A Close Reading Mid-Term Paper

This is a 7ish-page analytic essay (typed; 12 pt; double-spaced; one inch margins) built around close rhetorical analysis of prose. That is the only real requirement, so - I want you to have a lot of freedom in how you execute the paper. It cannot be on a work we've discussed in class, although you can use an author we've discussed. Needless to say, any essay you write should be grounded by and organized around a central argument. You should always do a first draft and then rework it - for any essay you write. One reason for this is that most writers don't really know what they're saying until they finish the first draft. It's a good idea to begin with a question and (hopefully) end up with an argument that goes beyond the initial question:

1. Your argument could be about a specific genre of journalism. Is there a style typical of conservative political journalists as opposed to progressives? If so, why do they use this style? How is the writer appealing to his/her audience? It might be interesting to compare editorial pages of various newspapers. What kind of stylistic cliches are typical of The New Yorker? How do they appeal to the presumed reader of such a considerable venue? An unexpected comparison often pays off: how similar is the writing in sex advice columns in Cosmopolitan and Playboy? How does the New York Times frame and tell stories differently than the UK Guardian?

2. Your paper could take a dense text and explicate it. How about the avant-garde writings of George Saunders, Lydia Davis, Alain Robbes-Grillet? You could write about a single text (which means you'd have to know it well and have a thesis about it) or a genre of fiction. What's typical in the writing of contemporary "realist" fiction - Updike, Oates, Richard Russo? The "transgressive" style of writers like B.E. Ellis, Martin Amis, Douglas Coupland, Irvine Welsh, Chuck Palahniuk? Compare Edith Wharton to Henry James? Norman Mailer to Hemingway?

3. If that kind of topic seems big, you can write about a single work, of course. Let's say it was Updike's Rabbit is Rich. Updike continues the adventures of Harry Angstrom, disappointed ex-high-school basketball star, in this third volume. He shows us the 1970s, Angstrom's mixed-up sexuality, his middle-aged apathy and relative wealth, his inability to be happy with what he has. His goal is apparently to show that his character doesn't learn life's lessons, unlike your typical - say - Dickens character. How does he use style to do this? Your paper summarizes a view of the book other critics have found reasonable. You're not trying to do a fresh reading of the book. Then you look at key passages. You need to find an idea with an element of surprise. Is Updike more of a moralist than we think? Is he mocking Rabbit or presenting him objectively? What does style tell us about how we should understand this important work?

Good idea to pick something you already know well. Offbeat choices are good, because you don't have to deal with everyone else's opinion. Dense or difficult prose is good. Have an idea and run it by me, well in advance. Start way ahead of time. Due 26 Oct.