Critical Perspective paper
1. How do you feel this paper turned out?
on a scale of one to pretty crappy, i'd have to say crappy. I don't feel like I am doing this paper right! Perhaps we are not supposed to feel like we got it all together just yet... and that is part of the process, but this paper made me feel like an idiot... If i am being honest.
2. How will the critical perspectives you selected allow you to talk about your artifact?
It is going to allow me to look at the issues of dating and how they are more traditional that not when applied to Sex and the City.
3. How were the articles you read using this perspective or one similar to it helpful to you?
The articles were helpful, but not as much as I though. I ended up getting thrown around the whole feminist issues more that traditional dating aspects.
4. Do you feel like there is something that you should have included or described in more detail?
Probably, but if i could think of it i would have included it!
5. What are the three biggest strengths of this essay?
I feel I have the structure down, I kinda know what I want to do, I feel my paper's direction has potential.
6. What do you think are two of its weaknesses?
I lack a more direct structure and my sources are not srtong enough at this point, and they should be.
7. What would you like your reviewers to focus on? tell me if you feel I on on the right page, do you think I have a clue here or not?
posted by dawnemry @ 12:50 AM
2 Comments:
Comm 355: Critical/Cultural Methods
Critical Perspective Paper Comments
Please post responses to the following questions on the blog of the author of the paper your are reviewing by Tuesday, April 4.
1. How does the author justify their choice of critical perspective and why it is appropriate for this particular text? Is this justification sufficient? What could be done to improve it?
I'm not sure a specific critical perspective was a chosen, although the units of analysis were there and they were good. I am not sure exactly how you will be examining this to prove your point. I think now that you know what you want to look at, choosing your critical perspective will be a lot easier.
2. Does this perspective(s) seem to arise from the rhetoric itself rather than seeming forced or artificial? In other words, does the perspective fit the artifact? What perspective seems to make the most sense with this artifact?
The units of analysis do not seem forced or artificial, they seem real. The perspective that would be best for this is probably the feminist perspective infiltrated with a little narrative. I say the feminist perspective because it talks about gender role construction, and your paper is talking about gender role construction in dating. I suggest thinking about narrative because all of this is talking through narrative, and these narratives seem to enforce the ideology that women should be in more traditional roles.
3. What will this perspective allow the author to explain/discuss that is interesting about the artifact?
This perspective will allow you to explain and discuss further about how this construction of gender for females, where women are supposed to get married have children, and why and where this ideology comes from.
4. Are the theories that comprise the perspective clearly explained?
I have to say not really.
5. Is there support/literature for the validity of this perspective? Is there literature that helps explain the perspective/theory? Is there literature cited where the perspective has been employed by others?
There is some literature to support her ideas, although more will definitely be needed. There is some literature cited where they talk about women and dating, but not as much as people who use any sort of critical perspective that would support this paper.
6. Does the author explain how they will apply this method/perspective to their artifact? What will the author be looking for in the artifact? How does what they will be looking for (units of analysis) stem from the theory/perspective discussed in the first part of the paper?
Not really, but I think once you figure out the exact critical perspective than you can. She will be looking for how women dating are portrayed and if how they are portrayed are furthering traditional ideologies about women.
7. What more does the author need to do to improve this section before beginning their analysis?
Choose a perspective, because the rest is pretty good.
8. What else can you recommend to the author about this process?
I would say figure out a plan of dissecting this piece to analyze it, and from there you can see what perspective is best for you.
1. I think your on the right track, you just need to go a little deeper and do just some basic definitions of words and issues.
2. Yes, I do think you chose an appropriate perspective to critique this series. Courtship and datind rituals do seem to be an emphasized theme in these episodes and thus justified into wanting to analyze about it further.
3. I like the traditional/non-traditional thing you got going on. I think, however, you need to define exactly what these are. However, that might be a little hard. You might just want to develop a paper based on teh fact that Sex and the City brings up a lot of traditional dating issues. Its not about "prooving" anything. Its just about noticing it in a different light.
4. Theories, semi clear but again, might want to expand.
5. Nope, definately should include other literature where this perspective has been applied.
6. Sould define more clearly what you are going to be looking for in depth. YOu seemed to just barely touch on a few things. you should just focus on 3 or 4 main topics.
7. oooo where to begin... No, I think you've got the right idea, you just need to expand on it a liitle further and do some more research. I think its a great start.
8. For further recomendations, please refer to # 1-7.
Post a Comment
<< Home