Next week, we're going to have another debate. This one will be a little trickier than last time; this time we'll be dealing with multiple texts and some pretty heavy-duty theory. I have total faith that you all are up to the task.
The resolution we will be debating is:
RESOLVED, that Snow Crash is a Hegelian story, not a Brechtian story.
Your post this week, like before our last debate, will again take the form of a position paper. (As a quick reminder, in a position paper, you state your position at the outset and then spend the rest of the paper defending your position.) We'll do teams by FIRST NAMES this time.
If your first name begins with A(nneva)-J(on), you will write a position paper in favor of this resolution. That is, you will argue that Snow Crash is a Hegelian story, not a Brechtian story.
If your first name begins with K(aitlin)-Y(erbol), you will write a positon paper in opposition to this resolution. That is, you will argue that Snow Crash is NOT a Hegelian story; rather, it is a Brechtian story.
Obviously, your two main sources for this position paper will be the SECOND HALF of Snow Crash (Chs. 39-71) and the "Hegel and Brecht" chapter from Theatre of the Oppressed. Please make explicit reference to both texts in your position paper -- including quotes and/or page citations. Feel free to bring in other texts from class if you think they'd help, but generally stay focused on these two; they'll give you plenty to work with!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment