The blog will be open for posting and commenting until Sunday, December 8 at midnight.
Here and in Canvas.
Also: next Tuesday, November 26, will be an optional scansion workshop in class. Students desiring reinforcement of the methods of scanning lines
(marking accents, dividing into feet, naming feet),
which will be required for the poetry paper, can attend that day for help and practice.
Hello Scansion Experts,
There is new/reiterated information about your collaborative project in Canvas and above under the Assignments tab.
You need to bring a strong draft of the thesis statement for your drama paper TOMORROW, 11/5. See assignment for more details.
Can’t get enough of Baudrillard and similacra? This is pretty clear.
Special thank yous to Adrienne for planning (and silverware), to Rachel for the best potluck contribution, to Ashton for bringing the DVD, and to Tedward for valiantly taking home all leftover food so no one else had to carry it.
Confession: I did not expect to like the DiCaprio/Mulligan version at all. But I did. A lot. It’s gorgeous, of course. And both Gatsby and Daisy were significantly more human in this version–reinforced even in simple ways like the fact that Nick repeatedly called Gatsby “Jay,” which is not true of the novel or Redford/Farrow movie. As a result, Leo-Gatsby seemed more vulnerable, his carefully constructed world on a much shakier foundation. I had loved Redford-Gatsby, but he is a cardboard man, and Leo-Gatsby showed the work it took to be Gatsby. And Mulligan-Daisy was both much more likeable and more awful, since her guilt for Myrtle’s death is more profound if she isn’t simply a twit.
Still struggling with how I feel about the Nick-in-a-sanitorium invention. And with the combination of explicit information about the 20s for an ignorant American viewing public being carefully woven into the film, only to be juxtaposed with radically anachronistic elements (not the music– I liked that much more than I anticipated).
Both Toms stink. Bruce Dern-Tom is not nearly enough of a “brute,” to use Daisy’s word. And Joel Edgerton-Tom is not believable as old money– would Tom Buchanan ever wear dirty polo clothes to a dinner with guests? No way. Very interesting difference in George Wilsons, one of whom is so beaten down and lost and the other of whom is a man ready to kill.
It has already been well established that I can find a phallic symbol anywhere. But please, people: Nick and Gatsby on the porch with a huge white column between them (Redford version)?? The sharing of one cigarette?? Etc. etc. Don’t even get me started psychoanalyzing Gatsby’s wombish swimming pools, in which he meets his death.
Lastly (maybe): why did Leo-Gatsby say “old sport” to rhyme with “Colbert Report”? That was awkward.
Friday, September 27
approximate times: Redford/Farrow at 7:00, DiCaprio/Mulligan around 9:00
NEW INFO: The 9:30 section has successfully argued for extra credit opportunities here. To get such credit, you MUST write a 500-600 word response/analysis (not a review or summary). You may focus on one or both films. I strongly encourage you to join us for our event if you can, but if you have to work or have other commitments, you may watch the film(s) alone and still submit an analysis for extra credit.
Extra credit on both this and Miss Firecracker
should be submitted before Fall Break.
People, Sam noticed that my syllabus said to drop the url for your applied theory post into the Bridge assignment. I meant, of course, the applied theory assignment. I will be grading these this weekend if possible and will look for problems, but if you put yours in the wrong place, resubmit under the right assignment, please. Syllabus is now updated. My apologies.