race/gender/science fiction - course info

syllabus

KF — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 03:25:01 +0000

This course will focus on a genre that has only in recent years been taken seriously as a subject for critical discourse -- speculative fiction -- and in particular will focus on relatively recent developments, as women and writers of color have increasingly found voices within what was seen for decades as a predominantly white and male genre. Throughout the semester, we're going to think about the "cognitive estrangement" that characterizes science fiction and its related subgenres, as these novels create new worlds that readers must struggle to understand. At the same time, we'll bear in mind the suggestion that all such "other worlds" narratives are always about our own world, and that tales of the future are invariably about the present. What kinds of commentary about contemporary culture can this combination of cognitive estrangement and critical perspective make possible? What kinds of political possibilities can be created through imaginative engagement with worlds radically different from -- and yet reflective of -- our own?

COURSE REQUIREMENTS

Reading Responses (15%): Before class on the last day we'll be discussing an author (so Jan. 30 for Heinlein, Feb. 6 for Gibson, etc.), you will post a reading response to the class blog. Each of these responses should be the equivalent of a one-page, single-spaced paper exploring some critical question affecting the text's meaning, and should use a close reading -- with appropriate quotation, citation, and explication -- of the text to support its points. You can explore issues that have been raised in previous class discussion, but you must significantly expand on that discussion and not simply rehash what's already been said. You can skip two of these reading responses with impunity.

Blogging (10%): In addition to the weekly reading responses, you'll use the blog for more general discussion about issues that arise in or around our class. You will each be required to post at least once a week, aside from the reading responses; these posts can be either top-level discussion openers or substantive comments on other posts, including comments on your peers' reading responses. The point of the blog is to feed our discussions, and to help you generate ideas for the papers you'll be writing this semester; use your posts to test ideas out, to get feedback, and to practice your close readings.

Presentation (10%): You will be divided, early this semester, into discussion groups, which we'll use frequently for small group work during class. Each small group (or a subset thereof) will give a presentation on and facilitate our discussion of one day's reading during the semester; more information about this assignment will follow.

Midterm paper (20%): Your midterm paper will be 4 to 6 pages long, and will perform a careful analysis of a particular aspect of one the texts we'll have read to that point. The assignment will be given out two weeks before the paper is due; more particulars to follow.

Term paper (30%): Your final paper will be 8 to 10 pages long, will involve independent research into the secondary criticism on the text of your choice, and will make a complex, well-defined argument about one of the novels we'll read this semester. You will submit a proposal for this paper just after midterm, and an annotated bibliography not long after that. You will also submit a draft of your paper, both to me and to a peer reviewer, two weeks before the final due date. A detailed assignment will be distributed later in the semester.

Attendance and Participation (15%): See policies below for more information. Bear in mind that participation doesn't mean simply doing the work, or simply speaking up in class, but actively working to make the class a positive learning experience for you and your fellow students.

GRADING AND OTHER POLICIES

My grading policy is pretty straight-forward, and comes in two parts:

The grade of B+ is yours to lose. Here are ways that you can lose it:

1. Miss more than three days of class. I know you all have a lot going on, but this class is your job this semester, and I want you to take it that seriously. You each have one day of vacation and two days of sick leave -- that is, one day that you can miss for whatever reason, and two days that you can miss with an official medical excuse. Use them wisely.

2. Show up late to class more than twice. It drives me absolutely bonkers when people walk into class after it's already begun. It's both rude and distracting. Get to class on time; every three late arrivals will add up to one unexcused absence.

3. Turn your assignments in late. You each have three grace days to use as needed. For instance, if the term paper proposal is due on a Monday, but you have a big exam on Monday, you can use a grace day and turn that proposal in on Tuesday. Please note, however: a "day" is twenty-four hours long, and ends at 5.00 pm. If you don't turn the proposal in until Wednesday morning, that's two grace days. Any lateness beyond these three grace days will count against your grade. Please note that because these grace days are freebies, I will give no extensions. Don't even ask.

4. Don't take the blog seriously. The blog is a key element of the course; it is taking the place of formal, print-on-paper reading responses, and it's also a space in which you can feel free to explore your ideas about the class material in whatever way most appeals to you. Not posting regularly or ceasing to post halfway through the semester constitutes a failure to take the blog seriously, as do posts that have obviously been slapped together in two minutes or less.

5. Fail to do the reading. Much of our in-class work is built around discussion, and you cannot participate fruitfully in a discussion if you aren't prepared. Read carefully, take notes on the reading, post your responses on your blog, and participate in class discussions. With respect to which:

6. Fail to participate collegially in class discussions. You don't need to speak every day. And you absolutely must not monopolize the discussion. But both never speaking and appearing to overly enjoy the sound of your own voice constitute a failure of collegiality. Our discussions are a group endeavor, meant to help each member of the class reach the greatest possible understanding of the material.

7. Turn in a weak, ill-thought-through, unpolished, dull, pointless, or generally mediocre project. Need I say more?

8. Give a scattered, unpolished, unengaged, or OVERLY LONG presentation. Again, 'nuff said, except about the length question: I'm dead serious about this. I will stop you when time is up, and if I have to stop you, your grade will suffer. Practice your presentation, and time yourself carefully.

9. Plagiarize. Academic dishonesty in any form will result in automatic failure of this class. Period. If you have any concerns about what constitutes academic dishonesty, refer to your student handbook, or ask me.

The grades of A- and A must be earned. Here are ways to earn them:

1. Write excellent papers. What constitutes excellence? Doing more than simply completing the terms of the assignment. An excellent paper is sophisticated, nuanced, engaging, and insightful. It is technically polished and free of any kind of errors. It shows evidence of a substantive, thoughtful engagement with the course materials. It is, above all, interesting, designed to draw the reader into full engagement with its argument.

2. Maintain an excellent blog. Make me look forward to visiting your blog often, and stimulate thoughtful conversation in your comments.

3. Participate excellently in class. Excellence in class participation means not simply speaking frequently, but contributing in an active and generous way to the work of the class as a whole, by asking questions, offering interpretations, politely challenging your colleagues, and graciously accepting challenges in return.

4. Deliver an excellent presentation. An excellent presentation is one that is focused, organized, engaging, and to the point. It has what my predecessor, Brian Stonehill, used to refer to as "heart, smarts, and sparkle."

TEXTS

All required books are available at Huntley Bookstore, and other required readings are posted on the web. Required films will be posted on etv.pomona.edu, and DVDs of most of them can be checked out from the Media Studies Library (Hahn 110). Additional recommended texts are listed in the schedule; these are available at Amazon.com; recommended films may be in the Media Studies Library.

SCHEDULE

W Jan 23	Introduction
M Jan 28	Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers (1959) Darko Suvin, "On the Poetics of the Science Fiction Genre" [pdf] Carl Freedman, "Polemical Afterwordâ€¦" [pdf]
W Jan 30	Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers (cont.) Starship Troopers (dir. Paul Verhoeven, 1997) recommended: Orson Scott Card, Ender's Game (1977)
M Feb 4	William Gibson, Neuromancer (1984) Brian McHale, "POSTcyberMODERNpunkISM" John Huntington, "Newness, Neuromancer, and the End of Narrative" [pdf] Lance Olsen, "Cyberpunk and the Crisis of Postmodernity" [pdf]
W Feb 6	William Gibson, Neuromancer (cont.) Blade Runner (dir. Ridley Scott, 1982) recommended: Philip K. Dick, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (1968)
M Feb 11	Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid's Tale (1986) Raffaella Baccolini, "Gender and Genre in the Feministâ€¦" [pdf] Shirley Neuman, "Just a Backlashâ€¦" [pdf]
W Feb 13	Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid's Tale (cont.) The Handmaid's Tale (dir. Volker Schlondorff, 1990) recommended: P.D. James, The Children of Men (1993); Children of Men (dir. Alfonso CuarÃ³n, 2006)
M Feb 18	Ursula K. LeGuin, Left Hand of Darkness (1969) Robin Roberts, "Postmodernism and Feminist Science Fiction" [pdf]
W Feb 20	Ursula K. LeGuin, Left Hand of Darkness (cont.) Barbarella (dir. Roger Vadim, 1968) recommended: Joanna Russ, Female Man (1975)
M Feb 25	Octavia Butler, Lilith's Brood: Dawn (1987) Alcena Rogan, "Alien Sex Acts in Feminist Science Fiction" [pdf]
W Feb 27	Octavia Butler, Lilith's Brood: Adulthood Rites (1988) Alien (dir. Ridley Scott, 1979) recommended: Aliens (dir. James Cameron, 1986)
M Mar 3	Octavia Butler, Lilith's Brood: Imago (1989) Octavia Butler, "Bloodchild" [pdf] MIDTERM PAPER DUE
W Mar. 7	No class: Prof. Fitzpatrick at conference
M Mar 10	Samuel Delany, Stars in My Pocket Like Grains of Sand (1984) Chris West, "Perverting Science Fiction" [pdf]
W Mar 12	Delany, Stars in My Pocket Like Grains of Sand (cont.) The Brother from Another Planet (dir. John Sayles, 1984)
M/W Mar 17-19	No class: Spring break
M Mar 24	C. J. Cherryh, Cyteen (1988) Gattaca (dir. Andrew Niccol, 1997) recommended: C. J. Cherryh, Downbelow Station (1981) TERM PAPER PROPOSAL DUE
W Mar 26	No class: Prof. Fitzpatrick at conference
M Mar 31	Nicola Griffith, Slow River (1995) Pia Moller, "The Unsettled Undercurrents of Hedon Road" [pdf]
W Apr 2	Nicola Griffith, Slow River (cont.) Tank Girl (dir. Rachel Talalay, 1995) recommended: Elice Ray Helford, "Postfeminism and the Female Action-Adventure Hero: Positioning Tank Girl"
M Apr 7	Neal Stephenson, Snow Crash (1992) David Porush, "Hacking the Brainstem" ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY DUE
W Apr 9	Neal Stephenson, Snow Crash (cont.) eXistenZ (dir. David Cronenberg, 1999)
M Apr 14	Nalo Hopkinson, Midnight Robber (2000) Gordon Collier, "Spaceship Creole" [pdf]
W Apr 16	Nalo Hopkinson, Midnight Robber (cont.) The Last Angel of History (dir. John Akomfrah, 1997) TERM PAPER DRAFT DUE TO PEER REVIEWER recommended: Nalo Hopkinson, Brown Girl in the Ring (1997)
M Apr 21	William Gibson, Pattern Recognition (2003) Veronica Hollinger, "Stories about the Future" [pdf] Christopher Palmer, "Pattern Recognition" [pdf] Neil Easterbrook, "Alternate Presents" [pdf]
W Apr 23	William Gibson, Pattern Recognition (cont.) The Matrix (dir. Andy & Larry Wachowski, 1999) COMMENTED DRAFTS DUE BACK FROM PEER REVIEWER recommended: William Gibson, Spook Country (2007)
M Apr 28	Margaret Atwood, Oryx and Crake (2003) Margaret Atwood, "My Life in Science Fiction" [pdf]
W Apr 30	Margaret Atwood, Oryx and Crake (cont.) 12 Monkeys (dir. Terry Gilliam, 1995) TERM PAPER DUE
M May 5	Battlestar Galactica (2003-2007)
W May 7	Battlestar Galactica (cont.) Concluding remarks Course evaluations

schedule changes

KF — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 23:04:55 +0000

Okay, so as I mentioned in class today, I've got to cancel class next Wednesday due to an emergency meeting I have to attend. I want to propose the following options:

1. We spend Monday, April 21, discussing Gibson and the secondary criticism as listed on the syllabus, but I order pizza and we stay until as close to 1.15 as we possibly can, so that both Monday's and Wednesday's groups can present on Monday, and we can finish with Gibson in one day.

2. We leave Monday's class just as it's currently scheduled, and instead extend class on Monday, April 28, spending the first chunk of class on Gibson before turning to Atwood. Pizza, ditto.

3. We find some time -- Friday, May 2? -- to schedule an extra class session. Probably a pizza-oriented enticement could be arranged.

Please register votes (or list additional options) in the comments...

peer review

KF — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 21:27:33 +0000

A few notes on the peer review process:

First off, if you don't have a partner as yet, please leave a comment on this post; there are likely other folks looking for partners to work with, too. If we wind up with only one person who seems unpaired, I'd appreciate it if a group would expand to three.

Second, as you read your partner's draft, comment by hand in the margins, of course, but you should also type out a coherent general response to the paper overall. A helpful response to your partner's draft will likely include comments on all or most of the following issues. The list below is for your convenience; you needn't address each item one after the other, though you may do so if it makes things easier.

Identify what appears to be the present draft's thesis or overall point. If you aren't sure exactly what it is, list the most likely possibilities.
Tell the author whether her thesis is interesting to you or not. Does it add anything substantive to your understanding of the novel(s) in question? If not, you might suggest ways to make the argument more interesting.
If, on the other hand, the overall thesis seems to you implausible, or unconvincing, or if you can see serious objections to it that the author hasn't addressed, say so, and detail why.
Describe, in no more than one short paragraph, the overall argument that's advanced in support of the thesis (in other words, how the author goes about constructing her thesis). If this seems impossible, explain why -- try to identify areas you find confusing or unclear.
Identify two parts of the overall argument that seem comparatively strong, persuasive, or effective.
Identify two parts of the overall argument that seem comparatively weak, unpersuasive, or ineffective.
Does the author use any abstract terms or phrases whose precise meanings in the paper aren't clear to you?
How well do the draft's parts fit together? Is the author doing a good job of moving the reader coherently from one part of the argument to another? If not, try to identify some places where you got disoriented or couldn't figure out quite where in the discussion you were.
Does the author's use of details and quotations from the primary text(s) and/or secondary sources seem effective? Do some of the quotations seem stuck in merely to satisfy the research requirements of this assignment? Are any quotations unnecessarily long? Are quotations introduced well, woven smoothly into the author's own prose, or do they just seem to hang there awkwardly? Do you know how the author interprets the key ideas of each quote she uses, and how those ideas connect to her argument? Are the quotations correctly punctuated and cited?
Identify (in the margins of the draft if not in the letter) any basic syntactic, usage, punctuation, spelling, or typographical errors. Since final drafts may be penalized if they contain such egregious errors, you'll be doing your partner a service by catching those errors now.
As your partner goes forward to revise this draft, give her at least two general suggestions for making the paper better.

Let me know if you have questions...

could it be yours?

KF — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:42:03 +0000

I've got an annotated bibliography with no name on it; the paper apparently focuses on Snow Crash, and the bibliography includes Pettman, Stockton, Gardner, Wyatt, Dougherty, Haraway, and Lakoff. Anyone care to take credit for their work?

where to start that research?

KF — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 00:52:47 +0000

I've been meaning to bring this up in class for the last week, and only today during office hours, while talking with a member of the class, did I suddenly remember: given that many of you are science/math/otherwise non-English majors, you might want a pointer or two on how to start your research.

The key thing is this: don't use Google Scholar; it's crap when it comes to the humanities. And don't start with JStor -- you'll get there, but it's not the place to begin. Begin on the library's home page (http://libraries.claremont.edu, but please don't tell me if you didn't already know that), and in the center of the page, click on the "most used databases" drop-down menu. What you want is the MLA Bibliography; everything published in literary and cultural studies is indexed in this bibliography, including all of the journals in JStor or Project Muse, but many, many others besides. The MLA Bibliography also indexes articles in edited volumes, which no other electronic database will help you find.

So: MLA Bibliography. Start there. If you find yourself stuck, talk to your friendly neighborhood research librarian; Gale Burrow is the literature specialist, and she'll likely be tremendous help.

presentation signups

KF — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:21:24 +0000

A reminder: presentation signups are taking place through the wiki on the Sakai site; if you have not yet signed up for a date, please do so immediately!

term paper assignment

KF — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:47:43 +0000

I've just emailed the term paper assignment to everyone, and am going to attach it to the proper places in the syllabus. Please let me know if you have questions.

oops

KF — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 00:16:21 +0000

I see that my intent to have the McHale essay posted on the syllabus in time for you to read it for tomorrow's class has been utterly foiled by my complete failure to follow through. Read the other two essays and the Gibson, and I'll attempt to get McHale up there sometime this week.

reading responses

KF — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 21:41:27 +0000

I'm in the process of reading and commenting upon your reading responses from last week, and wanted to give you all a few pieces of information based on my readings of them.

First of all, your responses are by and large good. Some of you could bear to go into a bit more detail in your close readings -- carefully analyzing the issue as it is represented in the text, supporting your points with demonstrated evidence from the text, or from other texts, and so forth. Remember that these responses are meant to be the equivalent of about a one page paper. And remember that these are supposed to be a little bit more formal than your average blog post -- you need to pay attention to the conventions of good academic writing (including grammar, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, etc., but also including citation formats, diction, structure, and other issues), as I'm assessing these responses both on the quality of the ideas they contain and on the clarity with which those ideas are expressed.

Second, on the tags: I'm cleaning up the tags we've used so far a bit, to create a bit of consistency. All posts must have tags, but don't overuse them -- creating too many similar tags makes things more confusing rather than more organized. (So, for instance, we had tags like "response," "reading response," "response 1," and "ST reading response"; I've combined all of these into "Response 1," so that all posts about that idea will be grouped together.)

Along that line, when you post your reading responses for this week, be sure to tag them "Response 2". A careful use of tags like this will help me to make sure that your reading responses are recorded properly.

Let me know if you have questions, and I'll look forward to seeing you all tomorrow.