Analyze, Connect, Explain is my intro class on analysis, where we focus on generating ideas about what we read, watch, and listen to in class. I introduce some of the most common and enduring topics they'll encounter in literary analysis, like family, gender roles, right versus wrong, heroes and villains, food, and culture. Students practice writing down what they think, without the added mental burden of making their writing grammatically correct or following a formal structure.
I started teaching this class in June 2020 as one of the classes I developed as a result of social distancing restrictions, and have been thrilled with how the online platform helps students become better writers quickly. Students who in the past might have spent 30 minutes worriedly staring down at a blank sheet of paper can now see others' ideas as they write them down in real time on the shared document. They can spark to an idea based on that and join the flow. No big deal, just writing down ideas as they come, the way we do. This is how the best idea generators help the ones who can't do as well, just by serving as an example. And the students who come in as the strongest writers? Well, they will learn valuable lessons too.
Take, for example, this thrilling, gorgeous writing a student produced last week. (We were watching The Cowboys, a John Wayne movie I use as the wrap-up to the unit on age-old topics):
"In The Cowboys, it is evident that the bandit wields the firearm in his duel against Mr. Andersen, which grants him a lethal advantage. The pistol is held in front of the rodent-like excuse of a man, held by quaking hands, though perfectly capable of squeezing the trigger. The bandit wants Mr. Andersen to retrieve the belt from the ground and hand it over. An impermissible act of humiliation. Mr. Andersen would not deign to, no matter the risk. That immoral filth behind that trigger could very well view etiquette as something beyond his scope, and not practice any tenet of it. But the bandit abstains, at least pro tem.
It is realized by both that this was no way to properly duel. The firearm is removed from the fight. Both men are now unarmed but for their fists and feet. To commence the duel, first there must be the exchange of verbal blows. Petty insults adorned with sharp, acidulous invectives. But nothing cuts beyond the skin."
What could this student need to learn about writing? you might ask. Well, so far, this is beautiful, glorious summarizing. The longer this summarizing goes on without a point of analysis or argument, the more worried I as the teacher reading it become. I do see the student has the beginnings of a purpose, based on the style and tone of the summary: he is examining the machinations of the fight, which can become the basis for analyzing the typical escalation of an altercation and the thinking behind it. But he has yet to be able to put it into words in his own head well enough to put it on the paper. And in fact, the student does appear to get stuck summarizing. Here is how the writing continues:
"No way could this mere exchange of language determine the victor. Soon the skirmish progresses to physical blows, each party delivering while receiving. Blood begins to spill, deep gashes and wounds appear on the bodies of both men. But the physical discomfort is mere nothing in comparison with the anger, the cordial loathing. Only one victor would walk away.
Mr. Andersen finally manages to attain the upper hand. Seizing an opportunity, he smashes his opponent’s head against the trunk of a large oak. The bandit is temporarily paralyzed. Mr. Andersen does not hesitate to repeat that same attack. More bloodshed now, the bandit is nearly unconscious. But alas, how it is a pity that Mr. Andersen does not pummel his opponent enough. After the third strike, the bandit’s still-conscious body is flung to the ground.
Never had that obnoxious firearm taken part in the skirmish until now. The bandit grits his teeth, having bore an insult he did not think he could bear. The muzzle is pointed right at Mr. Andersen’s back. But that timing is not opportune. The bandit wants Mr. Andersen to stare at the dreadful weapon that will deliver to him his death.
Mr. Andersen is no fool. He knows what the bandit wants of him, and he vows not to succumb. But he knows as well the alternative. Bleak prospects loom ahead.
The bandit is impatient. He will wait no longer. The gun recoils from his grasp as it fires. Mr. Andersen cries out but for a moment, then staggers, wounded but still standing. Another recoil, another deafening blast. Mr. Andersen struggles to negotiate his steps, but still manages to. A third shot fires. Then a fourth. And at last, Mr. Andersen can take no more."
See, there comes a point where the writing devolves into pure summary. Whatever the student intends as his argument, some of this summarizing would need to be cut from the finished essay.
This is how sometimes, good writing can mask a student's other writing issues. This student has an uncommonly good memory and vocabulary, which masks his rather common problem with analyzing. Furthermore, the other students in the class, who are looking to this student as an example to emulate because he uses such a big vocabulary, can learn by observation how to separate the wheat from the chaff, at any level. We'll be discussing just that in next week's class.
Comments