tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5425514987715337437.post1372916255492326970..comments2024-03-26T22:47:45.276-07:00Comments on Intro to Critical Reading: Immediate ChangeAdamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5425514987715337437.post-52413287246827641712011-02-21T15:01:33.082-08:002011-02-21T15:01:33.082-08:00Hello Adam! I just had some quick questions after ...Hello Adam! I just had some quick questions after looking over your suggestions so that I don't make the same mistakes in future assignments.<br /><br />After reviewing your comments, I just have to say that although I agree completely, I am was a bit confused on exactly what direction I was supposed to take this revision towards. I originally chose this essay to revise because after reading the comments in the original blog entry, I wanted to further develop Whitman's passionate attitude towards Democracy and exactly what "war" he mentions in Song of Myself. In order to do this, I used his own personal experience and interaction in the actual war itself. However, I was a bit confused how whether or not the newly revised essay had to pertain to the original essay topic or if it could take a complete different direction. This is why I also felt that the Marcuse analysis didn't exactly feel suitable. <br /><br />Because my original intent was to show the relationship between Whitman's Song of Myself and his passionate attitude towards democracy, I kind of just ‘threw’ in the Marcuse analysis. To be honest, Marcuse was a difficult read for me and I have a large difficulty really grasping his ideas without any extra help, which is why I try to not dabble as deeply into Marcuse’s work. However because I felt I needed to relate the revision back to the original topic, I decided to relate Marcuse’s greatly contrasting views on democracy to that of Whitman’s. I intended this to show how unique and truly empowering Whitman’s opinions were as opposed to Marcuse’s weary belief that democracy is an answer at all.<br /><br />I guess what I’m trying to ask is if our revisions had to still relate and respond to the original topic of the blog entry or if we are allowed to take it in a completely different direction. Perhaps a different blog entry would have been a more appropriate revision choice. Thanks for your help.Georgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09960351962609687320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5425514987715337437.post-22009110872277906582011-02-21T04:46:26.219-08:002011-02-21T04:46:26.219-08:00This essay begins with a long summary of some aspe...This essay begins with a long summary of some aspects of whitman's life and career, or rather of his life in relationship with his career. None of this is properly cited, although it is clear where it's coming from. The real problem with this material, though, is it's totally unclear what you're trying to do with it, or where you're trying to go with it. What argument does it help you make? What end is it serving? When you're writing (at least when working on a final draft), you need to have some *end* in mind - I don't see that here.<br /><br />Now, the idea of somehow contrasting some part of Whitman's ideology, especially in how it related to the civil war, to some part of Marcuse's ideology, is a fine one. But your discussion of Marcuse is so weak that you don't accomplish anything along those lines.<br /><br />Relevant fact from class: Marcuse was an important wartime official in the United States, serving in the agency which was the precursor to the CIA. He had his own war, and his own ideology both fed into it and emerged out of it. A *careful* reading (I see zero citations to Marcuse's text!) of *One-Dimensional Man* in light of this fact would have done a lot for you.<br /><br />Your general, vague claims about Marcuse (somehow a member of the "very next generation", although he died almost a hundred years after Whitman did, as a "critic of democracy" might be true or false, depending on how you define democracy and how you analyze Marcuse's text - but you don't analyze Marcuse's text at all.Adamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5425514987715337437.post-47779822249249047692011-02-20T20:53:30.851-08:002011-02-20T20:53:30.851-08:00The background history on Whitman and Song of Myse...The background history on Whitman and Song of Myself was actually interesting and explained some of his viewpoints, I'm just not sure how that relates to a comparison to Marcuse. The intro paragraph and the following four paragraphs had no mention of him so it suprised me when you brought him up. <br /><br />I also find it a little bit hard to pinpoint your argument, I think your intention was to compare and contrast Marcuse and Whitman's opinons about democracy but it got lost in all of the history about Whitman. I think if you had started with your argument (about their opposing feelings towards democracy) and then used the relevant Whitman history as supporting evidence it would have been a lot more clear.Kat Fesenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13476139960279086747noreply@blogger.com