For Friday: Scissortail Creative Writing Festival

REMEMBER, no class on Friday: instead, you could go to the Scissortail Creative Writing Festival which starts at 9:30 and continues at 11:00, 2:00, 3:00 and 7:00. Here is the entire schedule for Thursday-Saturday, so you can find a time that suits you: http://ecuscissortail.blogspot.com/2016/01/2016-scissortail-schedule-of-readings.html

If you attend a session, answer ALL FOUR of the questions below for an extra credit bonus. This can take the form of missed responses, missed classes, or simply extra points on your final grade. The amount of responses or absences I forgive is based on how detailed/engaged your answers are. For example, if you respond to each question with a 1-2 sentence response and I can't really tell if you even attended a session, I might not be able to give you any credit. But if I can see that you put some thought into it and really responded to what you observed at the reading, I can excuse up to 3 absences or 3 missed responses. So take notes as you watch so you can answer these questions with thought and detail. You can bring these responses to class on Tuesday. 

THE QUESTIONS (answer all 4):

Q1: Which of the authors interested you the most and why? Why did you respond their poems and/or story and why might you read more from this author?

Q2: Which piece (if any) did you find difficult to follow or understand and why? Is is simply not your kind of material, or was it too vulgar, or depressing, or confusing? If you liked all the pieces you heard by each writer, answer this instead: how did each author's reading work together as a whole? Why did these 3 (or 4) writers work well together? Was there any common themes or ideas that seemed to link them together?

Q3: Discuss briefly how the authors presented their material: their reading style, introductions, gestures, and other details that helped you appreciate the stories/poems. In other words, how did the authors help you understand their work through their performance?

Q4: How did the audience react to these authors/works? Did certain works get more response than others--and if so, why? Did people laugh? Were they completely silent. Did people seem to 'get' these writers, or did some leave them scratching their heads? How could you tell?

For Wednesday: Yang, Saints (pp.1-103)

[Sorry for the delay--I posted these questions but they got saved as a 'Draft' instead. Just realized now it didn't post!]

Q1: How does the figure of Joan of Arc parallel, in some ways, the relationship Bao had with the First Emperor of China? Is this a purely 'good,' and positive influence on Four-Girl's life? Is becoming a 'saint' her way of becoming a 'god/hero'? 

Q2:What is Four-Girl's relationship to Christianity throughout these pages? What compels her to become a "secondary devil"? Why wouldn't someone like Bao and his followers understand this? 

Q3: Besides the obvious juxtaposition of Joan of Arc/The First Emperor (Q1), what other echoes do we see from Boxers to Saints? Where do we see other themes repeated, or slightly embellished, in Four-Girl/Vibiana's story? Why do  you think Yang is at pains to do this?

Q4: Since Yang dedicated this volume to the "San Jose Chinese Catholic Community," what kind of portrait of the saints and martyrs of the faith does he offer? Is this a pious, even dogmatic work compared to Boxers? Or is he just as critical of them as he is of the Boxer Rebellion? Where might we see one view or the other? 

For Friday: Yang, Boxers, pp.125-250

Answer TWO of the following...

Q1: Bao is attempting to save China and be a hero like the characters in a Chinese opera, but the First Emperor of China takes exception to his methods. How does the Emperor seem to define heroism and how does this change Bao’s path? Does he become more or less ‘heroic?’

Q2: What lesson is Bao forced to learn about the “secondary devils” during his crusade? Why does this make it much more difficult to save China and fulfill his destiny? Also, how might this tie in with some of Akutagawa's stories, notably "O-Gin"? 

Q3: The novel introduces the very Chinese concept (discussed in ancient works such as the Tao te Ching) of the Yin and Yang, the male and female principles of the universe. What do various characters say about this force, and how does it affect Bao’s relationship with Mei-Wei?

Q4: What do you make of the name the rebellion takes, “The Society of the Righteous and Harmonious Fist”? Can an armed revolution be both “righteous” and “harmonious?” Can you follow romantic ideals with the edge of a sword? Can terrorists enforce a rigid morality without doing evil themselves? Where do we see this tested in the book? 

For Wednesday: Yang, Boxers, pp.1-120

Answer TWO of the following...

Q1: As a visual medium, comics are uniquely qualified to help readers imagine far-off places or unfamiliar moments in history. How does Boxers help us ‘see’ through the eyes of another culture, and particularly, a Non-Western one? What ideas or concepts make more sense through the comic than they would in a traditional novel?

Q2: Despite the historical aspect of Boxers, the work is also a classic (fictional) hero narrative. Where do we see the story of heroes such as Gilgamesh and Rama informing Bao? In other words, how does Yang incorporate an ancient story within more modern historry?

Q3: Like the last Akutagawa stories, Boxers discusses the presence of Christianity in the Non-Western world. How is this portrayed by Yang in the opening chapters? Is his approach similar to Akutagawa’s? How much of the Western criticism comes from the narrator rather than the author?

Q4: Discuss a passage where the images alone couldn’t tell the story the same way without the words. Remember how we added words to the wordless comic in class...how might Yang have done the same thing, and used words to help us see a very different story, or perhaps a much more effective one? 

For Wednesday: Akutagawa, “Under the Sword” Stories

Be sure to read the following 3 stories: “Dr. Ogata Ryosai,” “O-Gin,” and “Loyalty” and answer TWO of the following…

Q1: Two of these stories are unique for their mixing of East and West, Buddhism and Christianity. What side does Akutagawa seem to be on in each one (or in different ones)? Are these anti-Western stories, or does he use the West to criticize Eastern values and ideas? How can we tell?

Q2: “Loyalty” is a very Japanese story, as it concerns the elaborate ceremonial rites of etiquette that bind the various classes of society. Even death, in these stories, has to follow the proper procedure! Based on this, why might a madman be particularly troubling to members of this society? Do you feel Shuri is doing this on purpose; does he know what he’s doing?

Q3: Akutagawa’s narrators are one of his trademarks, particularly someone like Dr. Ogata Ryosai, who doesn’t really “get” the big picture. How do the narrators in one or more works inadvertently see ideas we might otherwise miss, or place a satirical spin on the characters or events?  

Q4: A very ‘non-Western’ attribute of each of these stories is the ending. Nothing necessarily dramatic or surprising happens at the end, and some of the stories lack what we would consider a compelling plot. Why do you think these stories are so minimalistic, more anecdotes than true stories? And why might the endings, which frustrate Western readers, actually be important to the story as a whole? 

Short Paper #2: A Hero of Our Time

The influence of a vital person vitalizes, there’s no doubt about it. The world without spirit is a wasteland. People have the notion of saving the world by shifting things around, changing the rules, who’s on top, and so forth. No, no! Any world is a valid world if it’s alive. The thing to do is to bring life to it, and the only way to do that is to find in your own case where the life is and become alive yourself” (Campbell, The Power of Myth)

For your Short Paper #2, I want you to step out of the ‘non-Western’ bubble and examine a hero or heroine you think is relevant to 21st century American culture. This figure should be fictional so we can read how his or her character, action, and origin represents values and ideas central to our culture. Remember, even the most universal hero comes from a specific time and place, and the more we peer into his or her origins, the more we can understand what this culture believed in. For example, Rama is literally a god, so his actions must represent the basic principles of Hinduism in a way that the average reader of the book could understand (and learn from). And don’t forget the “anti-hero/heroine”! Most of Akutagawa’s ‘heroes’ are of the anti-hero variety, especially someone like the painter Yoshihide, who represents specific cultural values through the ‘heroic’ creation of the Hell Screen.

PRESENTATION: Instead of writing a typical paper, I want you to prepare a handout for the entire class that addresses some or all of the following ideas:

• The hero/heroine’s origin
• The hero/heroine’s virtues or powers
• The hero/heroine’s symbolism (what he/she represents)
• The hero/heroine’s actions (what they do that can inspire us—or we can learn from)
• The hero/heroine’s universality: can anyone understand them, or is it more limited to a specific culture/time?
• The hero/heroine’s connection to our class: how does he/she relate to some of the characters we’ve met in this class?

You will then present this hero/heroine to the class using the ideas in your handout and at least some visual aid. This could be another handout, a powerpoint or Prezi slide or two, a video clip, You Tube, etc. Just make sure we can see some aspect of this hero to complement your discussion. Your presentation only has to take 5-10 minutes, though you can go a bit longer. The goal of this paper is simply to share your ideas with the class and generate a discussion about modern-day ‘heroes’ and their importance to our society.

DUE THE WEEK OF MARCH 7^th: We’ll sign up next week to see who presents on which day, but we will present on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.

For Wednesday: Akutagawa, "Hell Screen" (pp.42-73)

Answer TWO of the following...

Q1: How does “Hell Screen” share with stories like “Rashomon” and “In a Bamboo Grove” a very cynical view of human nature? According to these stories, why is there no fundamental difference between a thief, a painter, and a lord? Why might the moral of “Rashomon,” that “All I can do is become a thief” be the moral for all of these stories?

Q2: The painter, Yoshihide, claims that he can only paint what he has personally observed with his own eyes—and nothing else. This often leads him to observe rather gruesome spectacles, such as rotting corpses and chained prisoners (and at the end of the story, something even worse). Responding to criticisms of this practice, he responds, “Other painters are such mediocrities, they cannot appreciate the beauty of ugliness” (48). Despite his depraved character, why might this be a very “non-Western” sentiment, and a valid philosophy of art itself?

Q3: “Hell Screen” contains a curious doubling: both the painter and the monkey are named Yoshihide. Even though the monkey is named after him as a joke, in the story itself, it serves a larger purpose. What role does the monkey serve in the story, and how might it help us ‘see’ the true character of the painter?

Q4: The narrator of this story has a character all his own, as he tells the story in fits and starts, and makes commentary throughout. Why do you think he is so captivated by this story, and how might his manner of telling the story color how we read and understand it?