—Sally Foster Wallace
DFW/SFW teaching-related correspondence:
Excerpt from a letter from David in 1987, when he was a TA at the University of Arizona:
“I handed my papers back yesterday, and saw a burning effigy outside a frat party last night that looked a bit suspicious. It’s lonely at the bottom (a quote from Auden.)”
Excerpt from a January 25, 1991, letter when he was an adjunct professor at Emerson College:
“My students are nice, and though I was terribly anxious before the semester started, things are going better first-week-wise than they did last term. Mom, your object-and-subject exercise was a big hit, and it gave me a chance to see that these kids are really very acute readers; their trouble is that they know all this stuff in a vague intuitive way and haven’t been given any sort of schema for organizing and using their instincts. Or so I hope. On the East Coast, stilted and phonily formal prose is more a problem than aint’s and where-at’s, it seems, so I am adopting the persona of the minimalist, which is a hoot.”
DFW/SFW teaching/grammar-related e-mails:
DFW to SFW February 25, 2007
Yo. Question. Re the following sentence—“I have trouble being clear, concise, lucid, and brief.”—are the four adjectives here adjectives, or are they subject complements. In “I am tall,” I know that “tall” is a subj. coml. I was taught that predicates following the verb “to be” are always subj. compl.’s, not adjectives/But is that still true when the form of “to be” is part of a participial phrase that is itself modifying something?
Help, oh Queen of R?!
/dw/
SFW to DFW February 26, 2007
A: Short answer: no.
Long answer: When I first clapped my beady, bloodshot blues on the beginning of your query quite early this morning, my reaction was “Yikes—clear and lucid are synonyms, as are concise and brief—why the wordiness”? Then, after reading your entire question, I was flummoxed, so I googled “subject complements in grammar” to help me think about this. There are a lot of links, some of them helpful.
My training in grammar (and it was Latin grammar) took place long before subject, object, and verb complements were designations. so my grammatical expertise is probably antiquated to the point of being of little use. However, your question triggered these synapses: clear, concise, lucid, and brief are inarguably adjectives that appear in the sentence’s predicate, and I can’t see any problem springing from calling them adjectives. “Being” here isn’t behaving like a verb—it’s behaving like a noun, and I think the rule you were taught pertains only to forms of “to be” that are functioning as verbs.
Meanwhile, back to that pesky wordiness.…
Love,
Scullery Maid of R
DFW to SFW February 27, 2007
Mom—Thanks. Note, though, the sexy po-mo way that the wordiness of the sentence helps undergird its claim (in a sort of Gillliganish way).
The sentence’ll get cut, anyway—I’m doing this intro for the BAE 06, and so far it sounds like someone with a terrible fever. /dw/
SFW to DFW February 27, 2007
In the middle of yoga class yesterday, the realization smote me that the wordiness was intentional and clever and yours. (I originally thought that the sentence was a snippet from one of your students, and you were seeking a way to discuss it.) DUH!
LYL, Ma
DFW to SFW February 28, 2007
Yeah, but it’ll get cut anyway. It’s like the old joke: “My wife says I’m indecisive. but I’m not so sure…” har d har
DFW to SFW March 29, 2007
Mom: We were doing lie/lay last night, and someone asked me what the following tense is: “The tractor was lying in the yard.” Is that the perpetual past? Why is it not laying, since “lay” is the past participle of “lie”? I sweated and ahem’d; I fingered my tie-knot. I didn’t know what to say.
/dw/
SFW to DFW March 29, 2007
Was lying is the past progressive (old-fashioned label)/continuous past (new one)—formed with the past form of to be (was) plus the present participle of the verb (lying). The past participle of to lie is lain. Lay is the past tense of to lie. Hope this helps. Unhand that tie-knot!
Love, Mom
DFW to SFW November 29, 2007
Q: Consider the sentence “I believe that John killed Fred.” I was hectoring students last night about dropping “that’s” in constructions, and I was arguing that “to believe” can function both transitively (I believe you) and intransitively (see supra), and then I wondered: Is “to believe” intransitive in “I believe that John killed Fred”? If so, then is the clause “John killed Fred” a subject complement, or an indirect object, or what? And what part of speech is “that” in the sentence? Can you help? :-) /dw/
SFW to DFW November 29, 2007
Yowser of a grammar question! My initial gut feeling was that THAT JOHN KILLED FRED is the direct object of BELIEVE, obviously transitive here. As you know, the test for transitiveness is to repeat the verb softly to yourself and then ask WHOM OR WHAT: The answer is THAT JOHN KILLED FRED. That’s a direct object, to me. Just for cackles, I thought I’d check Bryan Garner, and ADMAU is pretty darn woolly here. On page 649, in section B, Wrongly Suppressed THAT, he says, “in formal writing, THAT is often ill-advisedly omitted” and then goes on to give good examples, but he never says what part of speech THAT is.
Then I used my Imac’s dictionary twanger, which states that THAT functions as a conjunction when it introduces a subordinate clause expressing a statement or hypothesis. “She said that she was satisfied.” “It is possible that we have misunderstood.”
Bingo! I like this a lot.
Italics don’t often make it through cyberspace successfully, so I’ve capitalized instead.
DFW to SFW November 29, 2007
A conjunction? What kind of conjunction? It sure isn’t coordinating… /dw/
SFW to DFW November 30, 2007
According to my very recent research, THAT is one of a special group of SUBORDINATING conjunctions that introduce a complement clause: I wonder WHETHER he’ll be late. I hope THAT he’ll be on time.
English 64A First-Day Pop Quiz
Name:
Please define or explain the following terms that people often use when talking technically about fiction-writing. If you don’t know a term, skip it.
Developed versus Undeveloped Character
Point of View
Narrative Omniscience
Summary versus Scene
Plot
Freitag’s Triangle
Unreliable Narrator
Genre Fiction versus Literary Fiction
Sentimentality
Voice
English 64A Student Data Sheet
(Feel Free To Use Back)
Name:
Class & Major:
Campus Phone:
Email Address:
OK to include your phone/email in a Class Roster that we’ll all have a copy of? Yes / No
Total # of finished pages of fiction you’ve written so far, lifetime:
Name two or three pieces of published fiction you’ve read that actually mean something to you. Explain what about each story gets to you so much, if you can.
Taken any kind of creative writing course before, ever? If so, when & where? What was the best thing about the class? What were some not-so-good things about it?
Explain what you’d like to get out of this course—like, what your consumer-expectations are. (It would help to be specific… and to be honest rather than just saying whatever it is you think the instructor wants to hear.)
How concerned are you about grades in this course? What do you expect your final grade to be based on? If you were the instructor for an Intro Fiction class, what criteria would you use for grading?
THINGS TO COPY
Syllabus
Student Data Sheet
Aug 31 Pop Quiz
Learning to Lie
Exercise–207-208 in brown What If?
Class Roster and Contact Info
Short-short Stories from What If (Get clean copy of “No One’s a Mystery”
“Sudden Fiction or the Short-Short Story,” Blue What If, pp. 220-221.
Dybek’s “Pet Milk” in Scribner Anthology
Lydia Davis “Break It Down” from her book.
Saunders’s “Isabel”
Linda Lloyd’s “Poor Boy”
Elizabeth Graver’s “Between” (1996 O Henrys, p. 285)–I own. COPIED 8/13
Homes’s “A Real Doll”
Moody’s “Twister.”
King, “Man in Black Suit” (1996 O. Henry’s, p. 3–I own.] COPIED 8/13
Tom Paine, “Say Something Monsieur Eliot”–O. Henry’s 96 p. 237 COPIED 8/13
Salinger’s “The Laughing Man.”
Walter Mosley’s “The Thief” 1996 O. Henrys COPIED 8/13
Hemingway’s “Clean, Well-Lighted.”
Jerome Stern, “Don’t Do This,” Crafting Fiction p. 230 ff.
COURSE SYLLABUS
ENGLISH 170R, SPRING ’03
SELECTED OBSCURE/ECLECTIC FICTIONS…
CLASS LOGISTICS Mondays and Wednesdays, 1:15–2:30, Crookshank 10
INSTRUCTOR David Wallace, 206 Crookshank, 607-8357
INSTRUCTOR’S OFFICE HOURS Mon. 8:00–9:00 AM, Tues. 4:30–5:30 PM, & by appt.
COURSE DESCRIPTION It’s a 170-grade Advanced Seminar, meaning it’s “speaking-intensive” and presupposes the basic set of lit-crit tools taught in English 67. Structurally, the course is meant to be more a colloquium than a prof.-led seminar. We are going to read and converse about nine novels (some of which are kind of long) dating from the 1930s–1970s. They’re books that are arguably good and/or important but are not, in the main, read or talked about that much as of 2003. At the least, then, English 170R affords a chance to read some stuff you’re not apt to get in other Lit classes. It would also be good to talk this term about the dynamics of the Lit canon and about why some important books get taught a lot in English classes and others do not—which will, of course, entail our considering what modifiers like “important,” “good,” and “influential” mean w/r/t modern fiction. We can approach the books from a variety of different critical, theoretical, and ideological perspectives, too, depending on students’ backgrounds and interests. In essence, we can talk about whatever you wish to—provided that we do it cogently and well.
REQUIRED TEXTS All but a couple of the following are available in paperback at the Huntley Bookstore:
(1) Renata Adler, Speedboat (*)
(2) James Baldwin, Giovanni’s Room
(3) Djuna Barnes, Nightwood
(4) Richard Brautigan, Trout Fishing in America… In Watermelon Sugar
(5) Joan Didion, Play It As It Lays
(6) Paula Fox, Desperate Characters (*)
(7) Doris Lessing, The Golden Notebook
(8) Walker Percy, The Moviegoer
(9) Christina Stead, The Man Who Loved Children
N.B. (1) The two books marked with asterisks are not at the Huntley; you are responsible for tracking these down and getting a copy. They’re not hard to find at used-type bookstores or through the Internet (abe.com, amazon.com, etc.). Paula Fox’s Desperate Characters (© 1970) is in print in a new paperback edition from W.W. Norton & Co; its ISBN is 0-393-31894-X (please get that particular copy if you can). Renata Adler’s Speedboat (© 1976) is apparently out of print right now, but there are lots of copies floating around the marketplace, especially of the Perennial Library trade paperback; that edition’s ISBN is 0-06-097143-6.
N.B. (2) Please do not buy William Gaddis’s The Recognitions even though Huntley’s got it on 170R’s Required Texts list. (Meaning feel free to buy it if you like, but it’s not really on our list.)
COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND GRADING
ATTENDANCE AND PARTICIPATION Because the whole breath and bread of this course is discussion, your presence and involvement are required. You are allowed one unexcused absence without penalty; each additional unexcused absence will lower your final grade by one numeral.1 For an absence to be excused, there must be an excellent reason and I must be notified in advance. Gross or chronic tardiness will quickly start counting as unexcused absences.
HOMEWORK, PREPARATION, AND RESPONSES TO READING As you can see from the SCHEDULE below, there’s sometimes a lot of reading; and for the course to function, everybody’s got to keep up all the time. A blunter way to say this is that you are required to do every iota of the assigned reading, on time and with care. Schedules and energies vary: please drop this course if you anticipate having difficulty keeping up when things get heavy. You will be required, moreover, to submit a one-page2 response to each of the books we read this term. These minipapers should deal with some critical question about the book’s meaning, technique, quality, etc., and should use a close reading of the text to support its points. They will usually be due on the last class-day we discuss each book, but the minipapers must not be mere rehashes of the class discussion—they need to represent your own thoughts/theses about some feature of the book. The minipapers also need to be clear, typo- and basic-error-free pieces of college-level writing.3 They’ll be graded. You’re allowed to skip one of the nine minipapers without penalty; if you turn in all nine, I’ll count only the eight highest grades. Note: No late minipapers will ever be accepted—if you have to miss class on the day one is due, you need to turn it in early.
LEADING CLASS DISCUSSIONS Once it’s settled who’s really enrolled, I will divide the class into two-member teams. Each team will be responsible for taking the lead in class discussion, at least twice, on a rotating basis. “Taking the lead” means giving a brief presentation and preparing topics and questions that will facilitate discussion of the day’s material. Handouts and (brief) excerpts from outside sources are OK. I will be available for voluntary consultation with squads about their presentations either during office hours or at breakfast sometime early on Monday morning.
MAJOR ASSIGNMENTS4 There’s a 4-7-page midterm paper in which you’ll do a close reading of some technical or thematic element in one of the books we’ve read so far. The final paper, due at the start of the last week of classes, will be 10-20 pages, will involve at least some outside research, and will need to make a complex, well-defined argument. You’ll have to submit a proposal and annotated bibliography for the final paper several weeks ahead of time; and shortly before the paper is due, you’ll submit a finished draft to a peer reviewer. By department rules for Advanced Seminars, the final paper must be in 100% MLA format, and late papers can be accepted only by prior arrangement with the instructor.
FINAL COURSE GRADES Here’s a percentage-type breakdown:
• Attendance and Participation = 15%
• Eight minipapers = 15% total
• Leading class discussions = 10% total
• Midterm Paper = 20%
• Final Paper = 40%
FYI (1) I use numerals in computing grades, according to the following scale:
13 = A+ = Mind-blowingly good
12 = A = Extremely good
11 = A- = Very, very good
10 = B+ = Very good
9 = B = Good
8 = B- = High-average
7 = C+ = Average to low-average
6 = C = Mildly subpar
5 = C- = Severely subpar
4, 3, 2 = D Markedly poor; we need to talk
0 = F = Obvious.
FYI (2) As far as I can determine, my own grading standards are somewhat less inflated than the Pomona College norm. Of the 306 final grades I’ve given since 1987, the average (mean) is currently 7.375.
COURSE SCHEDULE (Subject to possible change as we proceed)
Day 1. Wed., 1/22: Intro, syllabus, student info sheets, etc.
Day 2. Mon, 1/27 Stead, TMWLC. Read Jarrell’s “An Unread Book” (pp. v-xli), and Chs. One through Five (pp. 3-198). [Leading class: Instr.]
&nb
sp; Day 3. Wed., 1/29 Stead. Read Chapters Six through Eight (pp. 199-365). [Leading class: Instr.]
Day 4. Mon., 2/3 Stead. Finish book. [Leading class: _____________]
Day 5. Wed., 2/5 Stead. [Leading class: _____________]
Day 6. Mon., 2/10 Barnes, Nightwood. Read Eliot’s Intro and Weird Note to 2nd Ed. (pp. xi-xvii), and up to “WATCHMAN, WHAT OF THE NIGHT?” (pp. 1-78). [Leading class: _____________]
Day 7. Wed., 2/12 Barnes. Finish book. [Leading class: _____________]
Mon., 2/17 NO CLASS—PRESIDENTS’ DAY
Day 8. Wed., 2/19 Didion, PIAIL. Read first 47 chapters (pp. 3-125). [Leading class: _____________]
Day 9. Mon., 2/24 Didion. Finish book. [Leading class: _____________]
Day 10. Wed., 2/26 Baldwin, GR. Read Part One (pp. 3-72). [Leading class: _____________]
Day 11. Mon, 3/3 Baldwin. Finish book. [Leading class: _____________]
Wed., 3/5 NO CLASS—OPTIONAL CONFERENCES RE MIDTERM PAPER
Day 12. Mon, 3/10 Brautigan, In WS. Read up to “Something is Going to Happen” (pp. 1-75 in Huntley B.S. edition). [Leading class: _____________]
Day 13. Wed., 3/12 Brautigan. Finish book. [Leading class: _____________] Midterm papers due.
Mon., 3/17 SPRING RECESS
The David Foster Wallace Reader Page 78