The original prompt was to choose a character in one of the short stories (of the three we've read so far) that you liked the best, analyze why they work (how does she draw the characters, why do they behave the way they do, etc.), and explain why they appeal to you personally. (EDITED to correct the prompt.)
The optional prompt (meaning that you may do this one instead) is to consider our discussion on Thursday about our responses to gender in the stories. What expectations do we have about how the different genders respond to/approach nature? How do you personally respond to it, and does your response fit the expectations? That is, we talked about the fact that many of us were surprised at both the bluntness of Pam Houston's writing and of some of her female characters' boldness in natural settings. Is this the normal expectation for women in the outdoors? How do you feel about it? Where do your assumptions come from?
Personally, I think the optional prompt is more interesting...
If you have any questions, feel free to email me or to stop by during office hours.
Cheers!
2 comments:
Maybe i got confused, but I was under the impression that the original prompt was to write about your favorite character (rather than just story) from any of the stories and to expand on why they are important and how the author uses the tools you mentioned to expand?
Oops! You're right! I'll make that change. Thanks, Julie!
Post a Comment