Just to clarify to my readers who are not in my field, this course, as it is traditionally taught, has no theory whatsoever. It's just basic concepts of literary analysis: narrator, point of view, versification, etc... While I'll be the first to say that it is something important to teach, I find it really boring if it's the only thing I'll be doing the whole semester. I taught the course once, did my usual "innovative" syllabus from scratch, and while some things worked, I'll be the first one to admit that it was confusing and some things just did not work. So my question is: any suggestion as to how to spice the syllabus up? This is a 300-level course. I know I can make it a little more challenging, and most students would respond. Also, not all literary genres need to be covered if I don't want to. And I can add readings in English if I feel like it.So, all things considered, what would you suggest to make the course more appealing to me? I know that the intended audience are the students, but if I find the course appealing and enjoy the syllabus, I can make the students engage with the material without a problem. That is why I am thinking about me first.
In my (English) department, we use Schole's Textbook and Brummet's book on rhetoric as a starting point for a course that sounds similar. For me personally, I think working with lyric verse is easier to manage because you can work with small pieces more intensely. Scholes introduces a little theory, but something such as *The Theory Toolbox* might be of interest?
ReplyDeleteMe, personally, I'd go with lyric verse, some drama (because you've got such a wealth of Golden Age drama in Spanish), and some shorter narratives.
Sounds fun!
In my department (also English), we have intro to genre courses (Fiction, Drama, Poetry) with similar expectations. I owned my fiction class by splitting it in half. For the first half, we covered selections from the textbook and established a basic critical vocabulary. For the second half, I designed a mini-course on the American gothic tradition that still dipped into certain works from the textbook, but historicized the course and engaged the students in more specific ways.
ReplyDeleteGood luck!
I've used Aproximaciones in the past, but I more recently switched to Voces de Hispanoamérica. For me in this course, it was important to teach all the genres because I don't teach a lot of poetry at the upper level, and I don't teach theater at all. So,while my other colleagues do teach those genres, they teach them from earlier periods in Spain (Golden Age Spain, Generation of 27 Spain). So, if they're going to get Latin American poetry and modern or contemporary Latin American theater, it's going to have to be in that course I teach.
ReplyDeleteBut, besides making sure that they know what to do with a play (and know basic vocab for talking about it (e.g. acotaciones, cuadro, etc.)) and a poem (estrofa, verso, soneto, romance, arte mayor/menor, etc.; how to count the syllables and determine form, how to figure out where the sentences are and to re-write it into prose, etc.), the biggest challenge I find is getting students to move beyond generalities and platitutdes about a text (whether it's poetry or some other genre). And that's the most important thing for them moving forward.
So, I required everyone to write a response "paper" (one paragraph) three times throughout the semester (I divided the course up into three periods of time, and they chose dates on the first day so that the work was distributed throughout the semester). They had to say what they thought the main point of the text was and back it up with a specific passage from what was read. They posted this publicly (on a class blog), and everyone had to read these comments and come to class prepared to talk about the text and what their classmates said. Even if they didn't (though they had to do a response sheet, which I periodically (maybe twice?) checked for participation grade), I automatically had 2-3 people who could talk about the text and had ideas beyond the general. It worked really well, and it wasn't onerous grading for me since I had a simple rubric that emphasized content over language.
As far as dealing with criticism and theory, I included a short novel in addition to the textbook, and I made the final paper a reduced conversation between them and two different takes on the novel (two articles). We spent time with the novel first, then spent time breaking down two specific critical approaches to the novel (so they know what to do with a scholarly article about literature) and then worked on how someone might "enter the conversation" so to speak. Given that they aren't at the upper-level and don't have all the necessary background to make a "real" argument about the text, this was enough for me so that when I ask them to do a serious research paper in an upper-level literature course, they have an idea of what I'm expecting.
It was challenging all around, but the evaluations were good. The only thing they asked for was less poetry (though they said they now understand what to do with a poem).
and sorry for the long comment!
ReplyDelete@Anonymous: Your comments are more than welcome, and very helpful.
ReplyDeleteand to first anonymous and Bardiac: Thanks! I love having the perspective from another department. I particularly write the idea of splitting the course in half.
Keep the suggestions coming!
Here, we actually did split the course in half for a while: it was intro to lit and comp, 2 semesters, 1 semester essay and narrative theory, next semester poetry, theatre, and film.
DeleteIt ended up dragging because in our program, students also have to move on to the surveys pronto, and we moved back to 1 semester but I am now thinking hmmm, I could do this without trying to cover all genres in one term.
A very interesting and productive conversation. I've taught this course using Aproximaciones several times now, and have been very satisfied with using it as a base. Which means of course that it needs to be supplemented.
ReplyDeleteA couple of specifics:
I found the Siglo de Oro poetry, especially the sonnets, to be one of the better parts of the course. I add one sonnet (which I think was in Aproximaciones at one point but they took it out in one of their many new editions...a problem of economic exploitation I dealt with, by the way, by telling my students to buy an older edition, creating a situation that is not too difficult to work around). The added sonnet is Lope's Un soneto me manda a hacer Violante, which thematizes the difficulty of writing a sonnet, as well as the gender dynamic involved. These themes lead right in to the great sonnets in the book by Garcilaso, Gongora, Sor Juana et al.
I found that Aproximaciones' theory section on narrative is insufficient and needs to be supplemented with a more nuanced version of omniscience (one which breaks it down into something like alcance/profundidad or externa/interna) along with a simplified version of the concept of focalization. This can be found in Genette's narratology book, I think. After teaching this material (and it takes some teaching to get it across), in order for the students to really get it you have to supplement with two of three short stories with varied narrative modes. You can use variations within the usual third-person omniscient, along with first-person, but one in third person with a strong focalizer is essential. This gets the students operating on a far more sophisticated level than what Aproximaciones sets them up for, and it also gets around the contradictions contained in Aproximaciones' account of omniscience.
That's it for me.
I use Aproximaciones and add to it, although I am rather tired of it for the obvious readings. Depending on the semester: Berger, Ways of Seeing, which is available in Spanish; short things by Barthes and Benveniste, which can be taught at beginning theory level, essays on poetry and poetics by García Lorca, and also writers on their own writing; lots of modern writers also write theoretical type things. I should do all of this in a more systematic way. Here, students are still having so much trouble with the language at that point that everything is a challenge; this is actually a reason why one might as well go for theory. Genette, narratology, is a good idea.
ReplyDeleteI like all the suggestions and will take them into consideration when I design the syllabus. At first, I thought about going brave and do a whole class on narrative theory, but it requires too much preparation to much with the texts.
ReplyDeleteSurprisingly enough, given my field, when I taught it the last time, the part that worked the best was when I structured narrative around Spanish Middle Ages and Golden Age: fragments of "El Conde Lucanor", "Cantar del Mio Cid", one novela ejemplar from Cervantes, and "El prevenido engañado" by Maria de Zayas. It was cohesive. Maybe I'll repeat it, add the poetry examples from that period, and then just devote the last part of the semester to analyzing a novel. Maybe "Cronica de una muerte anunciada"?
By the way, last time I was in Buenos Aires, I bought a short book published by Eudeba, for first year college students of the University of Buenos Aires, called "La narracion", by Irene Klein. It is pretty useful too. I see it on Amazon for $27. I wouldn't pay that much, but if you can find it through ILL, it's worth looking at it.