Hollis Robbins > Spring 2008 Courses > Literary Trials > Paper #2 >
Share
Paper #2
Paper #2, Due Friday, May 2, Noon, Turnitin.com
Our friend M.E. Grenander, in “The Heritage of Cain: Crime in American Fiction” (Annals, AAPSS, 423 Jan 1976), suggests that while detective stories end with the alleged criminal being caught, serious literary fiction spends a great deal more time on the trial, where legal guilt or innocence is established with long, sometimes dramatic speeches. Consider Book Three of Native Son OR the court martial of The Caine Mutiny. Both texts feature a Jewish defense attorney—a kind of outsider figure. Answer one of the following.
1. Even if you have already made up your mind about the extent of the reasonability of Bigger Thomas’s actions, what role does the trial in Native Son play in solidifying or complicating your view of how much he is to blame (for either death or his actions afterward) and how severely he should be punished? What kind of job did Boris Max do? Whatever your view of Bigger’s guilt or your view of the death penalty, look closely at a particular moment in Max’s argument and explain in detail how it supported your initial view or caused you to waver a bit. Draw upon previous books we’ve read to enhance the discussion.
2. Compared to the other Captains (and Kings) we’ve looked at, what kind of Captain is Queeg? Is Maryk’s mutiny reasonable? What kind of job did Barney Greenwald do? How do you think Maryk (and the others) should be punished?
This paper should be 6-8 pages in length and incorporate your skills in reasoning, analysis, and interpretation.
A good paper will reflect your capacity to think logically and reflectively, to analyze critically and constructively, particular in the context of competing legal and moral claims presented in both texts. Please pay particular attention to questions of law, analytical reasoning, and textual analysis: that is, quote particular lines to the text and look at them closely. Discuss how both Wright and Wouk structured their novels so that the outcome could be considered both reasonable and unreasonable.
Your paper should also reflect your ability to understand and appreciate differing moral viewpoints; to make carefully considered, well-reasoned decisions; and to make a mature assessment of one’s own abilities, beliefs and values. Finally, a good paper is one which expresses your thoughts and feelings coherently and persuasively
All papers should be double-spaced, numbered, with your name on every page. Neatness and excellence in punctuation, spelling, and grammar should always be a goal.
REMINDER: All written work should be your own. This means that either: A) you are telling me what you think, or B) you are telling me what you think about what someone else thinks—which means you will tell me where you found this person’s opinion, when and where he/she expressed it, and how it is related to your own opinion. You may embrace someone else’s opinion, but you may not pass it off as your own. This is called plagiarism and it is wrong.
Our friend M.E. Grenander, in “The Heritage of Cain: Crime in American Fiction” (Annals, AAPSS, 423 Jan 1976), suggests that while detective stories end with the alleged criminal being caught, serious literary fiction spends a great deal more time on the trial, where legal guilt or innocence is established with long, sometimes dramatic speeches. Consider Book Three of Native Son OR the court martial of The Caine Mutiny. Both texts feature a Jewish defense attorney—a kind of outsider figure. Answer one of the following.
1. Even if you have already made up your mind about the extent of the reasonability of Bigger Thomas’s actions, what role does the trial in Native Son play in solidifying or complicating your view of how much he is to blame (for either death or his actions afterward) and how severely he should be punished? What kind of job did Boris Max do? Whatever your view of Bigger’s guilt or your view of the death penalty, look closely at a particular moment in Max’s argument and explain in detail how it supported your initial view or caused you to waver a bit. Draw upon previous books we’ve read to enhance the discussion.
2. Compared to the other Captains (and Kings) we’ve looked at, what kind of Captain is Queeg? Is Maryk’s mutiny reasonable? What kind of job did Barney Greenwald do? How do you think Maryk (and the others) should be punished?
This paper should be 6-8 pages in length and incorporate your skills in reasoning, analysis, and interpretation.
A good paper will reflect your capacity to think logically and reflectively, to analyze critically and constructively, particular in the context of competing legal and moral claims presented in both texts. Please pay particular attention to questions of law, analytical reasoning, and textual analysis: that is, quote particular lines to the text and look at them closely. Discuss how both Wright and Wouk structured their novels so that the outcome could be considered both reasonable and unreasonable.
Your paper should also reflect your ability to understand and appreciate differing moral viewpoints; to make carefully considered, well-reasoned decisions; and to make a mature assessment of one’s own abilities, beliefs and values. Finally, a good paper is one which expresses your thoughts and feelings coherently and persuasively
All papers should be double-spaced, numbered, with your name on every page. Neatness and excellence in punctuation, spelling, and grammar should always be a goal.
REMINDER: All written work should be your own. This means that either: A) you are telling me what you think, or B) you are telling me what you think about what someone else thinks—which means you will tell me where you found this person’s opinion, when and where he/she expressed it, and how it is related to your own opinion. You may embrace someone else’s opinion, but you may not pass it off as your own. This is called plagiarism and it is wrong.
