information creators, authors must consider the purpose of various formats when they are deciding how to disseminate information they have created. Consider this scenario –

Imagine you are a university researcher who just completed a project. You want to share what you learned with your colleagues and fellow researchers to fuel more research. But you also recognize that your results are important for the general public to understand.

How will you disseminate your information? What formats will you choose (probably more than one)? Why would you choose them? ( in the attached files you can find the the information formats)

How does context affect the level of authority we assign to authors and information creators? How is authority constructed and contextual?

For example, consider it this way: would you let a PhD Doctor of Psychology operate on your ruptured appendix? Why not?

I’m working on a literature discussion question and need guidance to help me understand better.

Re-Read the following passage from the end of the piece by Zora Neale Hurston and then answer the questions in your discussion post.

“But in the main, I feel like a brown bag of miscellany propped against a
wall. Against a wall in company with other bags, white, red and yellow.
Pour out the contents, and there is discovered a jumble of small, things
priceless and worthless. A first-water diamond, an empty spool, bits of
broken glass, lengths of string, a key to a door long since crumbled away, a
rusty knife-blade, old shoes saved for a road that never was and never will
be, a nail bent under the weight of things too heavy for any nail, a dried
flower or two still a little fragrant. In your hand is the brown bag. On the
ground before you is the jumble it held–so much like the jumble in the
bags, could they be emptied, that all might be dumped in a single heap and
the bags refilled without altering the content of any greatly. A bit of
colored glass more or less would not matter. Perhaps that is how the Great
Stuffer of Bags filled them in the first place–who knows.”

–Examine the metaphor that Hurston uses — what does the “brown bag” represent?

–What does the list of contents represent? Pick out at least two or three specific things she lists as contents and explain what they could symbolize.

–Why does Hurston say that if all the bags were emptied together and refilled randomly, it wouldn’t really alter the contents greatly?

–Who is the “Great Stuffer of Bags” and how does Hurston feel about him/her?

This assignment is worth 25 points.

Response parameters: A minimum of 250 words

Be aware that you will not be able to see your classmates’ initial postings until you post yours.

Respond to at least one of your classmates (around 100 words).

The goal of this assignment is to have you analyze a selection of poems, focusing specifically on persona, tone, imagery, symbolism, language, and form.  Also, this assignment should improve your ability to read and think critically.

Task:

Compose 2 short essays on 2 different poems (only choose poems on the syllabus): 1 poem per essay. Each essay should focus on a single poetic element: persona, tone, imagery, symbolism, an aspect of poetic language, or an aspect of poetic form. In the essays, discuss how these various elements relate to the overall meaning/theme of the respective poem. You must choose two different elements to analyze. Do not use any outside research for this assignment.

Frist poem -Do not go gentle into that good night

{Do not go gentle into that good night,

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,

Because their words had forked no lightning they

Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright

Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,

And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,

Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight

Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,

Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.

Do not go gentle into that good night.

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.}

second poem Tomorrow, And Tomorrow, And Tomorrow’, Spoken by Macbeth

{Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day today
To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.}