Critical thinking using Critical lenses essay Due Monday

Introduction

A very basic way of thinking about literary theory is that these ideas act as different lenses critics use to view and talk about art, literature, and even culture. These different lenses allow critics to consider works of art based on certain assumptions within that school of theory. The different lenses also allow critics to focus on particular aspects of a work they consider important. For example, if a critic is working with certain Marxist theories, s/he might focus on how the characters in a story interact based on their economic situation.

Psychoanalytic

Id, Ego, and Superego

Freud maintained that our desires and our unconscious conflicts give rise to three areas of the mind that wrestle for dominance as we grow from infancy, to childhood, to adulthood:

·

id – “…the location of the drives” or libido

· ego – “…one of the major defenses against the power of the drives…” and home of the defenses listed above

· superego – the area of the unconscious that houses

 

Judgment (of self and others) and “…which begins to form during childhood as a result of the Oedipus complex” (Richter 1015-1016)

Typical questions:

· How do the operations of repression structure or inform the work?

· Are there any Oedipal dynamics – or any other family dynamics – are work here?

· How can characters’ behavior, narrative events, and/or images be explained in terms of psychoanalytic concepts of any kind (for example, fear or fascination with death, sexuality – which includes love and romance as well as sexual behavior – as a primary indicator of psychological identity or the operations of ego-id-superego)?

· What does the work suggest about the psychological being of its author?

· What might a given interpretation of a literary work suggest about the psychological motives of the reader?

· Are there prominent words in the piece that could have different or hidden meanings? Could there be a subconscious reason for the author using these “problem words”?

Jungian criticism, which is closely related to Freudian theory because of its connection to psychoanalysis, assumes that all stories and symbols are based on mythic models from mankind’s past. (archetypes)

Typical questions:

· What connections can we make between elements of the text and the archetypes? (Mask, Shadow, Anima, Animus)

· How do the characters in the text mirror the archetypal figures? (Great Mother or nurturing Mother, Whore, destroying Crone, Lover, Destroying Angel)

· How does the text mirror the archetypal narrative patterns? (Quest, Night-Sea-Journey)

· How symbolic is the imagery in the work?

· How does the protagonist reflect the hero of myth?

· Does the “hero” embark on a journey in either a physical or spiritual sense?

· Is there a journey to an underworld or land of the dead?

· What trials or ordeals does the protagonist face? What is the reward for overcoming them?

Gender Criticism

Gender(s), Power, and Marginalization Gender studies and queer theory explore issues of sexuality, power, and marginalized populations (woman as other) in literature and culture. Much of the work in gender studies and queer theory, while influenced by feminist criticism, emerges from post-structural interest in fragmented, de-centered knowledge building (Nietzsche, Derrida, Foucault), language (the breakdown of sign-signifier), and psychoanalysis (Lacan).

A primary concern in gender studies and queer theory is the manner in which gender and sexuality is discussed: “Effective as this work [feminism] was in changing what teachers taught and what the students read, there was a sense on the part of some feminist critics that…it was still the old game that was being played, when what it needed was a new game entirely. The argument posed was that in order to counter patriarchy, it was necessary not merely to think about new texts, but to think about them in radically new ways” (Richter 1432).

Therefore, a critic working in gender studies and queer theory might even be uncomfortable with the binary established by many feminist scholars between masculine and feminine: “Cixous (following Derrida in Of Grammatology) sets up a series of binary oppositions (active/passive, sun/moon…father/mother, logos/pathos). Each pair can be analyzed as a hierarchy in which the former term represents the positive and masculine and the latter the negative and feminine principle” (Richter 1433-1434).

In-Betweens Many critics working with gender and queer theory are interested in the breakdown of binaries such as male and female, the in-betweens (also following Derrida’s interstitial knowledge building). For example, gender studies and queer theory maintains that cultural definitions of sexuality and what it means to be male and female are in flux: “…the distinction between “masculine” and “feminine” activities and behavior is constantly changing, so that women who wear baseball caps and fatigues…can be perceived as more piquantly sexy by some heterosexual men than those women who wear white frocks and gloves and look down demurely” (Richter 1437).

Moreover, Richter reminds us that as we learn more about our genetic structure, the biology of male/female becomes increasingly complex and murky: “even the physical dualism of sexual genetic structures and bodily parts breaks down when one considers those instances – XXY syndromes, natural sexual bimorphisms, as well as surgical transsexuals – that defy attempts at binary classification” (1437).

Typical questions:

· What elements of the text can be perceived as being masculine (active, powerful) and feminine (passive, marginalized) and how do the characters support these traditional roles?

· What sort of support (if any) is given to elements or characters who question the masculine/feminine binary? What happens to those elements/characters?

· What elements in the text exist in the middle, between the perceived masculine/feminine binary? In other words, what elements exhibit traits of both (bisexual)?

· How does the author present the text? Is it a traditional narrative? Is it secure and forceful? Or is it more hesitant or even collaborative?

· What are the politics (ideological agendas) of specific gay, lesbian, or queer works, and how are those politics revealed in…the work’s thematic content or portrayals of its characters?

· What are the poetics (literary devices and strategies) of a specific lesbian, gay, or queer works?

· What does the work contribute to our knowledge of queer, gay, or lesbian experience and history, including literary history?

· How is queer, gay, or lesbian experience coded in texts that are by writers who are apparently homosexual?

· What does the work reveal about the operations (socially, politically, psychologically) homophobic?

· How does the literary text illustrate the problematics of sexuality and sexual “identity,” that is the ways in which human sexuality does not fall neatly into the separate categories defined by the words homosexual and heterosexual?

Marxist Criticism

Whom Does It Benefit?

Based on the theories of Karl Marx (and so influenced by philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel), this school concerns itself with class differences, economic and otherwise, as well as the implications and complications of the capitalist system: “Marxism attempts to reveal the ways in which our socioeconomic system is the ultimate source of our experience” (Tyson 277).

Theorists working in the Marxist tradition, therefore, are interested in answering the overarching question, whom does it [the work, the effort, the policy, the road, etc.] benefit? The elite? The middle class? Marxist critics are also interested in how the lower or working classes are oppressed – in everyday life and in literature.

The Material Dialectic

The Marxist school follows a process of thinking called the material dialectic. This belief system maintains that “…what drives historical change are the material realities of the economic base of society, rather than the ideological superstructure of politics, law, philosophy, religion, and art that is built upon that economic base” (Richter 1088).

Marx asserts that “…stable societies develop sites of resistance: contradictions build into the social system that ultimately lead to social revolution and the development of a new society upon the old” (1088). This cycle of contradiction, tension, and revolution must continue: there will always be conflict between the upper, middle, and lower (working) classes and this conflict will be reflected in literature and other forms of expression – art, music, movies, etc.

The Revolution

The continuing conflict between the classes will lead to upheaval and revolution by oppressed peoples and form the groundwork for a new order of society and economics where capitalism is abolished. According to Marx, the revolution will be led by the working class (others think peasants will lead the uprising) under the guidance of intellectuals. Once the elite and middle class are overthrown, the intellectuals will compose an equal society where everyone owns everything (socialism – not to be confused with Soviet or Maoist Communism).

Though a staggering number of different nuances exist within this school of literary theory, Marxist critics generally work in areas covered by the following questions.

Typical questions:

· Whom does it benefit if the work or effort is accepted/successful/believed, etc.?

· What is the social class of the author?

· Which class does the work claim to represent?

· What values does it reinforce?

· What values does it subvert?

· What conflict can be seen between the values the work champions and those it portrays?

· What social classes do the characters represent?

Critical Race Theory

Critical Race Theory, or CRT, is a theoretical and interpretive mode that examines the appearance of race and racism across dominant cultural modes of expression. In adopting this approach, CRT scholars attempt to understand how victims of systemic racism are affected by cultural perceptions of race and how they are able to represent themselves to counter prejudice.

Closely connected to such fields as philosophy, history, sociology, and law, CRT scholarship traces racism in America through the nation’s legacy of slavery, the Civil Rights Movement, and recent events. In doing so, it draws from work by writers like Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, W.E.B. Du Bois, Martin Luther King, Jr., and others studying law, feminism, and post-structuralism. CRT developed into its current form during the mid-1970s with scholars like Derrick Bell, Alan Freeman, and Richard Delgado, who responded to what they identified as dangerously slow progress following Civil Rights in the 1960s.

Prominent CRT scholars like Kimberlé Crenshaw, Mari Matsuda, and Patricia Williams share an interest in recognizing racism as a quotidian component of American life (manifested in textual sources like literature, film, law, etc). In doing so, they attempt to confront the beliefs and practices that enable racism to persist while also challenging these practices in order to seek liberation from systemic racism.

As such, CRT scholarship also emphasizes the importance of finding a way for diverse individuals to share their experiences. However, CRT scholars do not only locate an individual’s identity and experience of the world in his or her racial identifications, but also their membership to a specific class, gender, nation, sexual orientation, etc. They read these diverse cultural texts as proof of the institutionalized inequalities racialized groups and individuals experience every day.

As Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic explain in their introduction to the third edition of Critical Race Theory: The Cutting Edge, “Our social world, with its rules, practices, and assignments of prestige and power, is not fixed; rather, we construct with it words, stories and silence. But we need not acquiesce in arrangements that are unfair and one-sided. By writing and speaking against them, we may hope to contribute to a better, fairer world” (3). In this sense, CRT scholars seek tangible, real-world ends through the intellectual work they perform. This contributes to many CRT scholars’ emphasis on social activism and transforming everyday notions of race, racism, and power.

More recently, CRT has contributed to splinter groups focused on Asian American, Latino, and Indian racial experiences.

Common Questions:

· What is the significance of race in contemporary American society?

· Where, in what ways, and to what ends does race appear in dominant American culture and shape the ways we interact with one another?

· What types of texts and other cultural artifacts reflect dominant culture’s perceptions of race?

· How can scholars convey that racism is a concern that affects all members of society?

· How does racism continue to function as a persistent force in American society?

· How can we combat racism to ensure that all members of American society experience equal representation and access to fundamental rights?

· How can we accurately reflect the experiences of victims of racism?

Assignment

You must select one of the following critical lenses: Gender, Marxism, Race, or Psychoanalytic theory and then conduct an critical analysis of the text you chose in week 4 for your rhetorical analysis. You’ve already chosen your topic, re-watched, and analyzed the text fully. So, much of your “research” has been completed. I will be looking for how thoroughly you are able to narrow down your analysis of the text utilizing the critical reading, thinking, and analytical skills that we have discussed in class up until point in the semester.  

Analysis through a critical lens does not have to cover all aspects of the text, but only those aspects that are relevant to your theory. For example, if you were to choose gender, then you would return to the text and dissect how the text portrays or explains gender roles, relationships, and gender identity. You may further examine whether it is an accurate depiction of the society that we live in. 

Thesis Statement

· Each of these lenses offer options, so there is no “correct” answer. But you must consider your argument carefully to ensure that your analysis is thorough. 

· Your “claim” needs to clearly identify the lens that you will be utilizing for analysis. And your “rationale” or reasoning needs to provide the argument.

Support

· You should not utilize secondary sources or additional research for this assignment. Your writing should focus only on your own reactions/analysis to the text through the lens that you chose.

· And then utilize specific examples/evidence from the text/film to support your thesis statement.

THIS IS MY RHETORICAL ANALYSIS ON THE TOPIC

·

· Title: The Magic of Not Giving A F***

· Author/Director: Sarah Knight

· Publication/Release Date – And briefly explain how you think this impacts analysis

· August 12, 2017, post-tidying society. The World has changed so rapidly from 2017. The Time of which we had a new president and a lot of uncertainty. Many American’s deal with highly stressful lives then and also now.

· Thesis – What is the main point? Now, with a work of fiction, this is going to be more subjective – So, no wrong answers here. 

· Mental decluttering is magical The Not Sorry Method: Step 1 Decide what you don’t give a fuck about. Step 2, don’t give a fuck about those things.

· Author’s Purpose – Fiction is primarily to entertain us, but is there another purpose – Is the director trying to inform us of an important issue? This may be connected to the thesis. Think deeper below the surface. 

· Sarah Knight’s intention is clearly stated, “Don’t be sorry, be honest and polite, so you do not feel guilty and you intern, you will have nothing to apologize about.” I believe Sarah Knight was trying to help her target audience. She used her personal experiences to help people improve there life.  

· Intended Audience – Be specific. What demographics does this appeal to? (age, gender, race, socio-economic … etc.) How does the intended audience factor in to the choices the director made and how an audience responds? 

·  Her target audience could range vastly, but she began her journey when she was depressed. She describes a deep depressive time in her life.    Her words can influence people battling with anxiety and stress. She provokes the viewer to categorize things that are important vs. things that don’t matter. This made it easy for the viewer. It painted a picture. Prioritize things that you give a f*** about.

· Methods – How does the text present the main ideas? – strong dialogue, visually, music .. etc. (With non-fiction, this will be the evidence, in fiction you can be a creative) 

· Sarah Knight is a great speaker who has an incredible way of using laughter to engage the audience. Laughter brings my guard down and also captures the attention of the audience. Sarah uses strong language throughout her speech. The title is eye-catching and can be viewed as vulgar.   

· Tone/Voice – How would you describe the style of the text? (comedy, drama .. etc.) Was it an effective choice? Why or why not? 

· Sarah used an excellent tone for her target audience. So many people can relate to daily stressors. Many Americans lead very stressful lives. Sarah uses repetition to remind the audience what her main point is.    She repeats, no f***s given, not sorry.

· Rhetorical Appeals – Which of the appeals does the text rely on primarily? All may be used, but what would be the order of importance, from your analysis? Be sure to explain.   

· Sarah knight uses ethos in her introduction. She compares herself to most Americans who are in the pursuit of a calmer, happier life. She then uses both pathos and logos to get her argument across. She uses logos and offers the reader concise terms to help them understand logically, for example, Time, energy, and money. Mental decluttering and the not sorry method is clearly stated in her presentation. Pathos is used when she talks about her deep depression and how she changed her life. She stopped giving F*** about the stuff that doesn’t matter.

 

Outline

1. Introduction (Recommended outline structure for this writing assignment)

1. Brief Background 

2. Thesis – Should clearly address the prompt, and answer the following – “what is the author’s purpose?” 

2. Supporting Paragraphs (repeat more than once) 

1. Topic Sentence 

2. Evidence (From your reading selection)

3. Analysis

4. Concluding Sentence 

HERE IS SOME IDEAS FROM THE INSTRUCTOR

PLEASE REMEMBER TO ONLY WRITE USING ONE CRITICAL LENS

Well, the point of this to look at the text through a different perspective. You interpreted it based, at least partially, from your own perspective. So, if you were a different gender, how might it come across? If you were a different race, how might it come across? If you had a different psychological profile, how might it come across? If you were from a different economic class, how might it come across? I can assume some of these things about you, but I can’t definitively know where you fit in to any of of these. But, the assignment is asking you to think about if from other “lenses”. So, you have to remove yourself and focus on the critical thought it takes to see from a different lens. I hope this makes sense. Let me know if you have further questions.

3.

ABOVE LINK TO TED TALK

TRANSCRIPT: 

Sarah Knight – Freelance writer

We’re living in a post-tidying society. Everyone, including me, has a story about de-cluttering their home. Gathering all of their possessions into the middle of the floor, deciding what brings joy, and then bidding farewell to a set of spatulas in pursuit of a calmer, happier life.

But what if we could gather up all of the other stuff: tasks, events, obligations relationships — and drop it at the kerb without a single regret? And by doing so, be free to focus our time, energy, and money on the stuff that really makes us happy?

Well, I figured out how to do it. It is great, and I call it, “The Life-Changing Magic of Not Giving a F*ck.” I hope you’ll excuse my language because there is more where that came from.

So before I can teach you how to stop giving a fuck, we have to talk about what it means to give one in the first place. ‘Giving a fuck’ means you care, right? So when I say, “I don’t give a fuck about ‘Game of Thrones,’” I mean, “I don’t care about ‘Game of Thrones.’”

Now, let’s take the concept a step further. And let’s define your ‘fucks’ as your time, energy, and money. So if you don’t care about something, you should stop giving your fucks to it. I don’t care about ‘Game of Thrones’ so I don’t spend time watching it; I don’t spend energy wondering where the next season is going; and I don’t spend my money on the books, or merchandise, or anything Westeros related. ‘Game of Thrones’ does not get any of my fucks. Make sense?

By making these calculated decisions, you wind up with more time, energy, and money to spend on the things you really do care about. And I call that “making a fuck budget.”

I’ll get back to fuck budgets in a minute, but first, I want to tell you a little bit about how the life-changing magic of not giving a fuck happened to me.

Two and a half years ago, I was a senior editor at a major New York publishing house. I had spent 15 years clawing my way up the corporate ladder, I had a roster of best-selling authors, and everything I always thought I wanted from my career was coming to pass.

ALSO READ:   Adam Baker: Sell your crap. Pay your debt. Do what you love (Full Transcript)

But I was really, really unhappy. The kind of unhappy that makes it hard to get out of bed in the morning; the kind of unhappy that makes it hard to commute 45 minutes on the New York City subway; and hard to spend 8 to 10 hours at your desk before turning around, going home, and doing it all over again. So, I quit.

And making that decision was also really hard. A lot of red wine, a lot of tears.But what came after I quit was nothing short of life-changing. Once I removed myself from the culture and lifestyle of a job that had been making me so unhappy, I was free to focus my time and energy on what would make me happy, including working, but just in a different way, and eventually, on moving from Brooklyn to a tropical island.

I stopped giving my fucks to working for a corporation, wearing pants, and taking those long subway commutes. And I started giving my fucks to working for myself, wearing bikinis, and taking long walks on the beach. I’m telling you, life changing.

But none of that change happened because I had tidied up my apartment. It happened because I cleared out my mind. Let me try and explain.

Imagine your mind is a barn, and inside it are all of the things that bring you joy, but also, all of the stuff that annoys you. The potential for a happy life is there, but you have to clear out the annoy to make room for the joy. This is mental de-cluttering, and it is magical. I did it by accident when I quit my job, but it was so amazing that I developed a way for you to do it on purpose. I call it “The Not Sorry Method.”

The Not Sorry Method

It has two steps. Step one: Decide what you don’t give a fuck about. Step two: Don’t give a fuck about those things. Simple, right?

But I know what you’re thinking: ‘This sounds like a recipe for turning into an asshole’. It’s OK, I get that a lot. But that’s where the “not sorry” part comes in.

See, my method is all about not giving a fuck using honesty and politeness. So in the end, you don’t have to feel guilty. You are on your best behavior, and you have nothing to apologize for. You are quite literally not sorry. You’re also not an asshole.

ALSO READ:   How to Become More Confident — Lay Down on the Street for 30sec by Till H. Groß (Transcript)

So how might The Not Sorry Method work for you? Well, let’s say, you love ‘Game of Thrones’ and you’ve been invited to a Sunday night dinner party that interferes with watching your favorite show. You feel bad about turning down the invite, but you really love ‘Game of Thrones,’ and you don’t want to record it to watch later because… spoilers.

Well, you only have so much time, energy, and money to spend on Sunday night. So, you need to consult your fuck budget.

Fuck Budget

Decide which activity brings more joy and allocate your fuck bucks accordingly.And I’m telling you, if you respond in a timely fashion, “No thanks, can’t make it to that dinner party,” you’ve done nothing wrong. You were honest, you were polite, and you don’t have to be sorry about it. And that’s just the tip of the fuck-berg.

You can apply the “not sorry” method to anything: tasks, events, obligations, even people. You start by making a list of everything that’s cluttering up your mental barn; all of the impositions on your time, energy, and money; the fucks you’re being asked to give.

To keep it manageable, I go by category. So for example, work is one category, and five fucks on your list might be mandatory meetings, conference calls, your coworkers charity half-marathon, a going away party for a coworker you don’t even like, and doing your actual job.

So once you’ve listed them all out, you perform the “not sorry” method.

Step one: Decide what annoys you. Non-essential stuff you don’t care about.Step two: Stop giving your fucks in the form of time, energy, and money to those things. Then cross them off your list with a big black marker. It feels good, just go with it.

What I’m saying is, yes, you may have to get up and go to work every day, and you may have to attend some mandatory meetings. But you do not have to attend a going away party for a colleague you don’t even like. But if you are still having trouble not giving that fuck? I recommend a visualization exercise.

Visualization Exercise

Picture how you’re going to feel when you walk into that party: annoyed or full of joy? It’s been a long day, your feet hurt, you don’t love socializing with your colleagues at the office, let alone at a shitty bar. You really don’t love pitchers of warm Coors Light. So, what should you do? RSVP ‘No’ of course.

ALSO READ:   Meaghan Ramsey on Why Thinking You’re Ugly Is Bad For You (Transcript)

Why would you spend your fuck bucks or your actual bucks on this party? I’ll tell you why. You do it because you feel obligated and guilty. You are psyching yourself out of a perfectly fine response, “No,” before you even try it. Most people just don’t think this stuff through. They say “Yes” to things like this right away, and then wind up wasting time, energy, and money on an annoying, unenjoyable night out.

You waste even more time and energy just dreading the party a week beforehand. 2And even more, trying to come up with ways to weasel out of your commitment, and then worrying that you’ll be seen as an asshole for bailing at the last minute.

And honestly? If you do bail at the last minute, having never intended to go in the first place, then you are an asshole. And you should feel bad about it.

Instead, pause, visualize, and say a timely, polite, “No, thanks. Can’t make it.”This is how you stop spending time you don’t have, with people you don’t like, doing things you don’t want to do. You’ll be less busy, less burdened, less annoyed. You’ll have so much more time, energy, and money, and you will wonder why you didn’t stop going to baby showers ten years ago.

But look, you don’t have to quit your job and escape to a tropical island like I did.You can make massive, liberating, meaningful change just by clearing out your mental barn, making a fuck budget, and sticking to it. You don’t have to organize a yard sale. You just have to say the words “No, thank you.” “I don’t have time.” “I can’t afford it.” You can even say, “I don’t want to.” The world will not end. This is you being honest and polite. No fucks given, not sorry.

The life-changing magic is right there for the taking. And to be honest, de-cluttering your house only takes about a week. And then it lasts one or two.

But mental de-cluttering? Learning how to say “No,” set boundaries, and give fewer, better fucks, that lasts forever.

Thank you.