Paper #3 (Final): Read a Book, Save the World

Intro to Lit Study/Teaching Lit in Secondary School

Paper #3 (Final): Read a Book, Save the World

In Chapter 46 of Station Eleven, Jeevan, his wife, Daria, and their friend, Michael, are arguing about the purpose of a post-apocalypse education. As Michael argues, “Does it still make sense to teach kids about the way things were?...It’s like science fiction to them, isn’t it? And if it only upsets them…” to which Daria responds, “I suppose the question is, does knowing these things make them more or less happy?” (270).

Though we’ve never endured a civilization-ending apocalypse, we live in a world that is constantly changing and threatened by disaster in terms of disease, technology, and climate change. In light of these factors, many would argue that our curriculum based on the past—especially great or influential books, is no longer relevant. Book bans are rampant throughout the country, with classics such as Catcher in the Rye, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, and 1984 being taken out of libraries and school districts because they are “upsetting,” “racist,” or “outdated.” More than ever, English teachers find themselves on the front lines of the cultural war, having to defend a curriculum that can actually save us from ourselves—if we take the time to read it and listen.  

For this paper, I want you to discuss ONE specific book (whether or not it’s been challenged yet) that you feel an essential part of anyone’s education. This should be something that as a teacher, you would make it your mission to teach, promote, and keep alive through reading and discussion. As you develop this conversation, consider some or all of the following:

• Why might this book be controversial today? Who would oppose it? Deny its importance or relevance?
• Why do you feel reading this book is crucial for a 21^st century education? What keeps it relevant despite its subject matter, genre, or age?
• How did you first discover this book? How was it important in forming your own educational or cultural identity?
• Would Culler agree with you? Why or why not? (find a passage…)
• How can you relate some aspect of Station Eleven to this discussion to give us fresh insight? (quote a passage…)
• And responding to Daria’s quote above, how can knowing about this book make students happier and more useful to society? In other words, why can this topic actually, in a small way, save the world?

REQUIREMENTS: At least 3-4 pages double spaced (minimum), using both Culler and Station Eleven in a significant way to support or expand your conversation. Be sure to introduce quotations and cite them by page number, and include a Works Cited page. Due no later than Thursday, December 7^th by 5pm.

Questions for Parts 4 and 5 for Station Eleven

Remeber that you can respond to these questions and get credit for them if you're a bit behind on your daily responses (part of your Participation grade!). You can also respond to other Part 4 questions if you want, even though we wrote about Q1 in class. 

Station Eleven: Part 5 Questions (Canaan & Madison)

Q1: In Chapter 36, When Jeevan is walking in the snow, he starts off repeating biographical facts about himself to “anchor himself to this life, to this earth.” but just a few lines later, the only words he repeats are “Keep Walking.” Is this Jeevan forgetting his identity, or representative of something more? Moreso, if Jeevan is losing his identity here, do you think that identity is dependent on one’s world and context within it?

Q2: Even after months after the Georgian Flu, Franklin still refuses to tell Jeevan who the philanthropist in the memoir is because he ‘signed a contract’. Is this the real reason that Franklin won’t tell Jeevan? Consider the lens Culler posits in Chapter 8, about how ‘the fundamental identity of characters emerges as a result of actions.’ What does this say about Franklin’s relationship to the philanthropist, and his refusal to name him?

Q3: Why are we as a culture so obsessed with celebrities, to the lengths that we climb trees to get pictures of them? Shouldn’t Arthur be flattered by this, instead of complaining? Similarly, what do you think “drives and moves” the paparazzi? Is it really a paycheck, or “truth and beauty,” like Jeevan says, or is it something else? Why are they so passionate?

Q4: Near the end of part 5, Kirsten says it was easier for children during the pandemic, because “the more you remember, the more you’ve lost.” Do you think this is true? Is this why it is so hard for Jeevan at the end of the chapter, and why Frank clings to his ghost-written memoir until his eventual suicide, because they are unwilling to let go of their past identities to resort to lives of survival? How might this relate to the Symphony’s motto: “Because survival is insufficient?” 

 Station Eleven Questions, Part Four (Christine & Joshua)  

In class writing: Culler tells us on page 115 “identity is the product of a series of partial identifications, never completed.” We see throughout the book that people are either called by their name or by what they do, specifically on page 128 when we are reading about Viola “She’d had a different name when she was younger, but had taken on the name of her instrument after the collapse.” Is there anything wrong in finding your identity in what you do? Is that really who they are? Does the pandemic have an influence on that?  

 

Question 2: On page 120, Kristen is trying to imagine watching a Star Trek episode with her family based off Dieter's description of the episode alone. If that image/ memory gives her comfort, does it make it less valid if it may not be real for her or if it never happened? 

 

Question 3: Because we are curious, there’s a lot of imagery to skeletons in part 4; do you think this is a reference to the phrase “skeletons in the closet” meaning someone has dark secrets/ baggage they’re carrying (Arthur has a TON of skeletons in his closet). Or is it just to paint a better picture of the world 

Question 4: On page 155 in the “Dear V” sections, Arthur writes “the instructor told me he felt I was a little flat, which is his way of saying he thinks I’m a terrible actor.” As English majors, how do you relate to this? When people critique your writing, do you take it as constructive or as them tearing you down? 

For Thursday: Station Eleven, Part 4 (Part 3 Questions Below)

NOTE: If you've fallen behind on responding to question in class, you can respond to TWO of these and e-mail them to me or bring them to our next class. 

ALSO: No Class on Tuesday! The ECU Interscholastic Meet is taking over our class. So read Part Four for next Thursday's class! 

 QUESTIONS FOR STATION ELEVEN, PART 3  (Jess & Josie)

Q1: In chapter 15, Miranda narrates that “He [Arthur] doesn’t tell the whole story,” about how they came to be together. He leaves out details about how Pablo hit Miranda. This seems to happen often, because Arthur talks for/about Miranda pretty regularly. Are we, as people, made up of facts? Do we get to reinvent our stories through the retelling or omitting of pieces? Does this make us all actors?

Q2: As we get more description of Dr. Eleven in part three, we can see exactly how much of it is based on Miranda’s life. She draws from personal experience to inspire her art. Luli the pomeranian, Neptune Logistics, even her ex-boyfriend Pablo all make an appearance. Does this make her art bad or unoriginal? What do other characters seem to think? Why, of all the mediums out there, does she pour herself into comics? How does this contrast with Arthur, a renowned actor?

Q3: Jeevan tells Miranda that, “Work is combat.” (pg. 103). How have we seen this illustrated throughout the book? Is Jeevan saying that he has hated every job he’s had? Does this conflict with what we know about Jeevan?

Q4: Part three is told almost entirely in the past (before the pandemic) except for the transcript between François and Kirsten. What was the significance of including this transcript? What affect did these transcripts have on the overall story of the novel? Are the transcripts relevant to the rest of part 3? Specifically the interview in chapter 18? How?

For Thursday: Station Eleven, Part Three & Pedagogical Assignment for Station Eleven

 Remember to read Part Three of Station Eleven for Thursday's class, even though we won't have any questions for the book. Instead, the class will start generating questions for discussion when we come to class. These will form the basis of our discussions, and help us navigate through the tricky narration of Mandel's Novel. Groups can send me the questions before class if they want me to distribute it to the class ahead of time, but this is not necessary. The assignment is below:

Pedagogical Assignment for Station Eleven

As your penultimate assignment for class (only the final paper is left), I want you to get some practical experience running a demanding college course—or in this case, designing some of the questions that guide our discussions and responses to the text. I will no longer assign any questions of my own, or any in-class writing exercises. That will be your job! I’ve broken you up into groups of two to help run our discussions of Station Eleven for the rest of the semester. Each group has a very simple task to complete, though it’s harder than it looks.

THE QUESTIONS: I’ll ask your group to come up with FOUR discussion questions that we will discuss as a class, much like the questions I assign on the blog.  Your group is completely in charge of creating these questions, which you can do in one of two ways: (a) each member can create 4 questions (a total of 8), which you can then cull into 4 questions for the class, or (b) you can work on the 4 collaboratively. Either way works, as long as you come to class with the four questions in enough handouts for the entire class (there are 13 students). These do not have to be posted ahead of time; just bring them to class and we will try to tackle them as a class.

REQUIREMENTS: Of the 4 questions, at least 2 of them should be theoretical in nature. This means that they either should reference a passage or an idea from Culler, or should use an idea from ‘outside’ the text to examine an idea or passage in the book. For example, you might point out something meta-textual in the book (Shakespeare, Sartre, etc.), or you could simply point out an example of ‘performative language.’ Just try to vary your questions and avoid asking questions about the plot or something that can be answered without some degree of ambiguity or disagreement.

ALSO: On the underlined days below, those groups should select one of their questions for an in-class writing prompt. Bring all four questions, but ask us to write about one of them at the beginning of class. So make it a good one!

THE SCHEDULE:

R 2     Mandel, Station Eleven:  Jess, Josie  (Part 3)

T 7     No-Class: ECU Interscholastic Meet  

R 9     Mandel, Station Eleven: Christine, Joshua (Part 4)

T 14   Mandel, Station Eleven: Canaan, Madison (Part 5)

R 16   Mandel, Station Eleven: Morgan, Cody  (Part 6)

T 21   Mandel, Station Eleven: Dallan, Huston, Rebecca (Part 7)

T 28   Mandel, Station Eleven: Christian, Kaylyn  (Part 8-9)

For Tuesday: Mandel, Station Eleven, Chapters 1-12 (parts 1 and 2)

From the Station Eleven series (2021)

No questions for our first reading, but we will have an in-class response on Tuesday, so consider some of the following ideas as you read Chapters 1-12 (parts 1 & 2 of the book):

* The motto of the Traveling Symphony is "Because survival is insufficient." What do you think this means, especially given people in the Symphony and their mission in life? In a post-apocalyptic world, what else do you need?

* Related to the above, why do so few people desert the Symphony? Is it simply a matter of safety/survival? Or is there something else about the reality of Year Twenty?

* Do you find it strange that the Symphony travels around performing Shakespeare, of all things? What might make Shakespeare even more relevant in a world "after" the world than in our own present? In other words, why does Shakespeare persist?

* We got a master class in narration with The Turn of the Screw, and in this book, we get a third-person narrator but limited through many different perspectives. Why do you think we open in the 'past' with Jeevan's experiences? What does he show us that might become important later on?

* Chapter 6 is one of the scariest chapters in the book: how is society connected by a spider's web of necessities, luxuries, and conveniences, so that if one disappeared it would take dozens of others with it? How conscious of this are we on a day-to-day basis? 

* Why does the novel constantly go back and forth between the past and the present so often? And why is a novel uniquely qualified to do that, much more so than a movie, show, or a play? Why might novels really be the first 'time travelers' in our society? 

For Thursday: Culler, Chapter 8: Identity, Identification, and the Subject

This is the LAST chapter of Culler that we'll read for class, but it's an important one. It's a little tricky, so bear with it, since the better you understand this chapter, the easier you'll see connections (and implications) for your Final Project. 

Answer TWO of the following: 

Q1: Why is the word "subject" in English such a tricky one? How do the various definitions of the word suggesting the theoretical complications of the term? Do you think this is an instance when our language knows more than it lets on? 

Q2: What does Culler mean, quoting Nancy Armstrong, that novels "produced 'the modern individual' who was first of all a woman" (113)? Why would novels create an identity which was primarily female in nature? And how might that have shaped even male identity for people who read books? In other words, why is the 'modern' self, in some senses, more female than male?

Q3: Lacan, a student of Freud, believed identity is a process of mirroring, of copying various performances which we come to believe are 'normal' or 'ideal.' Yet in doing so, "we do not happily become men or women...[and] always encounter resistance" (114). What "resistance" do we encounter in trying to copying our ideal male and female role models, and why does this ultimately doom are performance to be a "failure"? Why can't we become perfect copies of our models? 

Q4: In postcolonial studies, scholars often debate on how societies who have emerged from colonial ownership can best assert their identity and independence. If, for example, a novelist from post-colonial India writes a novel in English, are they still subject to English identity, even in the novel and its characters are Indian? Does an author have to utterly reject everything remotely sway to English identity to become liberated? Is a novel, by its very European roots, an agent of colonial identity? Is English itself? 

For Tuesday: The Turn of the Screw, Chapters 19-24

Answer TWO of the following as always: 

Q1: Why do you think the Governess becomes so antagonistic toward Flora, even seeing her as an "old, old woman"? It seems that if spirits were attacking the two children, Flora would have the most chance of redemption, being the most innocent. And yet the Governess sees her as the most forsaken, and has her removed from Bly altogether. Why is this, especially as Miss Jessel seems the less menacing of the two spirits?

Q2: Do you think Mrs. Grose finally believes the Governess, which is why she agrees to take Flora to her Uncle? Or is she simply removing her from the Governess (and if so, why doesn't she take Miles, too)? Are the "horrors" that Flora says in private about the Governess proof of Miss Jessel's instruction? Or might she have learned them from someone else? 

Q3:What does the Governess expect to happen now that the influence of Flora and Mrs. Grose has been removed? How might we account for statements such as, "We continued silent...as some young couple who, on their wedding-journey, at the inn, feel shy in the presence of the waiter"? Why might this moment invoke ideas of wedding/marriage/wedding night for the Governess? Is it as lurid as it first appears? 

Q4: Does Miles tell her the truth at the end of the story, or is he still lying (whether or not under the influence of Peter Quint)? Also, what reason does he ultimately give for being kicked out of the boarding school? Does she believe him?

Q5: (one more for good measure) What exactly happens at the end of the story? Has the Governess saved him from Peter Quint's influence? Is the exorcism successful? Or is he just dead? Was that the only way to save him from an evil spirit?