Megan Little's Instructor Page

Here are the areas we'll be talking about on the Geertz essay. You will choose one of these for FP1.

How do you close read a text? First, identify areas of density. These can be striking or strange or rich or peculiar, areas with figurative language and creativity, areas where something different happens than you would expect, or where something seems to be inferred just below the surface. Next, SLOW DOWN. Spend time looking at and thinking about an area of density. Look closely at the word choice, the tone. Are the sentences long or short? Is the imagery dark or light, positive or negative? Does the author spend a lot of time expanding upon a single detail, although it's not perfectly clear why? Then, dialogue with the author (or character). Ask them questions: why did you write it this way? Why did you make those choices? What the heck do you mean by saying we're all spiders in webs?

We practiced doing this in class today. I identified several "dense" areas in our reading for today, and, in groups, the class worked on these areas. Here's what we've learned about Geertz in this process so far:

He is critical of the tendency to create a "universal theory" that purports to explain everything about human behavior--whether it be Marxism, psychoanalysis, or evolution. We need to be more modest about what we're doing when we study culture--which is, basically, looking at how human animals occupy "webs" of meaning they themselves create. This means doing more than creating lists to categorize different observed behaviors; we must also look at what these behaviors mean in context, such as the various meanings of a wink. This is the difference between thin and thick description, and between explanation (and the listing of scientific "operationalism") and interpretation.

There's lots more, but this is as far as we got today. We'll continue figuring out what the heck Geertz is up to next time! (Please read the next two sections of the essay, through section VI, and identify one "dense" area to share with the class.)

We had some technical glitches in class today, but the Forum should be up and running. Be sure to post your introductions before our next class. I also asked the class to get the course packet and read the first few pages of the Geertz article. It's a hard piece to start with. But it will also be something we return to again and again and again. It introduces the link between literature and ethnography that is the core premise of this class and gives us some background on the close reading practices of anthropologists. It's also a very beautiful essay, rich with metaphor and compelling examples. It will take some effort, but the rewards are well worth it!

Welcome to Literature and Ethnography! Click here to read more about this class. During the first couple days of class, we'll go over what this course is about, I'll show you where all the materials are on this website, and I'll also cover all the boring policies and requirements. We'll also do a couple short exercises on close reading--the most important skill we'll be practicing in this course, one that seems to bridge the disciplines of English and Anthropology.

For the first week of class, please buy the course reading packet at Jenn's Copy Center (south location), and your books from either the Co-op or online: Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, Zora Neal Hurston's Mules and Men and Their Eyes Were Watching God. (We won't be reading these books until the second and third units, so there's time for shipping.)

The first reading we'll be discussing is an excerpt from Geertz's Interpretation of Cultures, in your reading packet. We start on this text the second class meeting, so please get your packets as soon as possible!

Here are links to some videos on YouTube regarding a parallel debate to the Confederate statues--debates about the Confederate flag.

A trailer from a movie on the confederate flag

John McCain

Mike Huckabee

Manor High School visited as part of the SPURS program on Monday, and we debated issues related to Affirmative Action. Although this is certainly a different question that the debate about the confederate statues, there are obvious parallels that we can talk about in class.

In a collaborative writing workshop here on the class forum, we will respond to each other's informal paper 5 by disagreeing directly with what your partner says. We'll do this to practice a couple rhetorical moves. One is disagreeing with somebody in a productive, respectful, and generative manner, as we read about in our course packet. Another is helping your partner come up with concession and refutation moves, which is the same thing as "planting a naysayer" discussed in your course packet.

This week, we start digging into the second case study of the year: the debate about the Gender and Sexuality Center's funding, hate crime legislation, and the QSA report. While these are three distinct areas, they have strong interconneted themes that we'll explore. We'll also start thinking about what makes for good evidence.

Jim Warren will come talk to us this week about the SPURS program. Jim is a recent graduate of the Rhetoric PhD program at UT and is the Director of the SPURS program.

This week, we're finishing up the paper for case study 1. Click here to download the peer review form.