Spring 2001
TTh 9:40-11:10
Thaxter 1
Email: fritzman@lclark.edu
Phone: 503-768-7477 (voice mail)
Office: Miller 308
Hours: MWF 10:30-12:00 & 1:30-2:30, TTh 11:30-12:00 & 1:30-3:00,
& by appointment
COURSE DESCRIPTION
Sigmund
Freud: "The great question that has never been answered, and which I
have not yet been able to answer despite my thirty years of research
into the feminine soul, is: What does a woman want?"
Perplexed and frustrated,
Freud wondered, "What does a woman want?" It's fashionable to laugh
at him for asking. He should have known, we chuckle. He should have
asked a woman, we sneer. Almost a century later, however, there's still
no consensus on the answer. A recent
study did ask women what they want. Their reply? They want $40,000
a year. Silly Freud! If only he'd hired some opinion pollsters. Or talked
to Mel
Gibson.
In this course, we'll study
the intersections, and collisions, of feminism and psychoanalysis. If
that doesn't excite you, then you don't know what you want. Or need.
-- Well, at least that's
what my advertising blurb claims!
There are seven required
texts:
Susan Alice Watkins,
Marisa Rueda, and Marta Rodriquez, Introducing Feminism.
Sophia Phoca and Rebecca
Wright, Introducing Postfeminism.
Richard Appignanesi and
Oscar Zarate, Freud for Beginners.
Darian Leader and Judy
Groves, Introducing Lacan.
Mari Jo Buhle, Feminism
and Its Discontents: A Century of Struggle with Psychoanalysis.
Judith P. Butler, Bodies
that Matter: On the Discursive Limits of "Sex".
Renata Salecl, editor,
Sexuation (Sic 3).
The first four books are
written in a graphic, comic book, format. The remaining three are in
the usual discursive and boring style. Why comic books? Because I do
not assume that you have any previous knowledge about feminism or psychoanalysis.
Since this is a 400-level course, it would not be appropriate to teach
it as though it were a survey course. Enter the comic books that will
bring you up to speed.
In addition to learning
about feminism's relations with psychoanalysis, this course also will
provide you with the skills required to succeed in professional or graduate
school.
In preparation for each
class meeting, you should have read the assigned material. You should
arrive in class with prepared questions or comments about the assigned
reading.
Each student will be a precis
on almost every reading assignment. In addition, you will write an explication
and an argumentative paper (which includes a prospectus, a draft,
and a mandatory rewrite).
The precis will be
weighted equally, and together will count for 10% of your final grade.
The explication will count for 20% of your final grade. The argumentative
paper will count for 65% of your final grade (the prospectus of the
paper will be worth 5%, the draft will be worth 10%, and the rewrite
will be worth 50%). In addition, 5% of your final grade will be based
on participation and attendance.
The grading scale is as
follows: A = 93%-100%, A- = 90%-92%, B+ = 86%-89%, B = 83%-85%, B- =
80%-82%, C+ = 76%-79%, C = 73%-75%, C- = 70%-72%, D+ = 66%-69%, D =
60%-65%, and F = 0%-59%.
A precis will
be due almost every class session. Each precis will be one
typed page -- never longer -- double-spaced, with 1 inch margins on
the right & left sides and the top & bottom. It must be at least
3/4 of a page in length. Use a 12-point Times font. There will be no
spelling or grammatical errors in your precis. Your name will
typed in the upper right-hand corner. In each precis, you will
summarize -- in your own words, without using any quotes -- the assigned
reading's main claims, as well as the reasons which are
given to support those claims. You will not include any opinion, evaluation,
or commentary. At the bottom of each precis, or on the back,
you will write one question that you have about the reading;
this question may be handwritten. You will receive 1 point for each
precis which meets all of the above requirements, and
2 points if the precis is excellent. I never will accept a late
precis, but I will allow you to drop one.
The explication should
be 4-5 typed pages, double-spaced. You will sign up for a date on which
you will present your explication. On the day you present, you will
distribute copies to all of the persons in this class. This will require,
of course, that you have enough copies made so that each member of the
class has one. You first will read your explication, and then you and
I will serve as the main resource persons for fielding questions concerning
the material. Since the class discussion will be centered around the
explication, it is very important that you distribute the explication
the class session when you present it, and that you actually be in class
to read your explication. The primary purpose of the explication is
to summarize, consolidate, and explicate the central issues, main points,
and key motifs of the assigned reading in order to facilitate class
discussion of the material. It is important that the explication contextualize
the reading by describing briefly both how the reading is a continuation
and development of material which has come before, and how it contributes
to the overall trajectory of the thinker's thought. While the explication
is not intended to be a research paper, it should reflect an acquaintance
with the requisite secondary literature. This means that you must cite
at least four secondary sources you consulted while writing your
explication.
A student presenting an
explication will not be required to submit a precis of that material
too.
The argumentative paper
should be10-12 typed pages, double-spaced. Except for the length, the
paper should follow the same format requirement as the precis
(see the additional helps at the end of this syllabus). There should
be no spelling or grammatical errors in your paper. It must employ argumentation.
You will choose your thesis, but it must be based on the readings for
this course. This paper may emphasize either a historical or theoretical
interpretation. In either case, you should carefully state the problem
you intend to treat, explain its significance, assess its possible solutions,
propose an hypothesis, argue convincingly for that hypothesis, and eliminate
the major (published or imagined) competing hypotheses. You should use
a half-dozen or more high-quality commentaries or articles.
Several weeks before the
draft is due, you will submit a prospectus of this paper -- 4-5
typed pages, double-spaced -- in which you: (1) indicate the topic and
thesis of your paper, (2) fully describe the problem or issue to be
treated, (3) outline your anticipated procedure and probable conclusion,
and (4) include an annotated bibliography of works to be consulted (a
minimum of 6 books or articles, with at least a paragraph discussing
the relevance of each work to your project). A word to the wise: it
would be a marvelous idea to begin thinking today about what your thesis
will be. I want you to succeed, and so I am requiring you to make appointments
to speak with me outside of class prior to submitting your prospectus,
your draft, and your rewrite. I will suggest useful resources, and --
if necessary -- point out potential problems. When submitting your rewrite,
you must hand in both the rewrite and the copy of your draft on which
I have written comments.
No doubt you have realized
-- precis, explication, and an argumentative paper with a prospectus,
draft, and a rewrite -- this course will require a lot of writing. Why?
Because writing can create knowledge, and reasons often are found by
writing. We write about what we already know, but we also produce knowledge
as we write. Not only do we write down our thoughts, we also discover
what we think as we write. Flannery O'Connor observes, "I write because
I don't know what I think until I read what I have to say." The more
you write, the more you will know, and the more you will discover what
you think. As Rebecca West notes, "I really write to find out what I
know about something and what is to be known about something...."
This class will be successful
only if there is a high degree of class participation, and so I want
you in class participating. For each class session, you will receive
1 point if you attend and participate. Further, I will not accept make-up
work unless you can document the reason for your absence. Documenting
the reason for your absence means providing a note from, for example,
your doctor explaining why you were absent. Serious illnesses and emergencies
will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Throughout the course you
are expected to read carefully the assigned material.
It is impossible to do well
in this course without reading and studying the books. You should spend
a minimum of 3 hours preparing for each class session. I suggest
that you read the assigned material at least twice and that you
take notes on what you read. You are expected to attend all class sessions,
come to class having read thoroughly the assigned material, and to contribute
to the discussions.
While it may be true --
as some relativists and malcontents assert -- that there are few right
and wrong answers, there are better and worse arguments and ideas, usually
in direct proportion to thoughtfulness and care. What is important is
that you think for yourself, and that you develop and defend your own
ideas. It would be an excellent idea to write drafts or outlines of
your precis, assessments, and paper, and to have a comrade read
them to check on spelling, grammar, development of arguments, and so
forth.
You are strongly encouraged
to discuss the class material, your ideas, your puzzles and difficulties
with each other. A word to the wise: Find a study partner to discuss
things with outside of class. However, when it comes to finally
writing your thoughts down, do your own writing; it is the only way
you will get the full benefit of your own efforts. I will be happy to
discuss ideas with you, read outlines and rough drafts, and so forth.
That is partly why I keep office hours.
A final word to the wise.
It is not difficult to do well in this class, but it also is easy to
do badly. Let me talk about the bad stuff first. You will receive a
major grade reduction -- or fail this course -- if you do not read the
material, seldom participate in class discussions, do not write your
precis, explication, or paper, plagiarize, cheat, and so forth.
About plagiarizing and cheating.
All students are expected to follow Lewis & Clark College's Academic
Integrity Policy. Except for highly unusual circumstances, plagiarizers
and cheaters will be given an "F" for the entire course (they will not
be allowed to drop or withdraw from the course). I also will turn their
cases over to the Honor Board; usually, I will recommend that disciplinary
penalties be assessed in addition to failing grades. It is never
in your interest to plagiarize or cheat!
Now for the good stuff.
With a concerted effort you can do well in this class. To do well, you
must participate in class discussions, read and study the assigned material,
write the precis, explication, & paper, do your own work,
be in class (almost) all of the time, etc. I do not grade on a curve,
and so there is no good reason why you should not get an "A" for the
course!
Course policy on disability
accommodation: Students with established needs or circumstances
relevant to academic performance must declare this within 1 week of
the beginning of the course. If such needs or circumstances develop
during the semester, they must be declared and documented as soon as
is practical. Failure to observe this requirement will preclude subsequently
citing such needs or circumstances as an excuse for unsatisfactory performance.
COURSE SCHEDULE
T 1/16 Introduction to course.
Th 1/18 Watkins, Rueda,
and Rodriquez, Introducing Feminism; Phoca and Wright, Introducing
Postfeminism.
T 1/23 Appignanesi and Zarate,
Freud for Beginners; Leader and Groves, Introducing Lacan.
Th 1/25 Buhle's Feminism
and Its Discontents, pages 1-52; precis due.
T 1/30 Buhle's Feminism
and Its Discontents, pages 53-84; precis due.
Th 2/1 Buhle's Feminism
and Its Discontents, pages 85-124; precis due.
T 2/6 Buhle's Feminism
and Its Discontents, pages 125-164; precis due. Explication:
DAN METCALF
Th 2/8 Buhle's Feminism
and Its Discontents, pages 165-205; precis due.
T 2/13 Buhle's Feminism
and Its Discontents, pages 206-239; precis due.
Th 2/15 Buhle's Feminism
and Its Discontents, pages 240-279; precis due. Explication:
JARRAH TAYLOR
T 2/20 Buhle's Feminism
and Its Discontents, pages 280-358; precis due.
Th 2/22 Class canceled (Midsouth
Philosophy Conference).
T 2/27 Butler's Bodies
that Matter, pages 1-55; precis due.
Th 3/1 Butler's Bodies
that Matter, pages 57-91; precis due. Explication: NORAH
VAN DUSEN
F 3/2 Prospectus due
in my office by 5:00.
T 3/6 Butler's Bodies
that Matter, pages 93-119; precis due. Explication: JESSICA
POULIN
Th 3/8 Butler's Bodies
that Matter, pages 121-140; precis due. Explication: KATHERINE
MCDERMOTT
T 3/13 Butler's Bodies
that Matter, pages 143-166; precis due. Explication: ALLI
MACHLIS
Th 3/15 Butler's Bodies
that Matter, pages 167-185; precis due. Explication: JACOB
WEISS
T 3/20 Butler's Bodies
that Matter, pages 187-222; precis due.
Th 3/22 Butler's Bodies
that Matter, pages 223-242; precis due. Explication: ROSEMARY
SCHMIDT
T 3/27 Spring Break!
Th 3/29 Spring Break!
T 4/3 Jacques-Alain Miller's
"On the Semblances in the Relation Between the Sexes" in Salecl's Sexuation,
pages 13-27; precis due.
Th 4/5 Colette Soler's "The
Curse on Sex" in Salecl's Sexuation, pages 39-53; precis
due. Explication: MOLLY MCDAVITT
F 4/6 Draft due in my
office by 5:00.
T 4/10 Paul Verhaeghe's
"The Collapse of the Function of the Father and Its Effect on Gender
Roles" in Salecl's Sexuation, pages 131-154; precis due.
Th 4/12 Slavoj Zizek's "The
Thing from Inner Space" in Salecl's Sexuation, pages 216-259;
precis due. Explication: CHAD PRESLEY
T 4/17 Alain Badiou's "What
is Love?" in Salecl's Sexuation, pages 263-281; precis
due. Explication: CARA PALESTINE
Th 4/19 Alenka Zupancic's
"The Case of the Perforated Sheet" in Salecl's Sexuation, pages
282-296; precis due.
T 4/24 Renata Salecl's "Love
and Sexual Difference: Doubled Partners in Men and Women" in Salecl's
Sexuation, pages 297-316; precis due. Explication: LINDSEY
VOLD
Th 4/26 Reading Day.
Th 5/3 Rewrite due at
8:30 AM.
WRITING AN ARGUMENTATIVE
PAPER
Wright
Morris: "You write -- and find you have something to say."
Your paper should be argumentative
rather than informative. A informative paper is one which simply reports
or presents the facts as either you or someone else understands them.
There are four primary rules you need to follow in writing an argumentative
paper: First, you should clarify key ideas. For example, are the troublesome
ideas defined? Are the theories in question clearly stated and exemplified?
Second, you must test the soundness of the arguments for or against
the theories in question. Are the premises true? Third, you should evaluate
the theories. Are the assumptions correct? Are the consequences plausible?
Fourth, most importantly, you must support what you assert with reasons!
Are your claims backed with arguments? Do they follow from other claims
already established?
You should not support your
case merely by: labeling the case as your own; asserting the case's
superiority over the competition; citing an authority, whether theoretical
or scientific. You must never use ad hominum arguments -- that is, attacking
a person's character or circumstances, rather than criticizing that
person's arguments.
Your paper will be evaluated
on the following sorts of criteria: Is your case supported with arguments?
Is the paper clearly written? Have you fairly and accurately presented
other's views? Is your paper well organized? Have you tried to think
for yourself?
Organizational strategies:
Formulating the
problem: Focus the general topic you have decided to deal with into
a specific question or statement which will be the thesis of your paper.
Clarify key terms. Think through any assumption of the question or statement
you are attempting to answer or discuss -- how do these influence the
kind of answers that might be given?
Deciding on the format.
Some common formats are: Comparing and contrasting two or more theories
in order to determine the most adequate one for the problem. Criticizing
a single theory or argument. Defending another thinker's view against
a mistaken criticism. Supporting an original theory of your own.
Ways to incorporate another
thinker's view: Restating a thinker's argument or theory in a clearer,
more incisive way. Applying that argument or theory to areas not discussed
by its original proponent. Admitting that the view is mistaken in
places, but attempting to remedy those deficiencies and thus producing
a modified view.
Some features of a good
introduction: It should state the problem to which you will address
yourself. It should state what you intend to show -- for example,
that a theory should be modified or that one is preferable to another.
It should state how you propose to show what you have stated -- for
example, by showing that one theory rests on highly questionable assumptions.
To achieve coherence,
ask yourself the following questions as you re-read your first draft
sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph: What is the relevance
of this passage, and does it fit clearly here? Is the passage an essential
link in my argument? Is it used to clarify something? Does it tell
the reader where I am and where I am going? If it is an argument,
is it relevant to what I am trying to show? Does this sentence add
anything to the substance of my essay? Does my introduction really
state my main point?
Achieving clarity. Some
rules of thumb for presenting a clear statement of your ideas: Avoid
vagueness, particularly of key terms and sentences; a vague expression
is one which fails to specify exactly to what objects or circumstances
it should be applied -- give definitions, use examples, restate things
in different words, etc. Avoid ambiguity; ambiguity happens when the
reader is unsure which among several possible meanings of an expression
is intended. Minimize your use of technical or profound-sounding expressions
like "reality," "absolute," "subjective," or "cosmic." Do not rely
heavily on metaphors and analogies; metaphors can be used in addition
to, never in place of, argumentation. Make what you mean and what
you say harmonize; make sure that your words actually say what you
intend.
Using examples: Remember
that examples are not arguments, but illustrating devices. Think through
carefully the relation between the examples and what it is you wish
to illustrate.
Writing well: Keep your
sentences short! Use devices that tell your readers where you have
been and where you expect to go -- for example, "Let us now turn to
our first argument," or "Following my presentation of theory X, I
shall offer two criticisms of it." Do not pad your paper with too
many examples, restatements of the obvious, and extended quotations.
Use active voice rather than passive voice -- for example, instead
of writing "Theory X was earlier shown by me to be false," write "I
have demonstrated X to be false."
Guidelines for Submitting
Finished Papers: All papers must be typed, double-spaced. You should
number your pages. Your paper should not contain any spelling or grammatical
errors. Do not quadruple-space between paragraphs. If at all possible,
use a computer or a word-processor when writing your paper; this will
make revising much easier. Do not make corrections on your paper --
if you find a mistake, retype that page. The copy you submit must be
clean and printed with a dark ribbon. Margins should be 1 inch at the
top, bottom, and on the right & left sides. If you are using a computer,
use a size 12 palatino or courier font. Papers must meet the required
length. Papers must be titled. Do not include a title page. In
the upper-right corner of the first page, type your name, the course
number, and the date. Staple your pages once in the upper-left corner.
Do not use folders or those plastic things -- use a stapler. You must
keep an extra copy of your paper -- if I cannot find your paper, I will
assume that you did not submit one. When you submit a rewrite, you must
hand in both the rewrite and the copy of your draft on which
I have written comments. All papers must be turned in on time!
Writing an excellent
paper can get you more than a good grade. It can serve as a writing
sample when applying to graduate schools. There is honor and glory
too! There are a number of philosophy journals for undergraduates.
Here is a list of some of them: Aporia, Carleton University
Student Journal of Philosophy, The Dialectic: University of
New Hampshire Undergraduate Philosophy Journal, Dialogue,
Discourse, The Dualist, Episteme, Exordium,
Hampshire College Journal of Philosophy, The Lyceum,
The Philosopher, Philosophika: The Internet Journal of Philosophy,
Public Sphere, Purdue Calumet Undergraduate Conference in
English and Philosophy, Santa Clara Undergraduate Philosophy
Conference, Student Philosophical Journal, and Student
Philosophy Online.
Also, there are philosophy
conferences for undergraduates. For information about undergraduate
conferences, visit http://www.earlham.edu/~phil/undjourn.htm
-- this site has information about undergraduate journals too.