FINAL EXAM: MAY 7th @ 11:30

Remember, all revisions are due by Final Exam Day! That's Monday, May 7th @11:30. You must come to the Final Exam to take the exam--no make-ups are allowed, so be careful! 

For the Final Exam, be sure to bring all three books--Best American SF/F 2017, Superman: American Alien, and Station Eleven. I will give you an excerpt of a short article as the 'conversation' to respond to, and you will use your own ideas plus TWO of the books to assist you. This is your last chance to prove that you can write a well-balanced conversation paper that (a) introduces quotes properly, (b) documents quotes properly, (c) responds to quotes, (d) integrates primary sources (the article excerpt), (e) integrates secondary sources (the books), and (f) considers the Naysayer. 

Good luck! I enjoyed teaching the class this semester and hope you enjoy the long break to come! 

Final Conference Schedule for This Week (No Class Otherwise)

Below is the schedule for this week, but please let me know if you would like to reschedule. We'll briefly go over your paper, I'll give you your final grade (so far), and I'll tell you about the Final Exam. See you then! 

Wednesday                                        Friday

11:00         Miles                                11:00  Coleman

:10            Nathaniel                            :10    Japheth

:20            Stacy                                :20    Annabell

:30            Penny                                :30    Riley

:40            Amanda                             :40    Benjamin

:50            Joel                                   :50    Mitchell

12:00        Nathen                              12:00 Kelsey

:10            Jadeyn                               :10

:20                                                    :20

:30            Kayla                                 :30

2:00          Lizbeth                               2:00

:10            Halie                                 :10

:20            Kasandra                           :20

:30            Gabe                                 :30

:40                                                    :40

OR Thursday, between 10:00 and 12:00

Conversation Paper #2: Due Monday! And some links...

Conversation Paper #2: A Post-apocalyptic Education, Part II

In Chapter 46 of Station Eleven, Jeevan is discussing the subject of Year Twenty education with some friends. One of them remarks, “Does it still make sense to teach kids about the way things were?” And Jeevan’s wife, Daria, responds, “I suppose the question is, does knowing these things make them more or less happy?” (260-270). 

So there is where you come in: I want you to imagine that you’re designing the first college for the Post-Flu Age. Now that we’re in a new world, we can start over again, with a completely blank slate. We really get to decide what would make the new generation of students “more or less happy”—and what would truly educate them for the future. So what should an education look like in a “perfect world”? This is your chance to imagine what education should be and what it could be rather than what it is today.

Consider what works about the modern university, what should be preserved, and what seems broken. Discuss at least one thing you would KEEP from the past—either a class, a field of study, or a method of teaching, and at least one thing you would CHANGE—again, the same types of things. You should also identify the overall philosophy that you think a university should embody: is it simply preparing students for careers and employment? Or is it to make them more responsible and educated citizens? Or is to teach values, morals, and ethics? What would you want the new generation to remember about the past, and how much of their education would create their identity as human beings, Americans, Oklahomans, or whatever country, state, or culture you would want them to identify as. In other words, what would make them happy and able to live a productive, informed life with a minimum of regret and confusion?

REQUIREMENTS:

• You must use Station Eleven as an important part of your conversation, since you are literally in this world. Respond to specific quotes/ideas in the book.
• You should use at least THREE secondary sources (articles, etc.) to expand your conversation. At least one should occupy a ‘naysayer’ role. Quote from these articles and respond to their ideas.
• Should be at least 4-5 pages, double spaced.
• Due Monday, April 23^rd by 5pm

Some Links to Article that May Be Helpful:

* https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/blogs/technology-and-learning/read-robot-proof-if-you-only-read-one-higher-ed-book#.WtdULHa9KfY.email

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/12/us/holocaust-education.html

For Wednesday: Mandel, Station Eleven, Chs. 48-55 (finish the book!)

NOTE: We won’t have class on Friday, so Wednesday will not only finish our discussion of the book, but will be a last chance to discuss ideas for the paper (due on Monday). I’ll also give you a head’s up about the rest of the semester. We’re almost done!

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: In Chapter 49, the “Clarinet” admits that she finds Shakespeare “inadequate” to their situation, and when challenged to write something better, she starts writing a play of her own (which is later mistaken for a suicide note). Why might the Clarinet’s voice be an important naysayer for the Symphony, and an important voice for any culture? What might be the danger of only performing the past?

Q2: Why does Kirsten commemorate the men she killed as knife tattoos? For someone who doesn’t want to remember her past, and hopes never to kill anyone again, it seems a strange thing to memorialize. Related to this, why didn’t she want to tell Francois (the newspaper writer) about them?

Q3: Both Kirsten and the Prophet were about the same age when the Flu appeared. Both had similar experiences, reflected in the Prophet’s admission that “I have seen such darkness, such shadows and horrors” (301). And both, of course, are the “children” of Arthur—the Prophet his actual son, and Kirsten his stage daughter. So why did they turn out so differently? What saved Kirsten from becoming the Prophet, or someone like him? And what doomed him from becoming more like her?

Q4: Do you feel the novel ends with a sense of hope or a sense of loss? Do we feel that Elizabeth (the Prophet’s mother) was right when she said, “It always passes”? Can civilization come back from the brink? Or was it destined to be a faded memory or a myth of another world? Is the beauty of the past that it can really never return?

 

For Monday: Mandel, Station Eleven, Chapters 40-47

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: Why might an airport be an advantageous place from which to start a new civilization? Is it really a coincidence that the Museum of Civilization begins in the Severn City airport? How might the airport itself—and the people it—inspire Clark to begin collecting the Museum?

Q2: In the early days of the collapse, Elizabeth tells Clark, “I’ve been taking art history classes on and off for years...[and] you see catastrophe after catastrophe, terrible things, all these moments when everyone must have thought the world was ending, but all these moments, they were all temporary. It always passes” (248).  In this case, why might knowledge of history be important? What could it teach you, or even help you understand about civilization and survival?

Q3: In Chapter 43, Clark more or less explains why he collects seemingly useless objects for the Museum: “Consider the mind that invented those miniature storms...Consider the white gloves on the hands of the woman who inserted the snow globes into boxes...Consider the signature on the shipping manifest when the ship reached port...” (256). What is he getting at here, and why are these objects important to see and contemplate, even when some of them, such as an I-pod, no longer have any use?

Q4: The airport eventually establishes its own school, which teaches all the abstract wonders of the past, such as airplanes, the Internet, and maps: “The children understood the dots on maps—here—but even the teenagers were confused by the lines. There had been countries, and borders. It was hard to explain” (262). What ideas do we still teach our children (and college students) which no longer completely make sense in the 21st century, but are considered vitally important? Do you understand why they are, or like the teenagers at the school, does it remain a mystery?

For Wednesday: Mandel, Station Eleven, Chs. 27-38

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: In Chapter 31, Kirsten is being interviewed by Francois about the last night of civilization, when Arthur died and a “mystery audience member” performed CPR on his body. Kirsten remembers “he was kind to me. Do you know his name?” and Francois replies, “I’m not sure anyone does” (181). Of course, we know the answers, and have since Chapter One. Why might this be the point of the novel itself, as well as the meaning behind Francois’ interview and the Museum itself? What story are they all trying to tell?

Q2: In Chapter 38, August and Kirsten discuss the idea of parallel universes, where “a person could theoretically be simultaneously present and not present, perhaps living out a shadow life in a parallel universe or two” (200). Kirsten also imagines this as “like the successive planes formed when two mirrors reflect one another” (200). Why might the theme of parallel universes be an important metaphor in this book, or a concept which might have inspired Mandel to write her book the way she did?

Q3: In the book that Frank (Jeevan’s brother) is writing, there’s a line that goes, “First we only want to be seen, but once we’re seen, that’s not enough anymore. After that, we want to be remembered” (187). Why is being remembered so important to human beings and to civilization itself? How can something selfish become something selfess—or perhaps, simply beneficial to other people?

Q4: Instead of leaving the apartment with his brother, Frank decides to stay in the apartment and die. His reason, or as much as he gives, is because of the time he spent in the hospital “thinking about civilization. What it means and what I value in it” (183). Why does his love for civilization make him choose not to “survive”? What did he fear might happen outside the apartment—or in the future? In a sense, was he correct?

For Monday: Mandel, Station Eleven, Chs.20-26

 

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: In Chapter 24, Kirsten recalls the tuba player saying “The thing with the new owrld...is it’s just horrifically short on elegance” (151). What do you think he means by “elegance,” and why might this be an important (and overlooked) aspect of life? How does the Symphony offer a way for audiences to experience the elegance lacking in their own lives?

Q2: In the chapter about Arthur’s letters (and elsewhere), we learn about his early years, long before he became famous and many decades before the Georgian Flu. Why does Mandel take us back this far? What does Arthur’s early life have to do with the experiences of Kirsten and the Symphony? Why is his life important?

Q3: Dahlia, the lady Clark is helping with his corporate coaching, tells him that “the corporate world’s full of ghosts. And actually, let me revise that...a fairer way of putting this would be to say that childhood’s full of ghosts” (163). What does she mean by this, and how does it relate to the men and women in corporate America, according to her? Why does “childhood” haunt them? And what does this have to do with their work?

Q4: In a conversation between August and Kirsten, he says to her, “You ever think about [not traveling]? There’s got to be a steadier life than this?” to which she responds, “Sure, but in what other life would I get to perform Shakespeare?” (135). Since she was actually in a Shakespeare play before the pandemic, why does this life allow her to perform Shakespeare? Why does she think the end of the world gave her the freedom to act for a living?

Scissortail Extra Credit Questions

For the complete schedule of readings, click here: http://ecuscissortail.blogspot.com/2018/01/2018-schedule-of-readings.html

You can respond to one session below for extra credit (though you might want to go to multiple sessions so you can write about the one you most enjoyed). Be sure to answer the following 4 questions (just like our blog responses, except you have to do all 4!) in a short paragraph--a few sentences each. As long as you give a thoughtful, honest response, I can excuse 2 absences or 2 missed blog responses--or just give you extra points at the end of the semester. But remember, this is extra credit, so if you just give me hasty, one-sentence responses or try to BS about sessions you didn't attend, I can't give you credit. 

THE QUESTIONS

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? 

Hope to see you at the Festival! 

Annotated Bibliography Example

Annotated Bibliography Assignment

SHOULD HAVE AT LEAST 5 SOURCES! (you’ll only have to use at least 3 on your actual paper—but I want you to have more rather than less to work with!).

Van Ummersen, Claire A. "No Talent Left behind." Change, vol. 37, no. 6,

Nov/Dec2005, p. 26. EBSCOhost, 0

search.ebscohost.com.library.ecok.edu/login.aspxdirect=true&db=f5h&AN

=188 77547&site=eds-live&profile=eds-1allsu. Accessed 20 March 2018.

[Brief explanation of why the article was useful to you and it’s basic premise…]

Bauman, Dan. "Why Students Are Leaving Illinois in Droves - and Why It

Matters." Chronicle of Higher Education, vol. 64, no. 22, 09 Feb. 2018, p. 

24.

EBSCOhost,search.ebscohost.com.library.ecok.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=tfh&AN=128410085&site=eds-live&profile=eds-1allsu. Accessed 29 March 2018.

[Brief explanation, etc….]

Strauss, Valerie. “A University of Wisconsin campus pushes plan to drop 13

majors.” The Washington Post. 12  March 2018. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news.  Accessed 29 March 2018.

[Brief explanation, etc…]

Wyllie, Julian. “Students Want Faster Degrees. Colleges Are Responding.” 

         Chronicle ofHigher Education. 1 April 2018. 

              https://www.chronicle.com/article/Students-Want-Faster-                    

              Degrees/243008?cid=cp196. Accessed 4 April 2018.

[Brief explanation…]

Schneider, Carol. “An Efficient Education? Sure. As Long As It’s Good.” 1 April 

         2018 https://www.chronicle.com/article/An-Efficient-Education-

             Sure/243005?cid=cp196. Accessed 4 April 2018.

[Brief Explanation…] 

For Monday: Mandel, Station Eleven, Chs.13-19

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: Why do you think the author decided to name the entire book after Miranda's graphic novel? How does it seem to echo some of the 'real-world' issues of the future? Do you think Kristen and the others are aware of this? Or is just escapist entertainment for them?

Q2: The more we read, the more we learn that Arthur Leander is the "glue" that connects all the main characters together. What makes him such a significant and/or interesting character in the book? Why are people so drawn to him, even though in some ways he's a bit of a failure at the end of his life?

Q2: At one point Miranda tells her dog, "This life was never ours...We were only ever borrowing it" (101). What does she mean by this? How might this statement become important to other characters/moments in the book?

Q4: In Francois' interview with Kirsten, he tells her that he's created a library because "I believe in understanding history" (115). She seems unimpressed by this, saying that "everyone knows what happened." Why do you think he's taking the trouble to interview people for a newspaper that almost no one reads, as the head of a library almost no one uses? Does history matter if so few people are around to use it?

The Annotated Biblography for Conversation Paper #2 (due NEXT FRIDAY by 5pm)

NOTE: The assignment below is just for the Annotated Bibliography. I'll give you another handout for Conversation Paper #2, though it is basically what I wrote below. I just wanted you to understand the ultimate assignment so it could help guide your hunt for sources.

In Chapter 46 of Station Eleven, Jeevan is discussing the subject of Year Twenty education with some friends. One of them remarks, “Does it still make sense to teach kids about the way things were?” And Jeevan’s wife, Daria, responds, “I suppose the question is, does knowing these things make them more or less happy?” (260-270). 

So there is where you come in: I want you to imagine that you’re designing the first college for the Post-Flu Age. Now that we’re in a new world, we can start over again, with a completely blank slate. We really get to decide what would make the new generation of students “more or less happy”—and what would truly educate them for the future. So what should an education look like in a “perfect world”? This is your chance to imagine what education should be and what it could be rather than what it is today. So consider what works about the modern university, what should be preserved, and what seems broken. Discuss at least one thing you would KEEP from the past—either a class, a field of study, or a method of teaching, and at least one thing you would CHANGE—again, the same types of things. You should also identify the overall philosophy that you think a university should embody: is it simply preparing students for careers and employment? Or is it to make them more responsible and educated citizens? Or is to teach values, morals, and ethics?

THE ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY:

 

To help you do this, you need to do research since this isn’t science fiction—this is a big conversation going on right now. Many schools are drastically changing how education works, what classes are taught, and who teaches them. Find other voices to respond to, and put them in conversation with your own ideas and Station Eleven. To make sure you do this sooner rather than later, I want you to turn in an Annotated Bibliography, which is a list of 5-6 sources that you found through research to help you discuss this conversation. The Bibliography should list each source alphabetically (according to MLA format, or whichever you prefer) and then provide a brief 2-3 sentence explanation of why this article is useful to your discussion and/or what its main ideas are. DO NOT take this summary from the article’s abstract—be sure to skim or read the article yourself and explain briefly what the article is about. This is due in ONE WEEK on Friday, April 6th by 5pm. And yes, you can use the article we just discussed in class (but you don’t have to).

Example:    Strauss, Valerie. “A University of Wisconsin campus pushes plan to

                 drop 13 majors.” The Washington Post. 12  March  2018

         https://www.washingtonpost.com/news.  Accessed 29 March 2018.

This article is useful to me because it discusses the university’s argument for making a very controversial decision—scrapping most humanities majors in favor of more “lucrative” or “hands-on” career fields. Even though many claim this goes against the very fabric of what a university stands for (character building rather than mere job creation), the university feels that this will better meet “the state’s workforce needs.” The article also explains that this is part of a trend in Wisconsin politics which has tried to undermine a liberal arts education under Governor Scott Walker’s leadership.

For Wednesday: Mandel, Station Eleven, Chs.1-12 (pp.3-67)

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: On the Traveling Symphony’s banner, it reads “Because survival is insufficient.” Though we’ll find out later what this means, why do you think it’s appropriate based on what we know about the Symphony and the people who perform in it? Why isn’t survival enough?

Q2: In Chapter 10, the author writes, “People left the Symphony sometimes, but the ones who stayed understood something that was rarely spoken aloud” (48). What is it that they understood? And why don’t they speak it aloud? What is the reality of Year Twenty that makes the Symphony so important to the performers who stay?

Q3: What makes Shakespeare strangely appropriate for a group of traveling players in the second decade after the collapse? What connections does Mandel hint at between Shakespeare’s world and the world of this science-fiction “present”? In other words, why might people get Shakespeare even more than we do in a post-apocalyptic society (besides just the nostalgia factor)?

Q4: Why do you think the novel opens in the present with Jeevan’s experiences? What does he observe or reveal about the past that is important to the reader? In other words, why is he our first ‘hero’ in the novel? (Also be sure to note who he meets in the opening chapters as a child—and where we see her again!)  

For Friday: Tolbert, “Not by Wardrobe, Tornado, or Looking Glass” (pp.152-166)

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: Why doesn’t Louisa find the rabbit holes of other people interesting? What’s wrong with other people’s fantasies? (and how might this relate to why Langford left his own)?

Q2: Why do the Others invade the ‘real world’ and try to assimilate into jobs, work clothes, and TV shows? Why don’t they establish their own worlds and laws? Consider this passage: “They all wore business dress, and when the train stopped, they hurried off and into the street like any other group of commuters. The only difference was that they were smiling” (161).

Q3: Louise realizes at the end of the story that “now that she was elevated above her problems, literally, she could see the world for what it was becoming—something stranger than whatever could be on the other side of a single rabbit hole. Why would she want to leave this?” (165). Why was she unable to see this before? Why can the entire world be a rabbit hole if you look at it correctly?

Q4: Considering that this entire story isn’t real, and therefore can be seen as a metaphor, or a finger pointing to a different “moon” (remember our discussion on Wednesday), what might it mean that we all have our own “rabbit holes,” and that none of them are prisons...we can choose to exit and enter them at will? What might be the advantage of having a fantasy world that you visit¸ rather than live in?

For Wednesday: Beagle, “The Story of Kao Yu” (pp.206-222)

 

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: When Lanying is told of the judge’s solitary life and his relationship with the chi-lin, the narrator writes, “It is perhaps the heart of this tale that Lanying chose to believe one of these truths and to disdain the other” (212). What do you think this means? Why is it important to the story which one of these “truths” she didn’t believe? How might this explain what she does and says to the judge?

Q2: The writer Joseph Campbell once said, “mythology is the penultimate truth—penultimate because the ultimate cannot be put into words.” With that it mind, what does the chi-lin represent in the story that “cannot be put into words”? Why does it only come every few generations, and in this case, only to the court of Kao Yu? What makes him special?

Q3: Kao Yu’s retainers say of him, after his affair with Lanying, that “He is like a vase of pot that has been shattered into small bits, and then restored, glued back together, fragment by fragment. It will look as good as new...but you have to be careful with it” (217). Why is his “shattered” by this experience? And what do they fear will break him to pieces again?

Q4: Why does Kao Yu save Lanying at the end of the story from the chi-lin? After all, he knows she’s a liar and a murderer and a thief; why does he want her to escape justice for her crimes? Is it as simple as he’s in love with her? Or is there something else that makes him alter his ideas of justice?

Conferences for This Week!

Remember, if you  haven't signed up for a confernece, please come at one of the available times below, or e-mail me for another time. This is all we're doing this week, so if you miss your conference, it's like missing two classes! All conferences are in my office, HM  348, right next to our classroom. See you then!

Wednesday

11:00: Amanda
11:10: Matthew
11:20 Nathaniel
11:30 Stacy
11:40 Nathen
11:50 Penny

1:00 Lizbeth 
1:10-1:50 OPEN

2:00 Coleman
2:10-2:30 OPEN

Thursday

11:00: Kelsey
11:10-:20: OPEN
11:30 Benjamin
11:40 Halie
11:50 Kasandra

Friday

11:00 Joel
11:10 Annabell
11:20 Riley
11:30 Mitchell
11:40 Kayla
11:50 OPEN

1:00 Japeth
1:10-2:30 OPEN 

Conversation Paper #1: The Monsters Are Real!

I: In “The Real Question,” the alien known as Mxyzptlk says, “we are gods. You are just puppets. As long as there’s one of you, there’ll be a hundred of us.” By this he seems to mean that we can never tell all of our stories (there are too many of us), but we can tell one of their stories, since they can live in a million minds for a thousand years. In this way, the science fiction world of aliens, monsters, and superheroes can represent in an immediate, universal way the struggles of identity we all experience. We don’t have to tell our story...we can tell Superman’s story, since his alter ego is us—the awkward, coming-of-age outsider in a world we don’t understand. 

 Q: For your first conversation paper, I want you to introduce people to the conversation: why do superheroes, aliens, and monsters help tell the story of our identity as teenagers, adults, Americans, or “others.” We all feel like we’re on the outside at some point in our lives, as none of us are truly normal. We might be from another country, speak another language, have strange abilities and talents, or seem to have none of the right abilities and talents. An alien trying to make it in America is a great way to explore these very human difficulties, particularly when this alien has extraordinary (but secret) powers that might make others fear or distrust him. Similarly, even being a teenager is to be an “outsider,” since adults distrust you, fear you, suspect you, and tell you what to think. What ‘powers’ do teenagers have that adults forgot they even had...and how do you use these to become a ‘superhero,’ at least to those you love? 

 R: You must use at least TWO of the chapters from Superman: American Alien in your discussion. Remember, you’re introducing the idea that superheroes, aliens, and monsters can represent real-world identity to people who have probably never read a superhero comic. So what do you need to explain to them? What do they need to know and see? Use two of the stories to show us why Superman is relevant to a modern American teenager or adult. ALSO, I want you to use at least one of the following stories by Dale Bailey in Best American SF/F, “Teenagers from Outer Space” and/or “I Was a Teenage Werewolf.” The goal is to make these works contribute to a conversation about ‘coming of age’ in our society through the metaphors of “others”—superheroes, etc.  

Length: At least 5 pages, double spaced (though you can do more)

Format: Be sure to quote passages from the comic and at least one of the stories according to MLA format or another you prefer (but be consistent). You must cite page numbers and include a Works Cited page

Due: Monday, February 26th by 5pm [no class that day]  

For Wednesday: Bailey, “I Was a Teenage Werewolf” (pp.286-303)

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: In the previous story, the town prefers to see Johnny “as a hero who’d saved humanity from the ascension of triumphant alien overlords” (55). How does this story also prefer to believe a convenient narrative of heroism/safety? Who is the hero? Who is the villain? What truths or taboos is the town hiding from?

Q2: Who is the narrator in the story? Even though he/she doesn’t introduce themselves as Nancy did, how can we tell who they are? Why do you think he tells the story from this perspective rather than giving the narrator a name and a character? How does it change the story?

Q3: The narrator claims that the anonymity of the werewolf gave them a certain power in their community. As he/she explains, “if we were both sovereign and slave to our terror, our teachers and parents were slaves alone. As long as no one knew who the teenage werewolf was, it could be any one of us” (296). Why does this give them power over their teachers and parents? How does this bond the teenagers together as a group?

Q4: The ending of the this story is surprising and a bit shocking: why do you think Bailey ends the story with all the adults being eaten/murdered? Is the point of the story to say “teenagers are evil and can’t be trusted”? Or does he have another intention? Why make every teenager a werewolf and every adult a victim?

For Monday: Bailey, “Teenagers from Outer Space” (pp.27-55)

 

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: How might this story be a version of Superman if instead of one alien, a hundred aliens descended on Smallville? How can we tell that both Bailey and Landis (Superman: American Alien) are sharing the same conversation about the acceptance “others” in the heart of America?

Q2: The entire story is told from Nancy Miller’s viewpoint, and by her own admission, “much of what follows is reconstructed from second-hand reports, with all the bias and self-interest inherent in such accounts” (29). Do we trust her version of events? Is there anyplace where it seems she adds her own bias or opinions into the mix? Or does she help us see the limitations of others’ biases and values?

Q3: Writing about Johnny (who is proclaimed as a hero after the aliens leave town), Nancy says, “Maybe he thought he was innocent, courageous, whatever...People do it all the time. People want to be blameless. People want to be brave” (47-48). Who is the hero of this story? If this is a traditional aliens vs. humans story, who “saved the world”? For the reader, who is most brave and selfless? And why might the people telling the story later not see this?

Q4: How might this story be a metaphor for women growing up in American society, especially in the 1950’s? What might Bailey mean that every woman has to choose between “freedom” and “slavery,” or “aliens” and “duty”? Why might he also explain why Joan makes the decision she does?

For Friday: Landis, Superman: American Alien, “Eagle,” “Angel,” and “Valkyrie”

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: In “Angel,” Pete is arguing with Clark about the future of Superman and what role he intends to play in society. He finally tells him, “Superman will never be able to retire.” What is it that Pete sees that Clark doesn’t here? Why is Superman bigger than one hero or one alien or one costume? (and related to this, why should he start talking to the other people who are  “like him” in the world)?

Q2: In “Eagle,” Clark reflects that “It feels good to help people. No, I’m not afraid…what’s there to be afraid of?” What hasn’t he figured out yet about being a super hero, and how do the next three stories show him why there’s a lot to be afraid about? Also, why is a superhero more than simply saving lives and feeling good about yourself?

Q3: “Valkyrie” is the only comic that doesn’t have the name of a bird. What is a Valkyrie, and why is this significant to the comic? Why end the bird metaphors with this title? What changes in this comic that we don’t see completely (or as developed) in the others?

Q4: Each one of these comics is about taking a large step into adulthood from the illusions (and delusions, sometimes) of childhood. If we stop reading this as a superhero comic and consider that it symbolizes what we all go through in this process, which comic relates the most to our journey? What can Superman teach us about our own identity as we become a new, more responsible person capable of saving the world day in, and day out?

For Monday: Superman: American Alien, “Parrot” and “Owl” (and the two mini-comics between them)

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: “Parrot” seems to allude to the fact that parrots can imitate human speech and ‘pretend’ to be something they’re not. While Clark Kent is literally pretending to be Bruce Wayne (Batman) in this comic, what other identities is he “parroting”? What does his one-night fling with Minerva teach him about finding his “true” self (or does he)?

Q2: The style of these two chapters is dramatically different from one another and from the pervious comics, as “Parrot” is bright and humorous, while Owl is angular, fuzzy, and tense. Why might Superman in particular be so adaptable to all these different stories and approaches? It might be harder, for example, to tell a Batman or Wonder Woman story this way.

Q3: In “Owl,” Clark Kent meets Superman’s arch-rival, Lex Luthor, and has a one-on-one interview with him (though of course Luthor doesn’t know who he really is). During this interview, Luthor tells him “People aren’t important. Not as a whole...That’s why you see people throughout history rising above the masses. Those are the changers. Those are the doers. You are not important. You’re not. I am.” How are we supposed to read this speech? Is it true? Is he helping Clark to understand/embrace his own identity? Could these words ever be expressed by a superhero? Or are they fundamentally a sociopath’s point of view?

Q4: In the short comic after “Parrot,” which is entitled “The Real Question,” the alien known as Mxyzpltlk breaks down the “fourth wall” and talks directly to the reader. Why are comics able to do this more effectively than a traditional novel? And what does he mean by the sentence, “We are gods. You are just puppets”?

For Wednesday: Landis, Superman: American Alien (“Dove” and “Hawk”)

NOTE: Read the first two stories/chapters of the book, "Dove" and "Hawk" for Wednesday's class. If you're confused about where to stop, you can stop reading where you see the full page of Clark on a boat with a with a bunch of women and champagne glasses.

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: Discuss how the art in one of the chapters helps to tell the story, and is also appropriate for that story. Why would this story be much different if we just had the words? Discuss at least one specific panel or page in your response.

Q2: What does Clark mean in “Dove” when he tells his father, “When you break something, you’re not just breaking the thing, you’re like...hurting everyone who made it the way it was”? Why might this also say something about Clark’s relationship to his powers and his mysterious identity as an “alien”?

Q3: In class on Monday we discussed how modern heroes, and especially super heroes, are often more “gray” than “white,” and how they often resemble the “dragons” in fantasy stories. How does “Hawk” discuss the thin line between being a hero and a villain for Clark? According to this story, what makes him a hero rather than a “monster”?

Q4: In-between the two chapters, there is a two-page illustration called “The Castaways.” How does it connect the two stories without “telling” us outright? Why can  single picture do this even more powerfully than a paragraph or an entire story?

For Wednesday: Van Eekhout, “On the Fringes of the Fractal” (pp.194-205)

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: According to the story, Stat is “determined by a complicated algorithm that factored in wealth, race, genealogy, fat-to-muscle ratio, dentition, and dozens of other variables from femur length to facial symmetry to skull contours. It was determined by the attractiveness of one’s house. The suitability of one’s car” (195). Why is this satirical, and what specifically might it be satirizing in our own world?

Q2: A fractal, as the story explains, “is a pattern that repeats itself. Magnifty it, and you’ll see the same pattern as if you’d reduced it” (200). While the world they live in is clearly a fractal of interconnecting neighborhoods and divisions, what does the title mean—“On the Fringes of the Fractal?” Why might being on the fringe of something help you see reality more clearly—and when do our characters do this?

Q3: Why is the “future” of this story dominated by generic names and places? Why is everything a Peevs Drugs and a Peevs 24-Hour Whatevers—or in the next town, a Wiggins Drugs and a Wiggins 24-Hour Whatevers? Also, why do they seem unaware that another town—with the same stuff, but different names—exists just down the road from their own?

Q4”: When they ultimately find the city, they find not a thriving metropolis but a wasteland—“a sad place, a lost place, a haunted place” (202). Why, then, do they like it so much and never want to leave? What would this city represent to someone who had spent their entire life in Peevs or Wiggins-land?

For Monday: Wolven, “Caspar D. Luckinbill, What Are You Going to Do?” (pp.267-285)

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: If the narrator of this story is introducing us to his world, how does he want us to see it? What kind of world does he think he lives in? What clues tell us the narrator (and the author’s) true feelings about “the future”?

Q2: When trying to figure out why Caspar has been targeted by mediaterrorism, his friend explains, “Computers don’t need explanations...Computers just do what they do” (270). What might this suggest is the greatest threat in an increasingly automated, technological civilization? (and why should we be afraid ourselves?)

Q3: What do you think was the point of the mediaterrorism campaign against Caspar? Was it trying to make him more aware of the world outside his creature comforts? Was he really responsible, in some way, for the terrors inflicted in the FRF? Or is there another explanation for targeting him?

Q4: At a few points in the story, Caspar learns to appreciate the silence of trees. As he remarks, “Only here I can be at peace, amid the indifferent, ignorant trees. They don’t recognize me, trees. They don’t care” (279). Besides not showing him images of violence, why do trees become an important symbol in this story? Note that the story ends with a vision of metaphorical trees of data.