Again, this post was previously from my old web site in May 2005; this thread was one of the most viewed, so I thought I'd bring it back to life here.
****
Well, I passed the exam, and my oral component was waived :-)
So, hopefully, that means the examples I'm providing are good ones!!
For those interested in some of my committee's feedback, please see the following (again, "****" means that material has been excised for privacy and research considerations):
Comprehensive Examinations: Peter Ryan
MAJOR GENERAL
This is an excellent overview of the field, particularly given the constraints of a half-course format. It touches on the main areas of research, as well as indicating the tensions and conflicts that have arisen historically between the different approaches to communications research. The contrast between American and Canadian research, as formulated by Babe (and despite its noted shortcomings), provides a useful starting point for students to recognise the ways in which formulations of communication are linked in many cases to specific conditions that mediate their development, and the inclusion of the Mattelarts provides a much-needed European perspective as well. This is excellent for overcoming the parochialism often associated with conceptions of the field’s development. ****
If there is one area that might be criticised, it would be Peter’s formulation of communication as message production. In following Babe in this respect there is no doubt that Peter is in good company, but we might argue that this conception is unduly restrictive, and tends to leave unquestioned the basic linear model formulated by Lasswell in politics and Shannon and Weaver in information theory. It is not at all clear why communication should be restricted to this particular formula (important as it is historically), and indeed many of the models Peter would include in the syllabus do not necessarily construe communication in terms of messages. This would be the case particularly with poststructuralist and recent post-hermeneutic media theories, as well as the political economy upon which much of the course leans. The course could be an opportunity to critique this notion.
Despite this issue, the course is well-formulated and well-grounded in a sophisticated and substantive understanding of the main lines of inquiry in the field and their historical and epistemological relationships, and thus demonstrates Peter’s excellent grasp of communications research.
A key aim of a comprehensive examination is to demonstrate that one is prepared to teach university survey and other courses in the field. Peter’s answer demonstrates a clear ability to do just this. His response shows that he has mastered the literature in communications studies and is capable of developing what would be an excellent course of study.
MAJOR SPECIFIC
Peter does a good job of indicating what the key authors in this area define as a network society and its distinction from previous or other types of societies. It is clear that Peter has an excellent knowledge and understanding of a wide range of complex literature on this topic. The question itself is rather complicated, and Peter has managed to organise the material into a framework that treats its different facets in a reasonable manner. The answer appears to head off in several directions, but this can be attributed to the difficulty of addressing the number of issues raised by the question. In the end, Peter finds a way of commenting on the various points. In particular, there is a good balance between positive and negative critiques and formulations of current social configurations as they are mediated by new technologies, and there are excellent thumbnail sketches of different perspectives. It is noteworthy that Peter stakes out a position in the end, and does so with analytical tools that emerge from an author with whom he disagrees. This shows an interesting sophistication that can rework notions derived from opposing perspectives without dismissing them out of hand, as is often the case where political differences are at issue.
We would have wanted Peter to return to issues raised in the introduction with regard to the positions of both Kittler and Foucault, and their differences. With respect to notions of network and structuration (especially, say, in systems views like Luhmann), there are interesting questions raised regarding conceptions of subjectivity and agency. Peter gestures toward these at the beginning of his answer, but he fails to return to a discussion of the implications of his sketch for the role of humans in a technologically mediated world characterised as the network society. This perhaps takes the question beyond the parameters of political economy that it emphasises, but Peter’s answer shows that he has a superb understanding of the different and conflicting positions of these approaches.
Peter’s answer is comprehensive and highly articulate. It demonstrates a mastery of the relevant literature and presents a clear and defensible argument. Peter has a deep knowledge of network theory.
****
Monday, 30 May 2005
Friday, 6 May 2005
Humanist Discussion: Visualization and Narrative
An interesting thread came up on The Humanist listserv around the topic of Visualization and Narrative. People were discussing the following books:
> Edward Tufte: Visual Explanations, Envisioning Information, The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Data Analysis for Politics and Policy. http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/index
> Computers, Visualization, and History: How New Technology Will Transform Our Understanding of the Past
Authored by: David J. Staley
Here's my two cents on the topic:
1.
In a timely addition to this debate concerning the power of words and images, a recent neuroscience study out of California has found that words and pictures are both similarly attached to just one tiny, individual neuron, in what appears to be a clustering of meaning surrounding any single concept. Please see: Jay Ingram (of the Discovery Channel) in The Toronto Star’s “The Brain’s Jennifer Aniston Cell” (Saturday, July 2nd, 2005). Ingram writes, “the human brain entrusts the job of remembering the faces and names of people to single brain cells.” Specifically, the California study looks at how pictures and words (verbal and non-verbal) -- regardless of the size/intensity/perspective of their delivery -- fired one individual neuron in the brains of epileptic participants involved in the research. The study used well known words and images associated with celebrities such as Jennifer Aniston or Will Smith. To note, this single neuron theory is called the “Grandmother cell” theory.
So, perhaps the case is that words and pictures are equal, according to the physical structure of the brain’s memory at least; however, the use of the remembered signs depends on the context of how each sign is perceived. As well, recall depends on the training and preference of those who perceive the same signs. In many cases, researchers found if one’s visual processors did not exist, or were damaged, or had not been "trained" well, then other parts of the system make up for the shortcoming (some respondents to this thread have already suggested this possibility).
2.
To add to this dialogue on visualization and narrative, when Gerda, Eric, and Chris stated that words say more than pictures, what might ideographic or pictorial languages such as Chinese or Japanese demonstrate, especially when an extra layer of metaphor is often added in poetic works written in these languages because the ideographs themselves have meanings other than that of a single word’s meaning? Also, Chinese characters and Japanese Kanji’s meanings depend on their contexts and positions in sentences for all levels of meaning (1. pictorial, 2. metaphoric, and 3. literal) -- how might such signs be processed by the mind?
In the Microsoft Information Age, the return to pictorial/ideographic interfaces might suggest that a picture can say just as much OR more than a word can… Think of a no smoking sign or a happy face emoticon; why wouldn’t that sign say just as much as, or MORE THAN, the single word “happy”? A sign is a sign is a sign, and differing values can be assigned to a sign by any individual that uses a particular sign (whether it is a verbal utterance, a non-verbal picture, or a non-verbal discursive word).
I’m still brain-storming and considering these issues, and I’m very interested in what others have been writing in this thread!
Lastly, please feel free to add these texts to the growing list for interesting points on visualization and images:
1. West, Thomas G. Thinking like Einstein: returning to our visual roots with the emerging revolution in computer information visualization. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2004.
West’s book explores the late-blooming visual thinker’s life and achievements, researching the claim that the wiring of Einstein’s brain is what helped him become the greatest physicist of the last century.
2. Waisanen, John T. Thinking Geometrically: Re-visioning Space for a Multimodal World. Jennifer Daryl Slack, Ed. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., 2002.
Waisanen’s book is a lament for the loss of visual training based in traditional tools such as the pencil and drawing on paper at universities, because of the change to using computer technologies. His work mostly concerns Engineering students, but he does consider the Arts and Humanities aspects as well. He argues that both skills provide differing perspectives and tactics for developing well-rounded visual thinkers.
Cheers,
(pr)
> Edward Tufte: Visual Explanations, Envisioning Information, The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Data Analysis for Politics and Policy. http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/index
> Computers, Visualization, and History: How New Technology Will Transform Our Understanding of the Past
Authored by: David J. Staley
Here's my two cents on the topic:
1.
In a timely addition to this debate concerning the power of words and images, a recent neuroscience study out of California has found that words and pictures are both similarly attached to just one tiny, individual neuron, in what appears to be a clustering of meaning surrounding any single concept. Please see: Jay Ingram (of the Discovery Channel) in The Toronto Star’s “The Brain’s Jennifer Aniston Cell” (Saturday, July 2nd, 2005). Ingram writes, “the human brain entrusts the job of remembering the faces and names of people to single brain cells.” Specifically, the California study looks at how pictures and words (verbal and non-verbal) -- regardless of the size/intensity/perspective of their delivery -- fired one individual neuron in the brains of epileptic participants involved in the research. The study used well known words and images associated with celebrities such as Jennifer Aniston or Will Smith. To note, this single neuron theory is called the “Grandmother cell” theory.
So, perhaps the case is that words and pictures are equal, according to the physical structure of the brain’s memory at least; however, the use of the remembered signs depends on the context of how each sign is perceived. As well, recall depends on the training and preference of those who perceive the same signs. In many cases, researchers found if one’s visual processors did not exist, or were damaged, or had not been "trained" well, then other parts of the system make up for the shortcoming (some respondents to this thread have already suggested this possibility).
2.
To add to this dialogue on visualization and narrative, when Gerda, Eric, and Chris stated that words say more than pictures, what might ideographic or pictorial languages such as Chinese or Japanese demonstrate, especially when an extra layer of metaphor is often added in poetic works written in these languages because the ideographs themselves have meanings other than that of a single word’s meaning? Also, Chinese characters and Japanese Kanji’s meanings depend on their contexts and positions in sentences for all levels of meaning (1. pictorial, 2. metaphoric, and 3. literal) -- how might such signs be processed by the mind?
In the Microsoft Information Age, the return to pictorial/ideographic interfaces might suggest that a picture can say just as much OR more than a word can… Think of a no smoking sign or a happy face emoticon; why wouldn’t that sign say just as much as, or MORE THAN, the single word “happy”? A sign is a sign is a sign, and differing values can be assigned to a sign by any individual that uses a particular sign (whether it is a verbal utterance, a non-verbal picture, or a non-verbal discursive word).
I’m still brain-storming and considering these issues, and I’m very interested in what others have been writing in this thread!
Lastly, please feel free to add these texts to the growing list for interesting points on visualization and images:
1. West, Thomas G. Thinking like Einstein: returning to our visual roots with the emerging revolution in computer information visualization. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2004.
West’s book explores the late-blooming visual thinker’s life and achievements, researching the claim that the wiring of Einstein’s brain is what helped him become the greatest physicist of the last century.
2. Waisanen, John T. Thinking Geometrically: Re-visioning Space for a Multimodal World. Jennifer Daryl Slack, Ed. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., 2002.
Waisanen’s book is a lament for the loss of visual training based in traditional tools such as the pencil and drawing on paper at universities, because of the change to using computer technologies. His work mostly concerns Engineering students, but he does consider the Arts and Humanities aspects as well. He argues that both skills provide differing perspectives and tactics for developing well-rounded visual thinkers.
Cheers,
(pr)
Comprehensive Exams: A Sample Answer
This posting has a link for those who would like an example of a Comprehensive Exam answer; the following example is how I chose to answer my Major General Exam question #1: click here
Comprehensive Exams Questions - The Actual Questions
The Actual Exam Questions
The following questions are the actual questions that my committee gave me for my examination:
Joint Graduate Programme in Communication & Culture
PhD Qualifying Examination
Candidate: Peter Ryan
Major Field: Technology and Practice
Minor Field: Media and Culture
Examiners: ****
Date of Exam: May 17, 2005
This is a 72-hour take home exam.
There should be no footnotes unless a direct quote is used. There should be a bibliography of all sources consulted only while writing the exam (not the list of sources used while preparing for the exam).
Answers are not to exceed ten (10) pages, typed, double spaced, for each answer.
Return a copy of your answers to each examiner ****
Answer one (1) question from each part.
A. Major General
1. What materials would you choose to teach in an introductory Communications course geared toward first-year graduate students? Specifically, why would you choose those materials and how would you organize them for study? Discuss in terms of areas of controversy and the strengths and weaknesses of various schools.
2. The domain of Cultural Studies is often generalized to research concerning how meaning is constituted within various texts, practices, and ideologies. What roles do consensus and dissent play in forming understanding of the definition of Culture from a Cultural Studies perspective? How do Cultural Studies theorists define Culture differently from other disciplines such as Communications, Literary Theory, Political Economy, and Sociology, which often are associated with Cultural Studies in interdisciplinary projects?
3. How does Habermas take up the work of the earlier members of the Frankfurt School in his definition of communicative action? Please define key terms where necessary and provide a structured, well-researched chronological response to this question based on various readings of Habermas’s public sphere and modernity.
B. Major Specific (Technology and Practice)
1. In many Political Economy critiques of technological shifts a recent distinction from previous communication technology epochs is that of “the network society.” How does neo-liberal Political Economy structure technological practices in the twenty-first century? Further, how does “the progress narrative” figure in neo-liberal ideology concerning technological changes in the twentieth century?
2. How would you characterize the present technological epoch given that some theorists describe the information age sometimes as 1) a continuation of modern formations, 2) postmodern in the terms of Frederic Jameson, or 3) hypermodern as an extension of modernity just at a faster pace? Please fully explain what these terms signify for differing theorists in the twentieth century.
C. Minor (Media and Culture)
1. Thomas Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow is often described as an influential work in both the areas of contemporary art and technology. How does Thomas Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow provide a critique of modern reason during World War II in comparison with, and contrast to, such early works of Science Fiction as Dracula or Frankenstein from the Romantic period? The texts that you choose to explicate your interpretations of Gravity’s Rainbow are based entirely on your own selection criteria; however, you must use at least five other texts of literary theory from the latter half of the twentieth century in your answer.
2 In the area of North American Literary Studies, what positions have North American authors occupied in challenging cultural, economic, and political hegemonic powers? Do you view North American Literary Studies as a colonial creation within the academy that represents US domination on the continent within a NAFTA context? If not, what other factors do you see contributing to such a field as “North American Literary Studies”?
3 Broadly, how is technology used as a theme in Canadian and American fiction of the latter half of the twentieth century? How would you describe the linkage between fiction and technological change?
The following questions are the actual questions that my committee gave me for my examination:
Joint Graduate Programme in Communication & Culture
PhD Qualifying Examination
Candidate: Peter Ryan
Major Field: Technology and Practice
Minor Field: Media and Culture
Examiners: ****
Date of Exam: May 17, 2005
This is a 72-hour take home exam.
There should be no footnotes unless a direct quote is used. There should be a bibliography of all sources consulted only while writing the exam (not the list of sources used while preparing for the exam).
Answers are not to exceed ten (10) pages, typed, double spaced, for each answer.
Return a copy of your answers to each examiner ****
Answer one (1) question from each part.
A. Major General
1. What materials would you choose to teach in an introductory Communications course geared toward first-year graduate students? Specifically, why would you choose those materials and how would you organize them for study? Discuss in terms of areas of controversy and the strengths and weaknesses of various schools.
2. The domain of Cultural Studies is often generalized to research concerning how meaning is constituted within various texts, practices, and ideologies. What roles do consensus and dissent play in forming understanding of the definition of Culture from a Cultural Studies perspective? How do Cultural Studies theorists define Culture differently from other disciplines such as Communications, Literary Theory, Political Economy, and Sociology, which often are associated with Cultural Studies in interdisciplinary projects?
3. How does Habermas take up the work of the earlier members of the Frankfurt School in his definition of communicative action? Please define key terms where necessary and provide a structured, well-researched chronological response to this question based on various readings of Habermas’s public sphere and modernity.
B. Major Specific (Technology and Practice)
1. In many Political Economy critiques of technological shifts a recent distinction from previous communication technology epochs is that of “the network society.” How does neo-liberal Political Economy structure technological practices in the twenty-first century? Further, how does “the progress narrative” figure in neo-liberal ideology concerning technological changes in the twentieth century?
2. How would you characterize the present technological epoch given that some theorists describe the information age sometimes as 1) a continuation of modern formations, 2) postmodern in the terms of Frederic Jameson, or 3) hypermodern as an extension of modernity just at a faster pace? Please fully explain what these terms signify for differing theorists in the twentieth century.
C. Minor (Media and Culture)
1. Thomas Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow is often described as an influential work in both the areas of contemporary art and technology. How does Thomas Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow provide a critique of modern reason during World War II in comparison with, and contrast to, such early works of Science Fiction as Dracula or Frankenstein from the Romantic period? The texts that you choose to explicate your interpretations of Gravity’s Rainbow are based entirely on your own selection criteria; however, you must use at least five other texts of literary theory from the latter half of the twentieth century in your answer.
2 In the area of North American Literary Studies, what positions have North American authors occupied in challenging cultural, economic, and political hegemonic powers? Do you view North American Literary Studies as a colonial creation within the academy that represents US domination on the continent within a NAFTA context? If not, what other factors do you see contributing to such a field as “North American Literary Studies”?
3 Broadly, how is technology used as a theme in Canadian and American fiction of the latter half of the twentieth century? How would you describe the linkage between fiction and technological change?
Comprehensive Exams Questions
Designing Comprehensive Exam Questions
The following posting is for those of you who are interested in how Comprehensive Exam questions get designed by a committee. In my programme, the candidate proposes the questions, and then their committee chooses and crafts the final questions, which are given to the candidate at the exam.
A draft of my proposed questions are as follows belows. To note, sections with "****" are excised for privacy concerns or because the material is a part of my future research:
Suggested Doctoral Comprehensive Exam Questions
March 6th, 2005 – Draft II
Peter Ryan
Personal Writing Option: Take Home Exam, in Two Parts.
Tentative Dates of the Exam:
1. Major: Monday, May 16th, 2005 (or Monday, May 31st, 2005)
2. Minor: Thursday, May 19th, 2005 (or Monday, June 7th, 2005)
****
Exam Questions Suggested Guidelines:
“In both formats, students will be given a choice of questions to answer: 2 of 5 for the major (which would normally be divided into 3 general questions and 2 questions specific to the major field) and 1 of 3 for the minor.”
Note:
1) I have provided more questions here just to get feedback at this point.
2) The Major General Questions are based on the PhD Core Course ****, the Core Course in Communication Studies ****, and the Core Course in Cultural Studies ****.
3) The Major Specific Questions are based on the PhD Foundation Course in Technology and Practice ****.
4) The Minor Questions are based on my Media and Culture foundation courses and electives.
I. MAJOR (Five Questions in Total – 48 hours to complete)
A. General -- 3 Questions --
Please answer one of the three following questions within 10 – 15 pages maximum. Use MLA style for citations, formatting, and works cited.
Suggested Reading List: Approximately 25 Texts for the Major.
1. If a Canadian canon of Communication Theory was to be formed for the last half of the 20th century and it had to contain the work of at least 10 core scholars, what theorists and texts would you argue should be included on the list? Why would you choose those theorists and their representative texts? Please support your choices and define key terms where necessary.
2. What materials would you choose to teach in an introductory Communications course geared towards first-year graduate students? Specifically, why would you choose those materials and how would you organize them for study?
3. The domain of Cultural Studies is often generalized to research concerning how meaning is constituted within various texts, practices, and ideologies. What roles do consensus and dissensus play in forming understandings of the definition of Culture from a Cultural Studies perspective? How do Cultural Studies theorists define Culture differently from other disciplines such as Communications, Literary Theory, Political Economy, and Sociology, which are often associated with Cultural Studies in interdisciplinary projects?
4. How does Habermas take up the work of the earlier members of the Frankfurt School in his definition of communicative action? Please define key terms where necessary and provide a structured, well-researched chronological response to this question based on various readings of Habermas’s public sphere and modernity.
B. Specific (to Field): Technology and Practice – 2 Questions --
Please answer one of the following questions within 10 – 15 pages maximum.
Use MLA style for citations, formatting, and works cited.
Suggested Reading List: Approximately 25 Texts for the Major.
1. In many Political Economy critiques of technological shifts a recent distinction from previous communication technology epochs is that of “the network society.” How does neo-liberal Political Economy structure technological practices in the 21st century? Further, how does “the progress narrative” figure in neo-liberal ideology concerning technological changes in the twentieth century?
2. How would you characterize the present technological epoch given that some theorists describe the information age sometimes as 1) a continuation of modern formations, 2) postmodern in the terms of Frederic Jameson, or 3) hypermodern as an extension of modernity just at a faster pace? Please fully explain what these terms signify for differing theorists in the 20th century.
II. MINOR (Three Questions in Total – 24 hours to complete)
Media and Culture: 20th Century North American Literature
Please answer one of the following questions within 10 – 15 pages maximum. Use MLA style for citations, formatting, and works cited.
Suggested Reading List: Approximately 20 Texts for the Minor.
1. Thomas Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow is often described as an influential work in both the areas of contemporary art and technology. How does Thomas Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow provide a critique of modern reason during World War II in comparison with, and contrast to, such early works of Science Fiction as Dracula or Frankenstein from the Romantic period? The texts that you choose to explicate your interpretations of Gravity’s Rainbow are entirely based on your own selection criteria; however, you must use at least five other texts of literary theory from the latter half of the twentieth century in your answer.
2. How does Philip K. Dick’s The Man in the High Castle challenge traditional definitions of the Science Fiction genre (or speculative fiction genre)? Critiques of strict genre boundaries often demonstrate challenges to modern academic disciplinary categories. Do you believe that Science Fiction is a market construction or a useful term of critical analysis? Please use examples of contemporary literary theory to explicate your position.
3. In the area of North American Literary Studies, what positions have North American authors occupied in challenging cultural, economic, and political hegemonic powers? Do you view North American Literary Studies a colonial creation within the academy that represent US domination on the continent within a NAFTA context? If not, what other factors do you see contributing to such a field as “North American Literary Studies”?
4. Broadly, how is technology used as a theme in Canadian and American Fiction of the latter half of the twentieth century?
The following posting is for those of you who are interested in how Comprehensive Exam questions get designed by a committee. In my programme, the candidate proposes the questions, and then their committee chooses and crafts the final questions, which are given to the candidate at the exam.
A draft of my proposed questions are as follows belows. To note, sections with "****" are excised for privacy concerns or because the material is a part of my future research:
Suggested Doctoral Comprehensive Exam Questions
March 6th, 2005 – Draft II
Peter Ryan
Personal Writing Option: Take Home Exam, in Two Parts.
Tentative Dates of the Exam:
1. Major: Monday, May 16th, 2005 (or Monday, May 31st, 2005)
2. Minor: Thursday, May 19th, 2005 (or Monday, June 7th, 2005)
****
Exam Questions Suggested Guidelines:
“In both formats, students will be given a choice of questions to answer: 2 of 5 for the major (which would normally be divided into 3 general questions and 2 questions specific to the major field) and 1 of 3 for the minor.”
Note:
1) I have provided more questions here just to get feedback at this point.
2) The Major General Questions are based on the PhD Core Course ****, the Core Course in Communication Studies ****, and the Core Course in Cultural Studies ****.
3) The Major Specific Questions are based on the PhD Foundation Course in Technology and Practice ****.
4) The Minor Questions are based on my Media and Culture foundation courses and electives.
I. MAJOR (Five Questions in Total – 48 hours to complete)
A. General -- 3 Questions --
Please answer one of the three following questions within 10 – 15 pages maximum. Use MLA style for citations, formatting, and works cited.
Suggested Reading List: Approximately 25 Texts for the Major.
1. If a Canadian canon of Communication Theory was to be formed for the last half of the 20th century and it had to contain the work of at least 10 core scholars, what theorists and texts would you argue should be included on the list? Why would you choose those theorists and their representative texts? Please support your choices and define key terms where necessary.
2. What materials would you choose to teach in an introductory Communications course geared towards first-year graduate students? Specifically, why would you choose those materials and how would you organize them for study?
3. The domain of Cultural Studies is often generalized to research concerning how meaning is constituted within various texts, practices, and ideologies. What roles do consensus and dissensus play in forming understandings of the definition of Culture from a Cultural Studies perspective? How do Cultural Studies theorists define Culture differently from other disciplines such as Communications, Literary Theory, Political Economy, and Sociology, which are often associated with Cultural Studies in interdisciplinary projects?
4. How does Habermas take up the work of the earlier members of the Frankfurt School in his definition of communicative action? Please define key terms where necessary and provide a structured, well-researched chronological response to this question based on various readings of Habermas’s public sphere and modernity.
B. Specific (to Field): Technology and Practice – 2 Questions --
Please answer one of the following questions within 10 – 15 pages maximum.
Use MLA style for citations, formatting, and works cited.
Suggested Reading List: Approximately 25 Texts for the Major.
1. In many Political Economy critiques of technological shifts a recent distinction from previous communication technology epochs is that of “the network society.” How does neo-liberal Political Economy structure technological practices in the 21st century? Further, how does “the progress narrative” figure in neo-liberal ideology concerning technological changes in the twentieth century?
2. How would you characterize the present technological epoch given that some theorists describe the information age sometimes as 1) a continuation of modern formations, 2) postmodern in the terms of Frederic Jameson, or 3) hypermodern as an extension of modernity just at a faster pace? Please fully explain what these terms signify for differing theorists in the 20th century.
II. MINOR (Three Questions in Total – 24 hours to complete)
Media and Culture: 20th Century North American Literature
Please answer one of the following questions within 10 – 15 pages maximum. Use MLA style for citations, formatting, and works cited.
Suggested Reading List: Approximately 20 Texts for the Minor.
1. Thomas Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow is often described as an influential work in both the areas of contemporary art and technology. How does Thomas Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow provide a critique of modern reason during World War II in comparison with, and contrast to, such early works of Science Fiction as Dracula or Frankenstein from the Romantic period? The texts that you choose to explicate your interpretations of Gravity’s Rainbow are entirely based on your own selection criteria; however, you must use at least five other texts of literary theory from the latter half of the twentieth century in your answer.
2. How does Philip K. Dick’s The Man in the High Castle challenge traditional definitions of the Science Fiction genre (or speculative fiction genre)? Critiques of strict genre boundaries often demonstrate challenges to modern academic disciplinary categories. Do you believe that Science Fiction is a market construction or a useful term of critical analysis? Please use examples of contemporary literary theory to explicate your position.
3. In the area of North American Literary Studies, what positions have North American authors occupied in challenging cultural, economic, and political hegemonic powers? Do you view North American Literary Studies a colonial creation within the academy that represent US domination on the continent within a NAFTA context? If not, what other factors do you see contributing to such a field as “North American Literary Studies”?
4. Broadly, how is technology used as a theme in Canadian and American Fiction of the latter half of the twentieth century?
Comprehensive Exams
For my first post on this web site, I will begin with an e-mail I sent at 5 AM in the morning after my recently completed Comprehensive Exams to my exam committee. This was previously posted on my old web site in June 2005.
******
I thought this might be a good beginning point for people interested in the actual writing of the comprehensive exams, and surprise – that’s what my blog will be primarily concerned with: my dissertation research.
To note, a lot of the following e-mail is exaggerated for comedic effect (which I hope is obvious), but much of it rings close to the truth.
I guess for a little setup, I should inform you that I wrote a three day (72 hour), take-home Comprehensive Exam composed of three questions: 1) a Major General, 2) a Major Specific, and 3) a Minor Specific question. Each question had to be answered in a 10 page space. I’ll attach the exact exam questions, answers, and responses from my committee later – these documents will be edited for areas that are particular to my future research, and will be especially refined for purposes of intellectual copyright.
Without further ado:
************
Dear all,
Just some quick notes:
1) Concerning my finished exam materials:
I’m pretty happy with how the actual finished product turned out, given the time constraints. I look forward to your comments on my efforts!
2) Concerning the process of writing the exam (written at 5 AM Thursday Morning, trying to get some of this excess energy out):
Well, to tell you truthfully, I have to send these exams off to you now, or I fear I’ll have a heart attack (and I don’t have a defibrillator readily at hand in such an event). Mainly, I have to send them off because I haven’t been able to sleep for the past two nights, and that’s not without wanting to, having the time, or for lack of trying!
Needless to say, these aren’t excuses for the quality of work that’s submitted here… this is just an account of my surroundings and experiences over the past few days from someone who usually has what would be considered a fairly “normal” and routinely structured life.
Although this test was not as bad as some have said (I should probably wait to hear of my success before making such claims), I would like to share some of the experiences that I’ve had in the last week or so leading up to, and including, the writing of these exams, just because I hope you’ll find them as humorous and truly bizarre as I do.
For someone whose life has been organized to have as little stress as possible since I left my crazy 24/7 commuting publishing job in Japan, and my previous equally stress-filled restaurant manager job in Edmonton, where I usually slept in a booth at least twice a week; this experience has not been the three day fun-filled paradise getaway for which I hoped (no, that comes now that I’m done J).
I prepared over the past four months as best I could for the one thing that I truly detest in life: an exam. Alas, my fellow PhD students were correct to warn me that the “COMPS” are truly a psychological test when there is a 72 hour deadline waiting for you like a brick wall, and the student is writing on the way towards that wall at 100 miles/hour.
First of all, I did get sick, like everyone predicted – a week before to be exact (as did everyone else in my house – so I don’t think it was nerves or a stressed immune system), but then I eventually got over it four days before the exam. Next were the nightmares of my fingers melting off, and me waking up sweating because I was scared that I wouldn’t be able to type for the exam. Also, there were frequent dreams of my teeth falling out – I’m not sure what those were about, but they truly rattled me, and I’m someone that enjoys having nightmares because I think they’re usually extraordinary experiences that don’t happen every day. This is still before the exam too…
Once the exam arrived at 9 AM on Tuesday morning (May 17th) my indigestion started, and for the next two days it has persisted – thank God for Tums… I had never even had indigestion before in my life, so I wasn’t sure if Tums actually worked, never having used them. Lo and behold they do! They probably ended up saving me a lot of discomfort and annoyance while writing! I guess the indigestion didn’t help with my sleep problems, but the pounding heart certainly didn’t either – these two stress symptoms made my late night dementia quite fun. Lastly, the burst water pipe in our washroom didn’t help matters either, with our oh-so-kind landlord visiting on Wednesday to help me out (making a noisy symphony for two hours).
Again, this is coming from someone who thinks they know how to handle stress – having a yoga instructor for a fiancé usually helps toward this end!! Honestly, I haven’t been this stressed since those days of corporate management -- and thank all that is blessed, these exams are now over!!
My systems are shutting down now… I’ve CC’d my fiancé on this e-mail, so she knows that she can come home now J -- yeah!! And the only thing that I’ll be stressed out about after this is if I ever have kids – dissertation defense, bah – I’ve already defended a thesis and it was a cake walk… J
Thanks again – all of you – for your advice, help, and support on these exams!!!
Cheers and have a great long weekend,
Peter
PS – As you can see from this note, answering the exams questions was not my problem… editing them down to 10 pages was, but I took Dr. Panofsky’s instructions -- that just as long as the answers weren’t over 20 pages I should be fine -- as a good warning/guideline for my two longer answers in the Major Specific and the Minor. Deep down inside I know they could both be edited a little more, but I actually like them how they are (after 3 edits each)! I hope you do too…
PS2 – any mistakes or illogical arguments found in my exam responses are entirely my dog Bear’s fault. Bear kept telling me to write strange arguments about cats and squirrels during the wee hours of morning, and he’s not too good at editing or typing either… However, he did keep me company many of the nights that I studied for these exams, and I must give him credit for that!
PS3 – I can’t wait to take all of these books back to the library and finally have a clean room again…
******
I thought this might be a good beginning point for people interested in the actual writing of the comprehensive exams, and surprise – that’s what my blog will be primarily concerned with: my dissertation research.
To note, a lot of the following e-mail is exaggerated for comedic effect (which I hope is obvious), but much of it rings close to the truth.
I guess for a little setup, I should inform you that I wrote a three day (72 hour), take-home Comprehensive Exam composed of three questions: 1) a Major General, 2) a Major Specific, and 3) a Minor Specific question. Each question had to be answered in a 10 page space. I’ll attach the exact exam questions, answers, and responses from my committee later – these documents will be edited for areas that are particular to my future research, and will be especially refined for purposes of intellectual copyright.
Without further ado:
************
Dear all,
Just some quick notes:
1) Concerning my finished exam materials:
I’m pretty happy with how the actual finished product turned out, given the time constraints. I look forward to your comments on my efforts!
2) Concerning the process of writing the exam (written at 5 AM Thursday Morning, trying to get some of this excess energy out):
Well, to tell you truthfully, I have to send these exams off to you now, or I fear I’ll have a heart attack (and I don’t have a defibrillator readily at hand in such an event). Mainly, I have to send them off because I haven’t been able to sleep for the past two nights, and that’s not without wanting to, having the time, or for lack of trying!
Needless to say, these aren’t excuses for the quality of work that’s submitted here… this is just an account of my surroundings and experiences over the past few days from someone who usually has what would be considered a fairly “normal” and routinely structured life.
Although this test was not as bad as some have said (I should probably wait to hear of my success before making such claims), I would like to share some of the experiences that I’ve had in the last week or so leading up to, and including, the writing of these exams, just because I hope you’ll find them as humorous and truly bizarre as I do.
For someone whose life has been organized to have as little stress as possible since I left my crazy 24/7 commuting publishing job in Japan, and my previous equally stress-filled restaurant manager job in Edmonton, where I usually slept in a booth at least twice a week; this experience has not been the three day fun-filled paradise getaway for which I hoped (no, that comes now that I’m done J).
I prepared over the past four months as best I could for the one thing that I truly detest in life: an exam. Alas, my fellow PhD students were correct to warn me that the “COMPS” are truly a psychological test when there is a 72 hour deadline waiting for you like a brick wall, and the student is writing on the way towards that wall at 100 miles/hour.
First of all, I did get sick, like everyone predicted – a week before to be exact (as did everyone else in my house – so I don’t think it was nerves or a stressed immune system), but then I eventually got over it four days before the exam. Next were the nightmares of my fingers melting off, and me waking up sweating because I was scared that I wouldn’t be able to type for the exam. Also, there were frequent dreams of my teeth falling out – I’m not sure what those were about, but they truly rattled me, and I’m someone that enjoys having nightmares because I think they’re usually extraordinary experiences that don’t happen every day. This is still before the exam too…
Once the exam arrived at 9 AM on Tuesday morning (May 17th) my indigestion started, and for the next two days it has persisted – thank God for Tums… I had never even had indigestion before in my life, so I wasn’t sure if Tums actually worked, never having used them. Lo and behold they do! They probably ended up saving me a lot of discomfort and annoyance while writing! I guess the indigestion didn’t help with my sleep problems, but the pounding heart certainly didn’t either – these two stress symptoms made my late night dementia quite fun. Lastly, the burst water pipe in our washroom didn’t help matters either, with our oh-so-kind landlord visiting on Wednesday to help me out (making a noisy symphony for two hours).
Again, this is coming from someone who thinks they know how to handle stress – having a yoga instructor for a fiancé usually helps toward this end!! Honestly, I haven’t been this stressed since those days of corporate management -- and thank all that is blessed, these exams are now over!!
My systems are shutting down now… I’ve CC’d my fiancé on this e-mail, so she knows that she can come home now J -- yeah!! And the only thing that I’ll be stressed out about after this is if I ever have kids – dissertation defense, bah – I’ve already defended a thesis and it was a cake walk… J
Thanks again – all of you – for your advice, help, and support on these exams!!!
Cheers and have a great long weekend,
Peter
PS – As you can see from this note, answering the exams questions was not my problem… editing them down to 10 pages was, but I took Dr. Panofsky’s instructions -- that just as long as the answers weren’t over 20 pages I should be fine -- as a good warning/guideline for my two longer answers in the Major Specific and the Minor. Deep down inside I know they could both be edited a little more, but I actually like them how they are (after 3 edits each)! I hope you do too…
PS2 – any mistakes or illogical arguments found in my exam responses are entirely my dog Bear’s fault. Bear kept telling me to write strange arguments about cats and squirrels during the wee hours of morning, and he’s not too good at editing or typing either… However, he did keep me company many of the nights that I studied for these exams, and I must give him credit for that!
PS3 – I can’t wait to take all of these books back to the library and finally have a clean room again…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
