/lit/ - Literature

[op No.1295390]

so i've been charged with a quest: write a five paragraph theme argumentative essay about poe's "the raven."

i can't deal. i am shit at this argumentative essay crap. i need to... say something about the theme, so i've gathered. and it needs to be argumentative, so it needs to be something that folks can (at least in theory) disagree on, or something...

but what the fuck am i supposed to be doing? i mean, yeah, i get the poem, but this "what is the really really for real DEEP meaning and shit" type shit is what gets me.

i'm not asking for anyone to do my homework, i just wondered if one of you literary minded folks might be able to at least get my brain working in the proper gear of "academic wankery."

[Anonymous No.1295399]

You can argue anything in fucking poetry.

Just reread it until a thought comes into your head, and defend the shit out of it. Pull it out of your ass if you have to, that's what any other poetic analyst does.

[Anonymous No.1295401]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Raven#Analysis

You could start here, maybe. Also, check sparknotes.

[Anonymous No.1295404]

You don't need to wank it. Just make a claim. That's all argumentative means: I think this and this because a, b, c. It doesn't even have to be a good interpretation as long as you can show how you got it.

[op No.1295410]

>>1295399

so... seriously just make some likely meaningless statement and defend it to the death? jesus fucking christ this is why i hate academics.

>>1295401

yeah, that's the first thing i did. thanks for the suggestion though. :) i'll check out the sparknotes thing.

[Anonymous No.1295420]

>>1295390

Easy dude. Just make the Raven be a metaphor for something. Literally pick any topic and just say it is then find a way to twist the poem into what you want it to be and then be aggresive in the paper and cite something about poe's life to back you up.

Instant B+

[Anonymous No.1295425]

homosexuality

[Anonymous No.1295426]

>>1295410
It doesn't need to be a meaningless statement. You can read the poem over and over and come to the conclusion that a certain of the poem meaning hinges on a particular word or phrase and then provide support for that. Obviously when you decide to write something meaningless, then it's meaningless, but if you write about what makes the poem effective to you and defend your viewpoint, it isn't meaningless is it?

[Anonymous No.1295447]

*a certain meaning of the poem

my bad I'm tired

[op No.1295452]

>>1295426

i was just referring to the idea that much of this literary analysis is, effectively, meaningless. you make a statement about a work and defend it. in the end it's pointless since it's all opinion and the only thing that really matters is "did you enjoy it or not?"

remember 'fahrenheit 451'? you know how everyone "knows" it's about censorship? well, it's not. it's about the death of intellectualism from the rise of television. but everyone is so hung up on reading so deeply into shit that they pretty much ignored what bradbury flat-out told everyone the story is addressing.

that's where my problem creeps in. i'd like to think that i'm a reasonably intelligent person, but a wall comes up when i'm forced to extract meaning from something. sure, the poem is all about grief and suffering and the narrator's decent into madness, but so what? does there really need to be three pages written about it? what is anyone gaining from this?

[Anonymous No.1295459]

>>1295452

if everyone thought like you, we'd still be in the dark ages, you lazy-minded prick

[Anonymous No.1295469]

>>1295452
Intuitive reasoning and themes are what the author intended to portray, if the author is any good at what he does. But, there could still be implications that the author may or may not have consciously intended. Fiction or any form of literature means to imitate or invoke a certain aspect of the life we know, so if the author did a good job at doing this, it wouldn't surprising if there are many other connections that can arise.

[Anonymous No.1295472]

>>1295452
It's about what you can find in it. Or if you're a student of the different critical schools then it's about what it shows about society or whatever their schtick is.

There's always more beneath the text. One of the great things about poetry is that the language is usually open-ended, setting it up for a massive range of interpretation.

[op No.1295485]

>>1295459

people read too far into shit, they start thinking that imaginary people in the sky are making it rain. next thing you know we have religion ruling over everyone, killing free thought with a "wwjd?" mindset.

it was the people that started thinking about the world in more practical terms that got us out of that, cupcake.

>>1295469

i know. and you're right. i'm just a bit put off by this class and i suppose i'm being needlessly combative to the concept.

seriously, thank you to everyone who has been trying to help me get in the correct mindset for this paper. :)

[Anonymous No.1295488]

>>1295485
But what happens when you "read too far" into religion?

[op No.1295491]

>>1295488

i don't. its pretty obvious that it is a set of rules made for scared little hairless monkeys to explain shit that science hadn't figured out yet. i believe i was around 8 years of age when this occurred to me.

[Anonymous No.1295495]

>>1295452
The short answer to your problem with criticism is quite simple. Engaging texts with new readings, and then writing about those discoveries, is what makes you a better writer and thinker. Also, writing about literature doesn't just mean you must focus on a structural or formalist approach. Poe's poem, for instance, can be looked at in many ways. You don't just need to focus on what you may think is literary wankery. You could write about Poe's life and how it coincides, you could take a New Historicist approach and discuss just how history allowed Poe to write his poem, you could discuss the poem's publication history or how the piece fits into it's social, political and cultural context. You could also try, of course, the formalist approach and do a close reading, but that is not all there is.

[Anonymous No.1295500]

>>1295452
I'm a bit with you on this one. It is basically pointless to try to analyze a poem/book/whatever since there's no way to tell if you got it right, unless the author confirms that you're right.

I can make the most half-assed claim or just interpret the text I've read to have no deeper meaning than what the text says and I'd still be as wrong (or right, if you want to see it that way) as some random professor of literature or whatever.

I might not be able to present my view as good as he can, but we'd be 100% equally wrong in our conclusions unless the author says that one of us is right, and then we'll have to debate wether the author is lying or not.

[op No.1295502]

>>1295495

if only i had those options. alas, i have to write an argumentative essay about the poem's theme(s). that's it. i have to pull three pages out of "it was spooky, yo!" but i'll try... honestly, i think just having a little bitch-fest with you guys has helped prep me for this.

[Anonymous No.1295514]

>>1295488
"Reading too far" is a relative statement that takes reference from the popular consensus of those who have analyzed the text.

For example, there could be a perfectly sane and reasonable intellectual that is incredibly literate and has personally built upon logical parallels between other texts and the context of history, and come to a deduction that is completely rejected by their peers.

Why? Because their paradigm has vastly widened into an understanding that his peers can not possibly conceive without following through all the layers of reasoning he has developed.

Whether they are right or wrong depends on how many publications they can write arguing their point and how well established their reputation already is. However, these skills are completely independent of critical thinking.

as for a real life example of someone who overcame this dilemma, see pic >>1295491

[Anonymous No.1295520]

>>1295500
I'm a bit with you on this one. It is basically pointless to try to analyze a poem/book/whatever since there's no way to tell if you got it right, unless the author confirms that you're right.

The author's function, as Foucault has explained, has very little to do with verifying and particular reading. What if there is meaning underneath the text that the author did not intend, but is still there? Criticism is not exactly about being "right." This is the incorrect mindset to go in with. Criticism is about finding unique readings and using logical assertions and evidence to back up your claims.

I can make the most half-assed claim or just interpret the text I've read to have no deeper meaning than what the text says and I'd still be as wrong (or right, if you want to see it that way) as some random professor of literature or whatever.

If you make a half-ass attempt this text will more than likely be exposed for the garbage it is. There is a reason why not everyone passes their PhD oral exam. If your argument is void of any logical procedure then you are not necessarily deemed "wrong," but just a bad thinker.

I might not be able to present my view as good as he can, but we'd be 100% equally wrong in our conclusions unless the author says that one of us is right, and then we'll have to debate wether the author is lying or not.

Your mistake is your presupposition that the author still controls the text once another is reading it. Just so you know, if an author reads his own text, even just after writing it, he will be a new reader and the text will appear new to him -- different from when he/she wrote it and read it in the first place. If an author claims you have the wrong interpretation fully knowing you have logically argued your claim then the author has simply underestimated his text's ability to convey meaning. You're not wrong, but you can be a bad thinker.

[Anonymous No.1295535]

>>1295502
You can read the theme in terms of the history, in terms of the society, in terms of other authors' texts, in terms of cultural modes, in terms of the literary movement, in terms of publication history.

A thesis, crudely put, is broken down into two parts: you have an observation and then a "so, what?" part. The thesis must be arguable. So you can say that Poe's theme is X which can be evaluated in terms of Y, yet a new reading would posit X as being evaluated by Z.

The "yet," or "but," or "however," or "although" is the most important part to the thesis because this will give you the argumentative nature that must be present.

[Anonymous No.1295546]

>>1295520
>Criticism is about finding unique readings and using logical assertions and evidence to back up your claims.

And it's still entirely subjective, which makes an argument between two readers entirely pointless. Me arguing my interpretation of text with you is about as giving as me trying to convince you that my favourite type of food is better than your favourite type of food.

If it's all about subjectivity no opinion or interpretation can be more valuable than another.

>Your mistake is your presupposition that the author still controls the text once another is reading it. Just so you know, if an author reads his own text, even just after writing it, he will be a new reader and the text will appear new to him -- different from when he/she wrote it and read it in the first place.

I'll agree with you on this part, it's more to the point than my bit about "lying", but it's 05:30 in the morning over here, so I'm a wee bit sleepy.

[Anonymous No.1295552]

>>1295535
I think this post breaks the assignment down into a workable form for a literary novice. There is no right or wrong to what you need to do, just find a theme in the poem in which you can logically draw parallels to support your claim. As long as you show some critical thinking and are able to back up your idea, you will get a good grade. You're just being lazy and don't want to spend time analyzing Poe's work for whatever reason.

[Isabelle Huppert "Joyless Twat" !!lYVA4YXz75M No.1295554]

>>1295452

>i was just referring to the idea that much of this literary analysis is, effectively, meaningless. you make a statement about a work and defend it. in the end it's pointless since it's all opinion and the only thing that really matters is "did you enjoy it or not?"

Sigh.

[Anonymous No.1295555]

>>1295546
I should add that ironically, my bit about the futility of arguing about entirely subjective topics probably does include discussions like the one we're having, which means that I, to follow the arguments I wrote in the previous post, am wasting my time.

Now isn't that a fun thought?

[Anonymous No.1295563]

>>1295546 And it's still entirely subjective, which makes an argument between two readers entirely pointless.

Not true, literature can have multiple meanings or themes (intentional or not), and 2 people can debate an issue without attempting to find an absolute truth. If you need to be argumentative you're goal is more about supporting your claim than it is about finding a theme that everyone can agree on.

[Anonymous No.1295573]

>>1295563 you're

ugh that's embarrassing. let's pretend this post is an edit.

[Anonymous No.1295579]

>>1295563
supporting your claim against what? there is nothing that can even in principle assail it. Its an arbitrary reading, subjective. You have as much need to support it as you have need to support the moon.

[Isabelle Huppert "Joyless Twat" !!lYVA4YXz75M No.1295586]

>>1295579

Oh, you're a troll. Of course.

8/10, actually. Well done.

[Anonymous No.1295599]

>>1295555
Well, i guess I'll share my attitude towards this dilemma.

You've established that placing value on any idea that is subjective in nature is futile. However, that doesn't mean opinions are any less important than others. I accept the fact that I have my own biases, and you have yours, however, I believe there is value in understanding your logic.

Gaining a new perspective certain matters is another exercise in achieving academic intelligence. New ideas can form and it may change your current understanding, not necessarily agreeing with the opposing opinion.

In a mathematical analogy, a subjective topic is like an equation with many variables, and thus many possible results.

By adding historical context, parallels in other texts, the author's perspective, and other opinions, you get more equations to work with to create relations between variables, resulting in a new, possibly narrower set of solutions.

This is a lot of effort and, perhaps instinctively, we place values on opinions so that we don't waste our time based on our own perspective and that which is popular.

[Anonymous No.1295600]

>>1295579
The reading is subjective, but you're missing the part where you need logical evidence to support your idea. You can't just say "The theme is BLAH because I read it and that's what I think", you need to provide supporting evidence -- which can open yourself up to criticism on whether or not your idea makes any sense.

If you just start making random claims, then of course there's nothing to debate because your claims are meaningless. When you tie the theme to reasonable evidence that shows the theme makes sense then you are essentially adding meaning to your argument. If critique and analysis of literature consisted solely of people making baseless claims then nothing would mean anything and you would have a point, but it doesn't happen like that (as far as I know).

[Anonymous No.1295607]

>>1295599
I think we're on to something here. There's a failure in the education system where teachers don't apply logic to literature, it's always some nebulous and esoteric thing that can make it hard for logical people to grasp. Granted, writing is an art form so there is plenty of room for subjectivity -- but I believe we can still apply certain principles that make the subject easier to grasp.

[op No.1295610]

alright, folks. you've all actually been a big help. i'm working through a rough outline of what i'm going to write and, with the help of this cute blonde in my class who just gave me a call out of the blue to help me sort through some ideas, i think i have it nailed down.

now the only problem is ignoring the fact that i want to fuck a married chick in my english class.

[Anonymous No.1295614]

>>1295600
Okay, I'm new here, but why do you need to establish a "theme"? honestly what does that do?

[Anonymous No.1295642]

>>1295614
I was under the assumption that OP had to analyze 'The Raven' and come up with an overarching theme, AKA: The really DEEP meaning and shit.

For the record, I am pretty much a giant bullshit artist so take everything I say with a grain of salt.

That could be difficult because I am a pillar of salt. I wrote a book that ends in 'poo-tee-weet?'

[Anonymous No.1295661]

>>1295607
Oh god thank you. This is exactly my grievance as a student.

There is a fundamental flaw in how the current educational model views and teaches the major subjects not limited to English. I could go on for days, but the current system is like an assembly line made to produce at minimum, a literate individual with basic skills in mathematics, which I feel is inadequate in this day and age. Skill (and only skill, not application) in writing and in math can be achieved through a lesson and constant practice.

However, all the rest can't be achieved the same way. Learning at this point requires personal effort and critical thinking in order to understand and conceptualize history, literature, and certain sciences. These skills can't be attained in a single lesson, but emerge through personal endeavor. If education were to support this better, people will become better, more independent learners.

Learning itself is a different skill, the ability to come to an understanding in less time and effort. Education only does one thing, and provide a set time and expected effort. There is no aspect of skill, and the approach to achieve a student's effort is by punishment over mistakes.

Sorry, I had to get that out, I'm not happy with my current academic life.