ENG 331: Edition Critique and Recitation

There are two parts to this assignment, both to be delivered at a one-on-one meeting with me at my office in JHB 812 (see below).

PART 1 (25% of the total assignment grade):

RECITE, IN PERSON AND IN REAL TIME, 24 TO 32 LINES OF A CLASS TEXT WE HAVEN’T READ YET

Browse through the readings we will not discuss in class until after this assignment is due (see the course schedule) to find any 24-32 line passage that catches your eye. Commit it to memory and practice reciting it, over and over. Then, at your one-on-one meeting with me, recite the passage aloud, from memory, with as few mistakes or omissions as possible (ideally, none!). You will be graded primarily on the accuracy of your recitation, and secondarily on how clearly your reading communicates basic comprehension of the words you are saying. You can opt to recite any lines — monologue or dialogue — but I won’t be able to prompt you with cue lines during your recitation.

You can stumble and start again as needed without any penalty to your score — but you must complete a recitation of at least 24 lines within 4 minutes at a maximum (this should be more than twice the time you’ll need!), so if you delay too long and reach that time limit, I’ll have to grade only what lines have gotten done at the 4-minute mark.

You will not be graded on your acting! But you should try to act the speech well if you can: I’ll offer the top 3-6 performances the chance to perform again in front of the whole class, and will give extra credit to any of those students if they take me up on that offer.

PART 2 (75% of the total assignment grade):

TALK TO ME FOR 7-8 MINUTES ABOUT A PROPOSED CHANGE TO, AND RESULTING CRITIQUE OF, A CLASS EDITION WE’VE READ SO FAR

Browse through the password-protected ENG 331 Early Text Collection — I will share the password in class (and only in class) at the beginning of Week 3. Try comparing some of those early texts/transcriptions to the corresponding class readings. As you compare, look for specific differences between the class edition and its source. You’re looking in particular for some element of the source text, in its early printing, manuscript, or transcription, which the class edition gets wrong, or doesn’t get quite right, or flattens, or reduces unnecessarily.

To prepare for this assignment, you must (a) identify, and make the case for, a specific correction in ONE of the class editions we read, where that edition corresponds to one of the “secret collection” texts(no other texts allowed!), that would make the class edition truer to, or a better communication of, the original early text. From there, you must (b) work fully through the deep, complex ramifications of your small correction, especially in relation to what the editor of the class edition has identified as the edition’s purpose or rationale (which you can usually find in the editor’s introduction to that edition, if there is one) — that is, to critique the edition, by means of a close study of one of its details. (If your correction does not have any such deep, complex ramifications, then go back to the source and find a new, more meaningful, correction.)

For this assignment, importantly, you must make sure you understand what you are looking at, including all relevant symbols and abbreviations, in each of the various resources you may choose to consult — which means you will have to seek answers on your own to the particular questions that arise in your research. You will almost certainly make use of the OED Online for this assignment — make sure you know how to use and understand this crucial resource (and if you do not, either meet with me or use the OED’s built-in guides to educate yourself). When critiquing class texts, be sure you thoroughly understand the relevant explanations of the editors’ rationales, if and when they explain them in the edition.

From there, you have to speak to me for 6-8 minutes in a way that convinces me of the validity of the correction and that educates me about, and argues for, the deep, complex ramifications of that correction. You can do this by means of a traditional short argumentative essay if you wish (if so, you can just read the essay directly to me or have me read it to you; 700-850 words should take about 6-8 minutes). But you don’t have to. I recommend that you try to just talk to me for 6-8 minutes, to make your case informally (informal doesn’t mean disorganized! bring notes!) — for this assignment, I’ll be grading you on how convincing your case is, not on how formal or “academic” you sound. No bells or whistles, please: use your whole 6-8 minutes to actually focus in on the element of the text you’ve chosen. Practice at home and make sure you do not go over 8 minutes; if you do go overtime when we meet, I’ll have to cut you off. Bring with you a visual aid that will show me, in the original early text, the passage to which you’re referring; also bring a concise 40-100 word “proposed change” (try to use a style that would fit in well with the corrigenda page here). If you do not have a specific part of the early text to show, it is likely because the correction you’re proposing isn’t specific enough — reread the instructions above — but if you have an exceptional case, run it by me ahead of time.

You are aiming, with this assignment, to change permanently the way future students in ENG 331 will interact with the edition you’ve chosen. The top scorers on this assignment will have their corrections added to a list of corrections, to be shared with future students.‍ ‍

How you turn in your work (look closely — this is unusual for English classes!):

For this assignment, I require students to present their work in real time, at a one-on-one pre-scheduled meeting with me.

All students must pre-schedule a 20-minute time slot with me — appointments will become available by the third week of class (I’ll make an announcement in class); when that happens, using the menu bar at the top of this website, navigate to my Resources page and click on “One-on-One Student Presentations”. Click on the appointment link listed there and follow the prompts to make a reservation. That appointment is now your deadline. There will be no further submission of work, nor any further feedback, than what we exchange during our meeting.

Please read this just before you attend your one-on-one presentation meeting:

We’ve got 20 minutes together. As soon as you walk in, tell me exactly which line numbers, in which class play, you’ll be reciting. Give me a moment to find the place in our class edition, then begin your recitation. You have a maximum of four minutes to do your recitation (it should not take that long). After your recitation is done, I’ll quickly let you know which lines or words you missed, and I may provide just a little feedback for future reading aloud you may do (this feedback usually has nothing to do with your grade, but I offer it because many students find it useful).

Next, tell me exactly where, in one of our class editions, you’re proposing a correction. Give me a moment to find the place in our class edition, then begin your presentation. You have a maximum of eight minutes to make your case. I may ask questions during your presentation — if I do, I won’t count these diversions against your total presentation time.

(This is a tight schedule! But that’s the point: the challenge is to make a succinct, strong case for something very specific. If this were a traditional written midterm assignment, I’d allot 20 minutes to read and grade each student’s work; I opt instead to use that allotted time to create real communication with each student.)

Once your recitation and presentation are done, we’ll have the remainder of the meeting (at least 8 minutes but usually about 10), for discussion and feedback on your edition critique. Be sure you’re aware that this feedback session is the only feedback you’re getting from me: there isn’t any written follow-up, though I may give you a couple of handouts to take with you.

I will not assign any grades at this meeting; rather, I’ll assign provisional numerical grades after every five student meetings or so, then go back and review those grades repeatedly, to make sure all is fair, and to take the pressure off of the individual meeting time, so we can focus on real feedback on the craft of scholarly writing and thinking, and specifically on writing and thinking about early drama.

Possible modifications to the memorization, recitation, and reading aloud parts:

Some students may be unable to memorize and recite, or even to deliver their work aloud. Knowing your capabilities is your responsibility: you must decide in the weeks leading up to the assignment whether the memorization, recitation, and reading aloud is a reasonable possibility for you. Knowing the difference between challenging and impossible/inaccessible is also your responsibility: I encourage you to challenge yourself — and to leave room to surprise yourself (don’t say “memorization has never worked for me” until you’ve at least tried it a little!) — but only you can determine whether these elements of the assignment are truly inaccessible to you, and you must determine that ahead of time, not after the fact.

If you determine that memorization and live recitation is unavailable to you for Part 1, or you are otherwise unable to do Part 1 (for instance, if you must attend our meeting remotely, since Part 1 cannot be done remotely), then you must instead extend Part 2 of the assignment from 7-10 minutes to 10-13 minutes — and you must present that extended assignment as a formal, traditional argumentative essay (about 1250 words). Print out two hard copies of that essay and bring them to your one-on-one meeting; one of us will read the essay fully to the other, then we’ll talk about it afterward.

If you determine that reading aloud or otherwise speaking your argument aloud for Part 2 is unavailable to you, then you must present that extended assignment as a formal, traditional argumentative essay, print out two hard copies of that essay and bring them to your one-on-one meeting, and ask me to read it to you. Then we’ll talk about it afterward.