Final Post: Ending the Semester

Class,

The class is over--almost! I'm sorry we had to end the class on-line, though I appreciate how everyone adapted to the challenge, and still managed to do the reading and turn in thoughtful, fascinating responses! Though I missed seeing you in class every other day, and hearing our wide-ranging conversations, I still felt I learned a lot from you in these final weeks, and it certainly helped me deal with my own isolation. I was consistently impressed with this class and I hate that we couldn't end the class together--but again, I really enjoyed these last few weeks. 

Remember that your final paper (Conversation Paper #2/the Final) is due no later than Friday, May 8th by 5pm. I can't accept late papers since this is the very last day of Finals, and grades are due almost immediately afterwards. So please get something in at any time before that (I know some of you have already e-mailed me your papers). If you have any questions, please write me and we can discuss anything. I'm still here to help you, and even if you need something after the semester, I'll be 'here.' 

Thanks for a great class, and enjoy your summer. Hope to see you in the Fall,


Joshua Grasso

The Last Response--for Part 4 of In Cold Blood

No more questions!! But I do have a short response for Part 4 that you can post here as a comment, just as a way to round out our discussion, and to look ahead at the Final paper assignment (see assignment in post below this one). Remember, if you haven't e-mailed me your 3 connections between the books (which is Short Paper #3--really a list more than a paper) then please do so as soon as possible. Doing this will help you on the final paper, and it will also allow me to offer you some personal guidance before you start. Most people seem to have a good idea of where they want to go, but if you feel lost, never fear--I can help you!

After you read Part 4, "The Corner," or are still reading it, answer the following question as a 'Comment' (or you can e-mail it to me): 

Q: The Reverend Post, who attended the trial, said to the author that "Doc Savage [a kind of Superman figure from old books/comics] had the right idea...he had an army of trained assistants [who] kidnapped all the world's criminals and brought them to [his] island. And Doc Savage operated on their brains. He removed the part that holds wicked thoughts. And when they recovered they were all decent citizens. They couldn't commit crimes because that part of their brains was out" (306).

Do you think if this was possible (to find the 'criminal' part of the brain), we should force everyone to undergo this operation? Would we remove the possibility of evil or criminal behavior in everyone, or even just people who commit violent crimes? Should people be lobotomized for the general good?  Would it be worth risking making such people vegetables rather than leaving them to hurt or kill again--or even to spend their lives in prison? 

Capote, In Cold Blood, Part 3: "Answers"

These are technically the last questions for the class (and the book); I will post something simple for Part 4, but it won't be a standard set of questions. So be sure to get this last set to me by next week, since that's our last week of classes. ALSO--be sure to read the post about assignments below this one. Get me Short Paper #3 (really just an e-mail) as soon as possible, but no later than Monday! 

Answer two of the following:

Q1: We get conflicting stories about the murder and its motivations: Perry claims that Dick is the "sick" one, who wanted to rape Nancy and cover the walls with blood...yet Dick claims that Perry is the one who murdered everyone, while he wished he had turned the gun on Perry. Which story do you believe? Or neither one? 

Q2: Perry's sister recalls her brother, when drunk, exclaiming that "I happen to have a brilliant mind...and talent plus. But no education, because he didn't want me to learn anything, only how to tote and carry for him. Dumb. Ignorant. That's the way he wanted me to be" (185). Do you think Capote believes that killers like Perry are made this way? Are parents and society largely to blame? Was Perry a budding genius cruelly neglected by his father? Or was he always going to be a "natural killer"?

Q3: Perry believes strongly in fate, and much of the book seems to hinge on strange coincidences and events. For example, when the Las Vegas police pick up the pair, Perry had just picked up a box from the post office (from Mexico) full of his souvenirs--including the boots he wore during the murder. Do you think Capote is trying to manipulate his narrative (like Vladek did) to make things seem divinely inspired (remember the use of fateful numbers in Maus)? Is this real, or something that the author is trying to make us see?

Q4: Reflecting on the "answers" for the murder, Dewey says, "The crime was a psychological accident, virtually an impersonal act; the victims might as well have been killed by lightning. Except for one thing: they had experienced prolonged terror, they had suffered" (245-246). What do you think this says about the nature of evil? And how might this compare to the acts of torture and death we see in Maus? 

Video Lecture and Short Paper #3/Conversation Paper #2!

Be sure to watch the short video lecture on In Cold Blood, parts 1-2, since it sets up your next two paper assignments. Remember, this is what I would normally do in class to help you understand what to write about, so if you skip it, you might be a bit confused and you won't see some of the connections I want you to think about. Beneath the video, is the next two paper assignments, though they are linked. Read about it below and let me know if you have any questions!

Short Paper #3 and Conversation Paper #2

Your Short Paper #3 is an abstract, meaning it merely states what you are going to try to do in your Conversation Paper #2. In a way, it is your thesis and your basic pre-writing before you actually start writing the paper. This way, you know what you want to say from the beginning, and you can do more focused research rather than trying to figure it all out in the end. So it’s not even a paper, but basically an e-mail (see below).

THE ABSTRACT: I want you to e-mail me the response to this question: both Maus and In Cold Blood are ‘true stories’ about tragedies that happen in the middle of the 20^th century (between 1939 and 1959). List 3-4 similarities that each story shares in its approach to history—what it shows, reveals, explains, and tries to reveal about why horrible events occur to ‘normal’ people. In other words, when do you get moments of déjà vu when reading these books that make you go, “oh wow, I’ve read this before…the same thing happened in Maus (or vice versa).” This is due no later than Monday, August 27th (so you can start focusing on the CP#2 below). 

CONVERATION PAPER #2: Your conversation paper is going to take us through the similarities in your abstract to answer the question, “according to both authors, what went wrong in the 20^th century? How could such violent, criminal acts occur in civilized countries where people live normal, decent lives? What are the similarities between the Nazis and the Holcomb killers? What illusions about ‘real life’ do both books shatter, and why could this happen again in the 21^st century in our own back yards? What ‘truths’ do these books reveal about the nature of horror and why human beings continue to punish each other in unspeakable ways?”

In answer this big question, think about the following:

• The similarities between both works: how do they use history to reveal our own present?
• How do they use fiction to tell the truth we couldn’t otherwise see?
• What do they reveal about history that we didn’t know or were told wasn’t true (or simply weren’t told about)?
• What parts of the story are hardest for the authors to explain or write about? Why is this?
• People always say “those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.” If so, what is being repeated today? Or has history never stopped…are we still living in the same world as Maus and In Cold Blood?
• What characters do the authors want us to identify with the most and why? What can we learn from their story?
• What do other writers have to say about these historical events (the Holocaust, Holcomb) or the novels themselves? Think about naysayers or merely other voices at the table. Use them to help you discuss the conversation.

NOTE: Conversation Paper #2 is your final assignment, so I always meant to treat it as a final exam. Therefore, it will be due on the last day of Finals, FRIDAY, MAY 8^th

Capote, In Cold Blood, Part 2: "Persons Unknown"

Truman Capote on the set of the film, In Cold Blood 

NOTE: Be sure to do the first set of questions before this one (see previous post), so you don't fall too far behind. However, you don't have to turn these questions in until next week. Also, I should have your SP#2 assignments back to you by the weekend, so check your ECU e-mail! 

Q1: Shortly after the crime, Perry confides t Dick that "There's got to be something wrong with somebody who'd do a thing like that" (108). He says this several times, though Dick basically shrugs it off, considering himself "a normal." Is Perry expressing regret or remorse here? What does he mean by this, and how might it explain something about why they did it in the first place?

Q2: Mrs. Dewey, the wife of one of the investigators, asks her husband, "Do  you think we'll ever have a normal life again?" (105). This is a question many people are asking themselves today, in the wake of COVID and social distancing. Why are they worried that life will change and never be 'normal' again after one family's death? What has changed in their eyes? 

Q3: Why does Capote include several long letters from the people in Perry's life--his father and his sister, especially? What do we learn about him through these letters, and why do you think he kept them (esp. as they are often very critical of his behavior)? 

Q4: Dewey, the lead investigator, felt that "at least one of the murderers was emotionally involved with the victims, and felt for them, even as he destroyed them" (103). What made him think this, and why did their seem to be a personal motive involved in the killings? As far as we know, was this true? 

For Next Week: Capote, In Cold Blood, Part One (pp.3-74)

READ Part One, "The Last To See Them Alive," which is like one mega-chapter. It's a lot of reading, but it goes quickly and I'll give you plenty of time to respond. I won't give you another section to read until around Thursday or Friday. 

Answer two of the following:

Q1: Truman Capote is reconstructing the events leading up the murder based on interviews and his own intuition. He wasn't literally in the car with the killers to hear their conversation, and he never even met the victims. Do you think it's fair to write a fictional reconstruction of 'real' events like this? Or is it more like the manipulation of photos that we saw in Morris? Did it bother you--or did it help you understand the events?

Q2: For most people in the town, the Clutters were the perfect American family: successful, close-knit, and high-achieving. And while Capote doesn't contradict this portrait, what secrets did the family keep behind the scenes? What makes them less 'perfect' than appearances might show?

Q3: Why was Dick so drawn to Perry? As Capote depicts them, they're very different people, and at times don't even seem to like each other very much. What made them 'fated' to be together, in his eyes?

Q4: Writing about the town of Holcomb, Capote notes, "The inhabitants of the village, numbering two hundred and seventy, were satisfied that this should be so, quite content to exist inside ordinary life--to work, to hunt, to watch television, to attend school socials, choir practice, meetings of the 4-H Club" (5). Based on this, what makes Holcomb worthy of writing about in a book like this? Since most people have never even heard of it, why is a murder in Holcomb a national event? What makes Holcomb uniquely 'American'? 

Quick Response Assignment (to help with SP#2)

NOTE: Be sure to watch the video in the post below first. It will help you with your Short Paper #2 assignment, as well as this short writing. 

In a COMMENT, I want you to add words to each frame of the Spiderman comic below. Try to determine what story the pictures alone are telling, and then add words to change that story--help us see something different, more complex, or more humorous, or more surprising. 

Remember that when words and images come together, they can change what we see and make us tell a different story. McCloud, in his book Understanding Comics, talks about many of the word + image relationships, such as "Additive" (when words add something to the image), "Parallel" (when words and images are both telling different stories), and "Interdependent" (when words and images each add something important to the story, and complement each other). 

In your COMMENT, just write Frame #1: words... Frame #2: more words... Have fun with it and think about how words change pictures and tell different stories. This is what I want you to examine in Short Paper #2, so consider this useful practice! 

This is all you have to do for this week, other than e-mail me the Short Paper #2 assignment by Friday. For next week, we'll start reading Capote's In Cold Blood, our very last book. I'll give you questions and reading selections for that book on Friday. Good luck and let me know if you have any questions! 

Short Paper #2 and Short Maus 2 Lecture

I'm posting the Short Paper #2 assignment below, along with a short lecture to give you a little guidance and context for the assignment. These are the ideas I would normally show you and discuss in class, but for now, have to make do with a short Zoom video. Please let me know if you have any questions as a comment or via e-mail. There are no comments necessary for this video (this time), but be sure to answer the response questions in the previous post. Otherwise, start thinking about this short paper, due next Friday by 5pm (since we don't really have TR classes anymore). 

Short Paper #2: Words and Pictures

INTRO: For your Second Short Paper assignment, I want you to focus on how Spiegelman uses words and pictures together to change the meaning of his comic, adding context that we might not have seen or been aware of. Just like in the photos from Morris’ book, when you add words to an image, it changes what we see and how we experience it. This could make the picture more “true” or more “false” depending on what the artist wants you to see, or what the picture represents about history, people, etc. In a comic book, the pictures alone don’t tell the story, since they could tell many different stories. The words help us frame the stories in a specific moment for a specific meaning, even when they seem to push against the meaning of the images.

PROMPT: So for this assignment, I want you to choose TWO passages from the comic, one from Maus I: My Father Bleeds History, and one from Maus II: And Here My Troubles Began. A “passage” should be no more than a few frames, or a single page at most. Discuss how these two passages change when you add the words to the pictures. In other words, if you blocked out the words, why wouldn’t you ‘see’ this story or this idea? Discuss why he wanted us to see this, and how it complements some of the major themes of his novel and of the Holocaust itself. Be sure to describe the images so we can understand how the words work with the images: in other words, don’t just tell us what the words say. Think back to your first short paper, when you had to describe the photos from Humans of New York.

REQUIREMENTS:

• At least 2-3 pages, double spaced (though you can go beyond this)
• Only choose TWO passages, one from each part of the book (Maus I and Maus II)
• Describe images and cite the passages you use, using page numbers according to MLA format
• For example: In Chapter Three, “And Here My Troubles Began,” Vladek sees a man shot by a German soldier and reflects, ““The dog was rolling so, around and around, kicking, before he lay quiet. And now I thought: “how amazing it is that a human being reacts the same like this neighbor’s dog” (82).
• DUE FRIDAY, APRIL 10^th by 5pm via e-mail (jgrasso@ecok.edu)

For Thursday/Friday: Maus Part 2, Chapters 3-5

Be sure to finish Maus this week, and answer two of the following for Thursday or Friday (just no later than Friday). Since we don't really have class on Thursday, the questions don't have to be due then--but no later than Friday. I'll post the Paper #2 assignment along with a short discussion (also explaining the paper) tomorrow as well.

Answer two of the following:

Q1: Chapters Three and Four use photographs throughout, not just drawings of photographs, but also real ones, such as the one of Vladek at the end. How do these photographs add a unique layer to the story? What do they show us that no amount of fictional storytelling could manage? 

Q2: In Chapter Three, Vladek hassles Artie to take home a used box of cereal. When Artie refuses, Vladek responds, "I cannot forget it...ever since Hitler I don't like to throw out even a crumb." How much should we blame the Holocaust for the 'present' Vladek, who is often insulting, intolerant, and outright racist? Does Artie believe the Holocaust made him this way? Should we?

Q3: When Maus was first published, the New York Times put it on their bestseller list for fiction, which Spiegelman strongly objected to. He claimed it was "non-fiction," even though the editor told him, "when you show me a six-foot mouse, then I'll call it non-fiction." Based on your reading of the book, what category do you feel best represents this book: fiction? Non-fiction? History? Something else? Or should it just be called a "comic book"? 

Q4: What do you make of the interesting passage in Chapter Three, where a soldier shoots a prisoner for walking too slowly, and Vladek says, "And now I thought: how amazing it is that a human being reacts the same like his neighbor's dog." This not only destroys the animal metaphor (since the American soldiers are portrayed as dogs), but it also makes an interesting connection between men and animals. What might this say about the true danger of the Holocaust and of Nazi ideology? What makes people become dogs (or other animals)? What keeps us 'human'? 

Short Lecture on Maus and The Holocaust (see below)

At least once a week (but maybe twice) I'll post a short video lecture to add to the conversation of our reading. These lectures will bring out ideas I would have discussed in class, often using slides that highlight specific ideas and images. Hopefully they will add useful perspectives as you answer the reading responses and write the next short papers (one is coming up very soon!). This lecture is on being an eyewitness to history, and why that's so important for historical events that are quickly becoming ancient history. Watch below...

AFTER you watch the video, respond to the following question as a COMMENT on this post. Just click where it says "1 comment" and write your own. You shouldn't need to create an account to do this (but let me know if you have any problems).

THE QUESTION: Besides the Holocaust, what other historical event recent or distant, do you feel is in danger of being forgotten? Why should we never forget this event? Why, to you, is it so important? 

ALSO, don't forget to answer the questions for Maus (see previous post) Tuesday's class. E-mail me with any questions! 

For Tuesday: Maus II, Chapters One & Two

NOTE: I'm posting this a little early so you have time to read and think about it. I know it's hard to get started again, and for some of you, it will seem pointless to finish a class you don't even attend. However, we only have about a month left, and I want to get you all to the finish line, and also, to share these works and ideas with you. In many ways, Maus is the perfect work to read at this time, because it's about a man who survives the end of the world, and lives to tell about it. Our world isn't ending, but sometimes it might feel that way...so let's try to finish the semester, and I'll do everything I can to make it bearable and hopefully a little interesting as well.

ALSO, I'll be posting a short video tomorrow with some ideas to think about in regards to reading the second part of Maus. For now, however, here are some questions for Tuesday's class. But as I said in the previous post, you can either e-mail these to me on Tuesday, OR send me one e-mail on Thursday with both Tuesday and Thursday's questions. It's totally up to you. 

Answer two of the following:

Q1: Where do we see Artie wrestling with the ethics of writing a comic book about his father's life (and the Holocaust) in Chapters 1 & 2? What is he most worried about? Are his fears justified, or is it merely another form of guilt for not appreciating his father? 

Q2: What do you think Vladek most wants to communicate to Artie, or to the reader, in his story of the Holocaust? While he's obviously trying to make himself the hero (sort of), what else does he want people to understand about the reality of making it through Auschwitz? 

Q3: One of the most touching passages of these chapters occurs early in Chapter One, when Vladek gets new shoes and a belt for his friend, Mandelbaum. Why is this such an important passage in the book? What does it show us about the very 'human' element of the inhuman Holocaust?

Q4: Even though Spiegelman uses simplistic animal metaphors for the different people in his story, how does he attempt to humanize even the 'villains' in his story? What does he reveal about the nature of the various Germans and Poles who ran Auschwitz? If this is a book about the nature of evil, what might surprise us about the people who commit evil deeds? 

Welcome (Almost) Back!

First of all, I'm extremely sad that we can't continue our normal classes this semester. I had so much more I wanted to discuss with you and teach you--though, I think we can still salvage some of this virtually. However, it just won't be the same, and my only hope is that I'll see some of you again in the Fall in a future class. 

For now, here's what I propose to do with this course:

1. We're going to stick closely to our old TR schedule, so I'll post the first work this Thursday, and that will be due on Tuesday. And then the work for Thursday on Tuesday, etc. Same as always. 

2. I'll also post at least one short video lecture on the blog per week. These replicate the kind of information I would have given you in class, and will basically be a video of my head narrating over a Power Point or a handout. They will be short (10-15 minutes max), but will help you see things in the readings you might not otherwise get, or will help introduce key writing topics and ideas before a paper. I'll also give you a few in-class writing prompts this way, just as we did in class. This way, it will feel sort-of normal.

3. I'll also be posting our next short paper assignment on the blog very soon. 

4. All questions and papers should be e-mailed to me at jgrasso@ecok.edu or jgrasso91@gmail.com (either one is fine with me). Horace Mann is being locked at all times, so you probably won't be able to get inside the building. 

5. If you need to talk to me, feel free to e-mail me at any time. However, if you would rather talk in person, I can do a Zoom conference with you. If you've never used Zoom, it's free to install and very easy to use. 

Otherwise, stay tuned and PLEASE keep checking the blog, since this is our lifeline for the course. Everything will show up here in the next few weeks. Take care and I'll talk to you soon!

--Joshua Grasso

Class Update--see below

NOTE: Be sure to check your e-mail and/or Facebook/Instagram/Texts from the university for details about class cancellations. 

Spring Break is next week, and then the President decided to extend Spring Break for an additional week. Classes will resume on the 30th but only on an on-line basis, meaning I can only conduct class via our blog. We'll talk more about what this means tomorrow, and of course I'll keep you updated on the blog itself. If you have any questions, just e-mail me any time.

So we'll keep going, keep reading and doing questions, and I'll try to give you my insights on the works we read, but obviously, without our class discussions. I'll have to revise the schedule to accommodate our lost time, and maybe even delete one of the assignments (oh no!). :) 

I'll write more during Spring Break, and I'll e-mail everyone as well in case someone forgets to check. Again, please e-mail me with any questions. Enjoy the break and stay safe--and well! 

For THursday: Spiegelman, Maus I, Chapters 4-6

SORRY--these questions didn't post yesterday! Here they are...

For Thursday, read the rest of Part 1, which comprises the chapters "The Noose Tightens," "Mouse Holes," and "Mouse Trap." Then answer two of the questions that follow:

Q1: How does Spiegelman play with the mouse/cat metaphor in the rest of Part 1? In other words, when does it help him tell Vladek's story effectively, and/or when does he want us to forget it entirely? Focus on a specific scene that shows this.

Q2: Why does Spiegelman include his earlier autobiographical comic, Prisoner of the Hell Planet, in the narrative? How does this disrupt the flow of the story as well as the style of the comic? Do we learn anything important about the characters of the piece to justify its inclusion?

Q3: When discussing the realities of life in the ghetto, Vladek explains, "At that time it wasn't anymore families. It was everybody to take care for himself!" How does Vladek document the breakdown of society in the ghetto and elsewhere? What makes Vladek so different from the others (or is that simply what he wants us to think)?

Q4: What does Artie call his father a "murderer" a the end of Chapter Six? Doesn't this strike you as a senseless and selfish thing to say to a Holocaust survivor? Or do we agree with him that, on some level, Vladek has committed his own act of biographical genocide? 

For Tuesday: Read Spiegelman, Maus I, Chapters 1-3, “The Sheik,” “The Honeymoon,” and “Prisoner of War”

NOTE: Even though this is a comic book, Maus is the true story of Art Spiegelman and his father, Vladek, who survived the concentration camps during the Holocaust. He spent years interviewing his father, and then turned those interviews into two comics, Maus I and Maus II (though we have them in one collection). He also made the fascinating decision to use animals to tell his story: the Jews are mice, the Germans are cats, the Polish are pigs, the French are frogs, etc. You have plenty of time to read this for next week, so take your time and think about how the story uses pictures and words to tell a “true” story. The questions below will help you make sense of the story if you’ve never read a comic before and are confused by the format.

Answer two of the following for Monday’s class:

Q1: The obvious question first: why do you think Spiegelman uses mice, cats, etc., in his story? Does this take away from the seriousness of his story? Does it make it seem less real? Or does it help us focus on a more important part of the story? Use an example from the comic that helps illustrate this.

Q2: What kind of relationship do Artie and his father have in the comic? Where do we see this specifically? Why do you think he focuses on this rather than simply telling the story of the Holocaust outright?

Q3: At the end of Chapter One, Vladek tells Artie not to include certain parts of his story, including his relationship with Lucia, because “this isn’t so proper, so respectful.” Since he often wants to edit out the truth or make himself look better, do we trust him as a narrator? Do you think we’re getting the absolute truth, or merely his version of it?

Q4: There have been many stories about the Holocaust—books, movies, TV shows, etc. All of them are trying to remind us what life was like for the survivors (and the victims) so we can never deny these crimes. Discuss one thing you learned from the book (a small detail, a historical fact, or something else) that deepened your appreciation for this moment of history. What dark element of the Holocaust did it help shine a light on for you?

Confernece Schedule and Reminders

Remember that Conversation Paper #1 is due by 5pm on Tuesday. We have no class on Tuesday or Thursday (so no class next week). We'll be back the following Tuesday, and I'll let you know what to do for class during your conference. 

If you didn't sign up for a conference, or want to change your time, choose a time with an X in it and let me know. See you next week! 

THURSDAY
9:30 Gable
:40 Kaden
:50 Brayden

10:00 La'Quan
:10 Trenton
:20 Dan
:30 Kensey
:40 Hailey P
:50 Haley L

2:00 Connie
:10 X
:20 Matthew
:30 Brandon
:40 X

FRIDAY
1:00 Shelby
:10 X
:20 X
:30 Megan 
:40 X
:50 X

2:00 Logan
:10 X
:20 X

MONDAY
10:50 Cody
11:00 Jamie
:10 Cece
:20 X
:30 X
:40 X
:50 X

1:00 Sofia
:10 Emily
:20: Bailee
:30-:50 X

2:00-2:40 X

For Thursday: Reading Your Image

I want you to start thinking about the paper assignment seriously now, so instead of reading more of Morris for Thursday, choose an iconic image (a photo, a painting, etc.) and answer the questions below--all FOUR. Bring these questions to class on Thursday, since we'll be discussing your answers and different approaches to answering them. 

Answer all FOUR of the following:

Q1: What is the title or name of the painting/photo? How does this shape your understanding of what the work means or is about? If you didn't know this, do you think you would have seen the same thing? Why or why not? ALSO, do you know if the artist gave the title to the work, or it came from someplace else? Why might this matter?

Q2: Morris asks in Chapter 4, "photographs function on so many different levels and mean  so many different things to different people. Are they fine works of art? Are they documentary photographs? Can they be both?" (167). Discuss how your image could be seen as a documentary photograph and a work of art. Also, could it be seen as propaganda as well? Which way do you feel is the best way to appreciate/understand it?

Q3: Morris quotes the philosopher Norwood Russell Hanson, who famously stated that "There is more to seeing than meets the eyeball," to which Morris adds, "if we believe we see a rabbit, we see a rabbit. If we believe we see a duck, we see a duck...Our beliefs can completely defeat sensory evidence" (84). Discuss two completely different ways people could view this image--as a "duck" and as a "rabbit". In other words, how could people see two very different or even contradictory readings in this one image? You might also consider what we can be fooled into seeing/thinking that isn't actually in the image.

Q4; In Chapter 3, Morris writes that "Photographs reveal and they conceal" (118). He also reminds us that a lot of things occur behind the scenes, since photographs gain power by what they don't show us as much as what they do. In your image, what isn't shown in the work of art that might be important? What don't we see? Why do you think the artist didn't include this? What story do the missing people/objects/context tell?

For Tuesday: Morris, Believing is Seeing, Chapter 4, Part 2

NOTE: Remember to choose an iconic work of art for your next paper soon! Once you pick an image, everything will get so much easier. Start researching slowly, reading an article or a website here and there. Before you know it, you'll have enough to write a paper--or two! 

Answer two of the following:

Q1: In talking to some of the experts, one of them tells Morris that photographers at that time sought "the kind of expression people are supposed to wear in documentary photos dealing with social problems" (161). What kind of expression is he talking about? How might this relate to the Migrant Mother image we looked at in class on Wednesday?

Q2: On page 173, Morris quotes Rothstein who writes of his own photo, "This picture was not controversial; it was informative--the dust storm picture. In the beginning, it was a record; after that it became a news picture, it then became a feature photograph, eventually it became a historical photograph, and now it's considered a work of art in most museums." How does a picture go from being an informative photo to a work of art in a few decades? What changes? What makes people see a different 'truth'?

Q3: If photography is art, and art is a series of rules that you  make up yourself and "follow slavishly" (167), what does it mean to make a photo 'artistic'? Should paintings and photos all follow the same rules to make them 'true' and 'legitimate'? Or can every artist follow their own rules as long as they show the world what they feel is real and true? What might be the problem with this? OR, what might be the advantage of this? 

Q4: How does the modern picture of Florence Thompson and her grown children change the context (or belief) of the Migrant Mother photo? If we put them side by side, what would we now see? Should we know the future (or the past) of an image? Or just its present?

For Thursday. Morris, Believing is Seeing, Ch.4, Part I (pp.125-157)

NOTE: There are NO questions for this reading. Instead, we'll have an in-class writing assignment based on some of the ideas in this chapter. I also want to make you write a little to help you start thinking about Conversation Paper #1 (every bit helps!). However, here are some ideas to consider as you read:

* Why did people consider the pictures 'fake' even when they were proved to not be fake? If the skull was really found in the same area as the photo, what made it fake to so many people?

* If a picture is meant to deceive, it can be considered 'fake.' But does it matter who intended to deceive? If someone added a context to make a picture lie, is the picture still 'false' or 'manipulated?' 

* What is the difference between Art and Propaganda? Can an artistic picture be used for propaganda? 

* Can a photograph have a point of view, even though it simply records what you show the camera? Can you make people 'see' an  idea without context?

* One of the photographers argued that photography, though not strictly an art form, "is an art for all that!" In other words, he felt that photographers had to be artist first, and photographers second. Why is this important?

* Why does Morris consider the clock in the photos so essential to understanding them? How does it change the photo and provide its own context?

* Morris says that our lives are often defined by our possessions and the other junk we accumulate. If someone looked into your bedroom, or your closet, or your desk, would they see the 'real' you?  Does your random stuff define who you are? Or would you  need more context to explain it?

For Tuesday: Morris, Believing is Seeing, Chapters 2-3

Answer TWO of the following for Chapters 2-3: 

Q1: In an article in The New Yorker that first introduced these pictures to the public, the writer, Seymour Hersch, wrote, "The photographs tell it all" (117). According to Morris, why can a single photograph not tell the entire story--or really, any story? What makes it especially hard to tell this story with one photo?

Q3: Morris consults a "smile scientist" to help him decode the picture of Sabrina smiling while leaning over the dead body. How does the scientist use several pictures to prove that Sabrina isn't as guilty as everyone believes she is? What does a "Duchenne Smile" have to do with it?

Q1: How does Qaissi's story relate to Fenton's from Chapter 1? Both are accused of fabricating their accounts and offering a "fake" story to the public. Yet Fenton actually took the picture, and Qaissi only claimed to be the subject of the picture. Was he intentionally "manipulating" an image for a specific effect? Or were his claims, true or not, unable to substantially change the image?

Q4: In Chapter 1, Morris writes that there is a significant difference between "information and knowledge" (63). How does this chapter prove this point once again? Why does the information around this photograph not translate into knowledge in the article? What prevented the journalists investigating the story from becoming informed?