ENGL 298 B: Intermediate Writing Social Sciences   Autumn 2011, University of Washington

For this week, I’d like you to leave comments on at least two of your classmates’ blog posts. A reminder: comments are meant to be substantive, i.e., more than just “this is cool” or “I like this post.” You can review the guidelines for blogging posted above, if it’s helpful.

A substantive comment might agree, and offer another relevant point; apply the author’s perspective to another situation (e.g., extending his or her argument.). A substantive comment could also disagree (taking care to explain why), or might raise a question, either explaining why the question needs to be raised, or suggesting the start of an answer. FYI: I’ll be reading and commenting, too.

I expect to have you all in writing groups by Friday of this week. From that point forward, you will be responsible for commenting on your three other writing group members’ posts each week, so that you can become familiar with each other’s ideas and writing style. This doesn’t mean you can’t comment on other people’s posts as well, and I encourage you to read all of them — but I’m only making you responsible for 3.

Here’s your assignment for Week 3, which is designed to allow you to start exploring Emma Goldman’s ideas through writing, and to give you some practice working with the definitions of the thick and thin self as described by Prof. DiStefano (if you didn’t get a chance to write them down during lecture, you can find them in the Week 2 overheads in the online reserves):

Please respond to the following prompt: How would Goldman react to the idea of thick and thin selves? (Would she see herself as advocating one or the other? What might her critique of thick selfhood (as defined by Prof. DiStefano) be? If you see Goldman as advocating for thin selfhood, then why, precisely, would she feel that it was vital? If you see Goldman as predominantly thick or thin, can you see aspects of the other form of selfhood in her ideas as well?)

Note: you do not have to answer every single one of the parenthetical questions. They are recommended/intended as starting points for your post. Also: it may be tempting to bring in Socrates to this post, but I recommend against it — instead, use this space to get familiar working with Goldman’s ideas. There’ll be plenty of occasions to put her and Socrates together later.