Posted in Teaching, Writing

ENG 111: Looking Forward, Looking Back, Part II

Lucas, Jane. “The Strange Fruit of Sosnowiec.” Facebook, 2 Apr. 2021, 10:36 a.m., https://www.facebook.com/jane.m.lucas.75/.

In Monday’s class notes, I addressed the reasons I have asked you to limit your screen time, a practice that can benefit not only our writing but also our overall well-being. That said, although I limit my daily screen time, I post my writing on social media, as you can see from the images included here with today’s notes. 

On Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter, my writing reaches readers who might not otherwise read my blog.

I encourage you to explore the opportunities that social media platforms provide for your own writing to reach a broader audience.

Lucas, Jane Meekins and Arlene Spencer Neal. Comments on “The Strange Fruit of Sosnowiec” by Jane Meekins Lucas. Facebook, 2 Apr. 2021, 10:36 a.m., https://www.facebook.com/jane.m.lucas.75/.

In Monday’s notes, I also addressed the reasons that I have asked you to draft longhand, and I presented a list of questions for you to consider as we examined “The Strange Fruit of Sosnowiec,” the textual analysis of Maus that I wrote as a model for you.

Maus Analysis Blog Comment Assignment

Later this week or early next week, all of you will receive feedback from me on your textual analysis of Maus. As an opportunity for additional feedback on your blog and an exercise in critical reading, I have developed the assignment that follows.

Directions

  1. Go to the class blog page, https://janelucas.com/english-at-gtcc/.
  2. Click on the name of the student whose name precedes yours in the class list. If that student’s name is not a live link or the student’s analysis is not posted, choose another classmate. If your name is first in the list, click on the name of the student whose name appears last.
  3. Read the student’s analysis, and compose a short response (50 words, minimum).
  4. In your response, demonstrate your close examination of one or more components of the analysis: the title, the thesis, textual evidence, quotations or paraphrases from primary or secondary sources, the conclusion. 
  5. Post your comment as a reply no later than noon on Friday, April 9. If you do not see the leave comment/reply option at the bottom of the student’s analysis, scroll to the top of the page, click on the post’s title, and scroll down. You should then see the leave comment/reply option. 

Lucas, Jane. “The Strange Fruit of Sosnowiec.” LinkedIn, 2 Apr. 2021, 10:29 a.m., https://www.linkedin.com/in/jane-lucas-7073b564/detail/recent-activity/.
Lucas, Jane. “The Strange Fruit of Sosnowiec.” Twitter, 2 Apr. 2021, 10:29 a.m., https://twitter.com/jmlucas/status/1377991574777442308.
Posted in Reading, Teaching, Writing

ENG 111: Looking Forward, Looking Back

In our final weeks of English 111, we will continue our study of Maus and reflect on the assignments you have written as well as the habits that I have encouraged you to cultivate, including drafting longhand and limiting your screen time. This blog post addresses the reasons that I’ve asked you to engage in those practices.

Writing Longhand

One practical reason for writing longhand: What we mark through remains on the page. Sometimes what we cross out can be useful later on, elsewhere in our writing. More importantly, research in cognitive neuroscience indicates that writing longhand has these benefits:

Simply put, writing longhand sharpens our minds in ways that typing doesn’t.

Limiting Screen Time

When we use our phones and laptops, it’s difficult for us to give our undivided attention to one endeavor, but often that singular focus is critical.

When we type on our phones, we often aim to convey as much as we can with as few characters as possible. Texting and emailing–both of which now feature predictive text–do not foster the vital skills of developing our writing and producing original thought.

Limiting our screen time not only helps us improve our writing skills, it can also benefit our overall well-being.

The research cited in the links that I’ve included isn’t definitive, but it makes a strong case for the value of limiting our screen time and putting pen to paper. I encourage you to continue these practices after the semester ends.

Model Textual Analysis

Along with reflecting on the assignments you’ve written and the habits I’ve encouraged you to cultivate, this week we will examine the textual analysis of Maus that I wrote as an additional model for you.

As we read the “The Strange Fruit of Sosnowiec,” consider these questions: 

  • What is the essay’s thesis?
  • What textual evidence (images and words in the panels) supports the essay’s claims?
  • Where do I quote or paraphrase the primary source (Maus)?
  • Where do I quote or paraphrase an authoritative secondary source?

After we’ve read the “The Strange Fruit of Sosnowiec,” look back at the final paragraph, and consider which strategies I use to develop the conclusion.

  • Do I include a quotation from a primary or secondary source, one that emphasizes the essay’s main point or puts it in a different perspective?
  • Do I place the analysis in a different, perhaps larger, context? (Do I link the analysis to the pandemic or the current social or political climate?)
  • Do I address the implications of the analysis? (Do I explore what the analysis implies, or involves, or suggests about parent-child relationships, about storytelling, about memory, or about totalitarian regimes?)
Posted in Reading, Teaching, Writing

ENG 111: The Strange Fruit of Sosnowiec

Spiegelman, Art. Maus I. Pantheon, 1986, p. 83.

In Chapter 4 of Art Spiegelman’s graphic memoir Maus, he depicts his father Vladek’s account of the hangings of four Jewish merchants in Sosnowiec, Poland. Vladek and his wife, Anja, learn from Anja’s father, Mr. Zylberberg, that the Nazis have arrested his friend Nahum Cohn and his son. With his head bowed in sorrow, Mr. Zylberberg says to Anja and Vladek, “The Germans intend to make an example of them!” (83). That image of Mr. Zylberberg speaking with Vladek and Anja overlays the larger panel that dominates the page, one that depicts the horror that Mr. Zylberberg anticipates: the murder of his friend Nahum Cohn, Cohn’s son, and two other Jewish merchants. That haunting panel and the smaller ones that frame it illustrate the complexity of Spiegelman’s seemingly simple composition. His rendering of the panels of the living in conjunction with the fragmented panels of the hanged merchants simultaneously conveys connection and separation: both the grieving survivors’ ties to the dead and the hanged men’s objectification at the hands of the Nazis.

The placement of the overlaying panel not only hides part of the horror behind it, but it also connects Vladek’s father-in-law to one of the victims. Mr. Zylberberg’s head and torso appear directly above the suspended legs and feet of one of the hanged men, creating an image that merges the two.

Spiegelman further emphasizes the mourners’ identification with the hanged men by extending two of the nooses’ ropes upward to the smaller panel above them, linking the living to the dead. Additionally, Spiegelman underscores the link with Vladek’s line of narration at the bottom of the smaller panel: “I did much business with Cohn!” (83). The word “with” appears directly above the rope, punctuating the connection between both Nahum Cohn and his friend Mr. Zylberberg and Zylberberg’s son-in-law, Vladek.

While the panels of the hangings yoke the living to the dead, Spiegelman’s presentation of the hanged men in fragments also objectifies them. The final panels on the page depict only their shoes and part of their pant legs suspended above the onlookers, images that may evoke in some readers thoughts of the last remnants of the Jews who stepped barefoot into the gas chambers of Auschwitz.

Whether the hanged men’s shoes call to mind those mountains of leather left behind by the Jews, the separation of their lower legs and feet from the rest of their bodies turns them into something less than human—not people, but mere parts. Thus, Spiegelman creates a picture of the hangings that illustrates both the mourners’ identification with the victims and the Nazis’ perception of the Jews as less than human: the malignant ideology that the artist has pinpointed “at the very heart of the killing project.”

Spiegelman, Art. Maus I. Pantheon, 1986, p. 83.

Spiegelman’s transformation of the Nazi propaganda portrayals of Jews as rats remains an astounding achievement thirty-five years after the publication of the first volume of Maus. But seeing the hanged merchants in Modrzejowska Street in the midst of the George Floyd murder trial in Minneapolis and less than three months after the January 6 Capitol riot reminds readers that the panels of Spiegelman’s memoir have grown more prescient. The nooses evoke images of Officer Derek Chauvin’s knee on George Floyd’s neck, the January 6 chants to hang the Vice President, and a T-shirt glimpsed in the Capitol crowd, one with a Nazi eagle below the acronym “6MWE” (Six Million Wasn’t Enough), a reference to the numbers of Jews slaughtered in the Holocaust. Our heads are bowed in sorrow with Mr. Zylberberg’s. The strange fruit of our past, both distant and recent, should seem far stranger.

Works Cited

Spiegelman, Art. Maus I. Pantheon, 1986.

—. “Why Mice?” Interview by Hillary Chute. The New York Review of Books, 20 Oct. 2011, https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2011/10/20/why-mice/.


Posted in Teaching, Writing

ENG 111: Editing Your Textual Analysis

Edditing Editing

Earlier this week, I asked you to focus on the big picture of your textual analysis of Maus. Continue to focus on presenting your ideas clearly and effectively, and determine which secondary source you will integrate into your analysis. Later this week, as the assignment deadline nears, shift your focus to finding and correcting errors. 

Proofreading

A Writer’s Reference presents excellent advice on proofreading, which I am including verbatim below.

“Proofreading is a special kind of reading: a slow methodical search for misspellings, typographical mistakes, and missing words or word endings. Such errors can be difficult to spot in your own work because you may read what you intended to write, not what is actually on the page. To fight this tendency, try one or more of the following tips.

Proofreading Tips

  • Remove distractions and allow yourself ten to fifteen minutes of pure concentration–without your cell phone.
  • Proofread out loud, articulating each word as it is actually written.
  • Proofread your sentences in reverse order.
  • Proofread hard copy pages; mistakes can be difficult to catch on-screen.
  • Don’t rely too heavily on spell checkers and grammar checkers. Before automatically accepting their changes, consider accuracy and appropriateness.
  • Ask a volunteer (a friend, roommate, or co-worker) to proofread after you. A second reader may catch something that you didn’t.” (31)

Grammar, Punctuation and Mechanics, and Word Choice

The items listed below are the ones that I noted most often in your drafts. Review the ones that are trouble spots for you. 

  • active verbs/voice, 153
  • apostrophes, 275-78
  • capitalization, 293-96
  • colons and semicolons, 271-73
  • commas, 259-71
  • end punctuation, 283-84
  • hyphens, 291-92
  • italics for titles, 301
  • lay, lie, 182-83
  • like, as, 146
  • numbers expressed as words, 299
  • paragraph focus
  • paragraph length, 53-54
  • pronoun case, 196-97
  • reason why, 148
  • reflexive pronouns, 306
  • sentence fragments, 207-13
  • standard idioms, 166
  • subject-verb agreement, 171-79
  • than, then, 149
  • that, which, 149
  • there, their, they’re, 149
  • to, too, two, 149
  • verb agreement with subjects, 171-79
  • who’s, whose, 150
  • who, which, that, 150

Concluding Your Analysis

In addition to returning to your thesis, consider developing your final paragraph in one of these ways:

  • Include a quotation from or reference to your primary source (Maus) or your secondary source, one that emphasizes the essay’s main point or puts it in a different perspective.
  • Place the analysis in a different, perhaps larger, context. For example, you might end your analysis by linking it to the pandemic or the current social or political climate.
  • Consider the implications of the analysis. What does it imply, or involve, or suggest about parent-child relationships, about storytelling, about memory, or about totalitarian regimes?

In conclusion, To conclude,

Avoid the phrases “in conclusion,” “to conclude,” “in summary,” and “to sum up.” These can be useful, even welcome, in oral presentations. But readers can see, on the page or the screen, when a short essay is about to end.

Writing Help

If you would like for someone to review your analysis of Maus before you submit it, look to the Center for Academic Engagement, which offers a variety of options:


Hacker, Diana, and Nancy Sommers. A Writer’s Reference. GTCC Custom 9th Edition. Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2018.

Posted in Reading, Teaching, Writing

ENG 111: Revising (or Reenvisioning) Your Textual Analysis

The authors of A Writer’s Reference note that “[r]evising is rarely a one-step process” (Hacker and Somers 19). Editing for surface-level correctness is essential, but it isn’t the only step, and it shouldn’t be the first. Begin instead by re-seeing (or re-visioning) your analysis and considering its focus and organization. Ask these questions:

  • Is it a focused analysis rather than an overview of a scene in Maus?
  • Does it present a clear thesis?
  • Would the analysis benefit from a different organization? If the strongest piece of textual evidence appears in the first body paragraph, try moving it to the last one.

After you have addressed those questions, examine each paragraph one by one, from first to last.

Introduction

  • Does the first sentence name the author, Art Spiegelman, and the title, Maus?
  • Does the description that follows create a picture of the panel or panels for the reader? For more on descriptive paragraphs, see pages 45-46.
  • Does the description include pertinent terms, such as dialogue, narration, panel, speech balloon, and tier?
  • Is the description followed by a clear thesis? Can the thesis be a point of disagreement among reasonable people? (If the answer to both questions isn’t yes, revise accordingly.) For more on writing a thesis for an analytical essay, see page 69.

Body Paragraphs

  • Does each body paragraph present textual evidence (words and images from the panel or panels) that supports the thesis? For more on supporting a thesis, see page 69.
  • Do the paragraphs include pertinent terms, such as dialogue, narration, panel, speech balloon, and tier?
  • Do the paragraphs include at least one relevant quotation or paraphrase from an authoritative secondary source and one paraphrase or quotation from Maus? Note: You may quote or paraphrase your secondary source in the conclusion rather than in the body paragraph.

Conclusion

  • Is the conclusion a well-developed paragraph?
  • Does it reiterate the thesis without repeating it verbatim? For more on writing conclusions, see page 18.

After you have revised the paragraphs one by one, review the MLA section of A Writer’s Reference to ensure your document complies with style guidelines.

MLA Style

The MS Word file or PDF that you will submit to Moodle should comply with the format guidelines for MLA (Modern Language Association) manuscripts, including in-text citations with signal phrases (384), and works cited entries (392-423). 

Remember that in addition to submitting your revision to Moodle, you will publish it as a post on your WordPress blog. Your blog post will omit the first-page information included in your file submitted to Moodle (your name, my name, course, section, and date). You will include in your blog post an image that documents some part of your writing process away from the screen, such as a photo of your reading notes or a page of your handwritten draft.

Works Cited Entries

The following list includes sample works cited entries for secondary sources. Note that in your MS Word file, your works cited entries will have a hanging indent; in other words, each line except the first one will be indented five spaces or one-half inch.

Bosmajian, Hamida. “The Orphaned Voice in Art Spiegelman’s Maus.Considering Maus: Approaches to Art Spiegelman’s “Survivor’s Tale” of the Holocaust, edited by Deborah R. Geis, U of Alabama P, 2003, pp. 26-43.

Brock, Michael and Zachary Goldstein. “The Lasting Effects of World War II and the Holocaust.” Guilford Technical Community College Globalization, Education, and Literacy Committee Presentation, Microsoft Teams Live Stream, 16 Mar., 2021. Lecture.

Cavna, Michael. “Why Maus Remains the Greatest Graphic Novel Ever Written, 30 Years Later.” The Washington Post, 11 Aug. 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/comic-riffs/wp/2016/08/11/why-maus-remains-the-greatest-graphic-novel-ever-written-30-years-later/.

Chute, Hillary. “History and Graphic Representation in Maus.A Comics Studies Reader, edited by Jeet Heer and Kent Worcester, UP of Mississippi, 2009, pp. 340-62.

Miller, Nancy K. “Cartoons of the Self: Portrait of the Artist as a Young Murderer—Art Spiegelman’s Maus.” Considering Maus: Approaches to Art Spiegelman’s “Survivor’s Tale” of the Holocaust, edited by Deborah R. Geis, U of Alabama P, 2003, pp. 44-59.

Spiegelman, Art. “Why Mice?” Interview by Hillary Chute. New York Review of Books, 20 Oct. 2011, https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2011/10/20/why-mice/.

Wilner, Arlene Fish. “‘Happy, Happy Ever After’: Story and History in Art Spiegelman’s Maus.” Considering Maus: Approaches to Art Spiegelman’s “Survivor’s Tale” of the Holocaust, edited by Deborah R. Geis, U of Alabama P, 2003, pp. 105-21.

Works Cited Entry for a Blog Post

Lucas, Jane. “ENG 111: Maus under the Microscope, Part II.” Jane Lucas, 3 Mar. 2021. https://janelucas.com/2021/03/03/eng-111-maus-under-the-microscope-part-ii/.

Works Cited Entry for an Online Lecture

Lucas, Jane. “Maus under the Microscope.” English 111, Guilford Technical Community College, Microsoft Teams Live Stream, 1 Mar., 2021. Lecture.

Posted in Reading, Teaching, Writing

ENG 111: Citing Secondary Sources

In the revision of your analysis of Maus, you will cite a relevant authoritative secondary source: a critical essay, book review, or interview published in an academic journal or a well-regarded news publication. Next week in class, I will distribute a handout that includes passages from some studies of Maus that you may cite in your essay. Excerpts from those sources appear in a later section of this post.

Why Cite an Authoritative Secondary Source?

Quoting or paraphrasing an authoritative secondary source gives your writing credibility. It indicates to readers that your ideas are trustworthy and valid because your analysis is informed by the work of an expert.

Citing an authoritative secondary source also links your analysis to a study of Maus that preceded yours. Academic writing is knowledge-building. With your analysis, you are adding to the critical conversation about Spiegelman’s memoir.

Ask yourself, what has a scholar or journalist written about Maus, and how do my own ideas about Spiegelman’s memoir fit into the conversation? Your answers to those questions can serve as a starting point for integrating your own take on Maus with the ideas presented in a secondary source.

Locating Authoritative Secondary Sources

The GTCC Libraries website includes a research guide for Maus, which features links to articles, essays, reviews, lectures, and interviews.

You can also locate scholarly, or peer-reviewed, articles on Maus by following these steps on the libraries’ home page:

  1. Click on advanced search.
  2. In the first search index box, select subject. In the search term box to the right, type Spiegelman, Art.
  3. In the second search index box, select subject. In the search term box to the right, type Maus.
  4. Click search.
  5. On the next screen, you will see a list of more than two-hundred sources. You can refine your search by choosing one of the limiters in the menu bar on the left. Selecting articles will narrow the list of sources to fewer than ninety; selecting peer-reviewed articles will limit the list to fewer than twenty.

Another Authoritative Secondary Source

If you watched the live stream of GTCC Professors Michael Brock and Zachary Goldstein’s lecture “The Lasting Effects of World War II and the Holocaust,”you are welcome to use that presentation as a secondary source for your analysis of Maus. Here’s how you would integrate one of their points into your analysis:

Zachary Goldstein, Associate Professor of English at Guilford Technical Community College, observes that one of the misconceptions of the Holocaust is the notion that all of the deaths occurred in the gas chambers. Art Spiegelman’s depiction of the public hangings of Jewish merchants in Modrzejowska Street illustrates Goldstein’s point.

Notice that the signal phrase includes the writer’s first and last name as well as his credentials. The paraphrase does not include a page number because the source is a presentation. The works cited entry, which would appear at the end of the analysis, lists the details of the event:

Works Cited

Brock, Michael and Zachary Goldstein. “The Lasting Effects of World War II and the Holocaust.” Guilford Technical Community College Globalization, Education, and Literacy Committee Presentation, Microsoft Teams Live Stream, 16 Mar., 2021. Lecture.

For more on introducing sources with signal phrases and citing online lectures, see A Writer’s Reference, pages 376-79 and 419.

Passages from Authoritative Secondary Sources

From Hamida Bosmajian, Professor of English at Seattle University:

“[t]he Nazi flag. . . is never shown unobstructedly unfurled in Maus” (42).

From Nancy K. Miller, Distinguished Professor of English and Comparative Literature at the City University of New York:

“The Success of Maus is due to a double audacity. The first is the choice to represent the Holocaust as a cartoon, the second to cast its star witness as a victimizer in his own world, a petty tyrant at home” (48-49).

From Arlene Fish Wilner, Professor of English and American Studies at Rider University:

Adam Gopnik has noted that the animal heads given to the humans in Maus reflect “our sense that this story is too horrible to be presented unmasked” (qtd. in Wilner 109).

From Hamida Bosmajian, Professor of English at Seattle University:

The telling of stories is, of course, a primary means of ordering the disorder of experience; it provides a surface sensibleness that may be perceived as meaningful. Artie, however, will never make any sense or meaning of it all, no matter how many times he articulates the horror verbally and graphically; he can only shape an imitation, an illusion of meaning through the telling of the tale. (30-31)

In an MLA-style manuscript, the quotation above is indented one-half inch because it is one of more than four lines. The quotation marks are omitted because the indentation signals to the reader that the lines are taken word-for-word from the source. For more on presenting long quotations in MLA papers, see A Writer’s Reference (376).

From Hillary Chute, Distinguished Professor of English and Art + Design at Northeastern University:

“The most striking instance of representing past and present together in Maus is the inclusion of the autobiographical comic strip ‘Prisoner on the Hell Planet: A Case History’” (346).

Works Cited

Bosmajian, Hamida. “The Orphaned Voice in Art Spiegelman’s Maus.Considering Maus: Approaches to Art Spiegelman’s “Survivor’s Tale” of the Holocaust, edited by Deborah R. Geis, U of Alabama P, 2003, pp. 26-43.

Chute, Hillary. “History and Graphic Representation in Maus.A Comics Studies Reader, edited by Jeet Heer and Kent Worcester, UP of Mississippi, 2009, pp. 340-62.

Miller, Nancy K. “Cartoons of the Self: Portrait of the Artist as a Young Murderer—Art Spiegelman’s Maus.” Considering Maus: Approaches to Art Spiegelman’s “Survivor’s Tale” of the Holocaust, edited by Deborah R. Geis, U of Alabama P, 2003, pp. 44-59.

Wilner, Arlene Fish. “‘Happy, Happy Ever After’: Story and History in Art Spiegelman’s Maus.” Considering Maus: Approaches to Art Spiegelman’s “Survivor’s Tale” of the Holocaust, edited by Deborah R. Geis, U of Alabama P, 2003, pp. 105-21.

Posted in Reading, Teaching, Writing

ENG 111: Welcome Back! Part II

Students drafting longhand on Monday, March 22

Those of you who meet with me on Wednesdays will begin planning and drafting your textual analysis of Maus today. You will receive a paper copy of the complete assignment in class. The assignment is also posted in Moodle, and I have included an additional copy below.

Anatomy of an Analysis

Here are the elements that you are required to include in your revised analysis of Maus:

  • an introduction that includes a description of the panel, tier, or page
  • a thesis statement that presents your particular reading or interpretation
  • textual evidence, both words and images, that support your interpretation
  • a relevant quotation or paraphrase from an authoritative secondary source
  • parenthetical citations for both Maus and your secondary source
  • a conclusion that revisits the thesis without restating it verbatim
  • a title that offers a window into your analysis
  • a works cited list with entries for Maus and your secondary source

Note that the requirements above are for your revision. You do not need to integrate an authoritative secondary source into your draft. Later this week, on Thursday or Friday, I will post information on secondary sources, including article excerpts that you may quote or paraphrase in your analysis.

And Keep in Mind as You Plan and Draft . . .

  • You are welcome to focus on a single panel or a series of panels in Maus I, but you should not focus on more than one page.
  • If your initial plan doesn’t seem to be taking shape, turn away from your draft for a while. Try brainstorming or freewriting in your journal. Don’t concern yourself with spelling and structure; attend to those matters later. The aim of brainstorming and freewriting is to get your ideas on paper as quickly as you can. For more on brainstorming and freewriting, see A Writer’s Reference (6).
  • If you write on one panel or series of panels and that doesn’t seem to lead anywhere, turn back to the pages of Maus and try writing on another panel or series of panels.
  • I am drafting an analysis along with you and will post my revision for you next week.
  • The textual analysis of Maus that I wrote for my students last fall and four students models are available to you now on my blog. My analysis is included in the March 17 blog post; the four student analyses are included in the March 15 post.
Posted in Reading, Teaching, Writing

ENG 111: Welcome Back!

What you will need in class this week: (1) your journal, (2) Maus, (3) loose-leaf notebook paper, (4) a pen with dark ink, preferably black, and (5) a mask.

Welcome back to in-person classes at Guildford Technical Community College! I can’t tell you how happy I am that we are finally meeting face to face. Remember that the 9 a.m. class is divided for social distancing purposes. Half of you in the 9 a.m. class will meet with me today and every Monday; the other half will meet with me on Wednesdays. Schedules for the 9 a.m. class–as well as ones for the 8 a.m. and 10 a.m. classes–are posted below, in the March 17 blog post, and on Moodle.

For those of you who are new to the campus–and as a reminder to those who are returning–I am including some details here about pandemic protocol for the classroom.

Near the door, you’ll see a white bucket of disinfectant cloths. When you enter the classroom, pull a cloth from the bucket and wipe down the table where you will sit. This can be a messy process. Often the cloths are so saturated with rubbing alcohol that they fall apart in your hands.

To maximize your distance from your classmates, do not move the chairs. Keep your chair on the side of the table opposite the round “TABLE UNAVAILABLE” decal.

As I mentioned in our last online meeting in Microsoft Teams, except for days devoted to revision work, class time is time away from our screens. Using your phone or any other digital device without permission will lower your grade. 

This week will be devoted to planning and drafting your textual analysis of Maus, the second of your three essays for English 111. You will receive a paper copy of the assignment in class. Later this week, the assignment file will be posted to Moodle and on my blog. 

Although I have emphasized the importance of revising and editing, I am asking you to resist the urge to revise and edit this week. Your primary goal for now is getting your ideas down on paper. In Bird by Bird, author Ann Lamott’s guide to writing, she offers these reassuring observations about beginning the process:

Almost all good writing begins with terrible first efforts. You need to start somewhere. Start by getting something–anything–down on paper. A friend of mine says the first draft is the down draft–you just get it down (25).

Brainstorm and Freewrite

If your initial plan doesn’t seem to be taking shape, turn away from your draft for a while. Try brainstorming or freewriting in your journal. Don’t concern yourself with spelling and structure; attend to those matters later. The aim of brainstorming and freewriting is to get your ideas on paper as quickly as you can.

For more on brainstorming and freewriting, see A Writer’s Reference (6).

If you write on one panel or series of panels and that doesn’t seem to lead anywhere, turn back to the pages of Maus and try writing on another panel or series of panels.


Lamott, Anne. Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life. 1994. Anchor, 1995.

Posted in Reading, Teaching, Writing

ENG 111: More on Maus, Part II

Spiegelman, Art. Maus I. Pantheon, 1986. p. 74.

On Monday we studied several student essays–including three written by students of mine last semester–as models for your own analysis of Maus. Today we will examine an additional analysis of Maus, Of Mice and Menace,” which I wrote as a model for my students last semester.

A Possible Secondary Source

Before we examine my analysis, I will turn back briefly to “The Lasting Effects of World War II and the Holocaust,” yesterday’s live stream of Michael Brock and Zacary Goldstein’s lecture. If you watched it, you are welcome to use that presentation as a secondary source for your analysis of Maus. Here’s how you would integrate one of their points into your analysis:

Zacary Goldstein, Associate Professor of English at Guilford Technical Community College, observes that one of the misconceptions of the Holocaust is the notion that all of the deaths occurred in the gas chambers. Art Spiegelman’s depiction of the public hangings of Jewish merchants in Modrzejowska Street illustrates Goldstein’s point.

Notice that the signal phrase includes the writer’s first and last name as well as his credentials. The paraphrase does not include a page number because the source is a presentation. The works cited entry, which would appear at the end of the analysis, lists the details of the event:

Work Cited

Brock, Michael and Zacary Goldstein. “The Lasting Effects of World War II and the Holocaust.” Guilford Technical Community College Globalization, Education, and Literacy Committee Presentation, Microsoft Teams Live Stream, 16 Mar., 2021. Lecture.

For more on introducing sources with signal phrases and citing online lectures, see A Writer’s Reference, pages 376-79 and 419.

Sample Analysis: “Of Mice and Menace”

My sample essay features all of the elements that you are required to include in your analysis of Maus: 

  • an introduction that includes a description of the panel, tier, or page
  • a thesis statement that presents your particular reading or interpretation
  • textual evidence, both words and images, that support your interpretation
  • a relevant quotation or paraphrase from an authoritative secondary source
  • parenthetical citations for both Maus and your secondary source
  • a conclusion that revisits the thesis without restating it verbatim
  • a title that offers a window into your analysis
  • a works cited list with entries for Maus and your secondary source

Note that the requirements above are for your revision. You do not need to integrate an authoritative secondary source into your draft.

In-Person Class Schedule

Our schedules for in-person class meetings, which begin next week, are posted below as well as in Moodle. If you are in the 9 AM class, review the schedule carefully. Because of social distancing requirements, you are permitted to attend class only on your designated day.

Posted in Reading, Teaching, Writing

ENG 111: More on Maus–a Sampling of Student Studies

Spiegelman, Art. Maus 1. Pantheon, 1986. p. 15.

On March 3, I led you through my close reading of three tiers of panels in Maus. From that examination of Spiegelman’s work, I developed four paragraphs of commentary, a total of 450 words, that could serve as a rough draft for a textual analysis of Maus

Today we will examine additional samples of analysis, beginning with one written in 2016 by Sadie Dossett for an English class at the University of Hawaii at Hilo. Dossett’s essay, “Lucia Greenberg: In-Depth Analysis” was chosen for publication in Hohonu,  the university’s undergraduate journal of academic writing.

Notes on “Lucia Greenberg: In-Depth Analysis”

Dossett’s analysis is admirable for its reassessment of Lucia Greenberg. She effectively argues that Spiegelman’s depiction of Lucia, based on what Valdek tells him, reduces her to a one-dimensional temptress. Though admirable, Dossett’s analysis would benefit from additional revisions and edits including these:

  • The first two paragraphs of the essay should be condensed and combined.
  • The thesis, which Dossett presents at the end of the second paragraph, should offer something more specific about Lucia. In other words, the thesis should show how she was “so much more” than what readers see on the page. For more on drafting an analytical thesis statement, see A Writer’s Reference, page 66.
  • In MLA style, numbers one-hundred and below are spelled out, so 15 should appear as fifteen, but that number should not appear in the third paragraph. Whenever possible, limit the appearance of page numbers by including them only in parenthetical citations. For more on writing numbers as words and figures, see A Writer’s Reference, page 299.
  • The first sentence of the third paragraph is written in passive voice. Rather than writing that “Lucia is introduced,” Dossett should write, “Art Spiegelman introduces Lucia,” or “Lucia enters the narrative in Chapter 2.” Note that chapter numbers are an exception to the words-versus-figures rule in MLA style. For more on active verbs, A Writer’s Reference, pages 153-55.
  • The parenthetical citation in the third paragraph should not include Spiegelman; it should simply include the number 17 because Dossett has established that Art Spiegelman’s Maus is the subject of her analysis. For more on repeated citations from the same source, see A Writer’s Reference, page 388.
  • The first sentence of the conclusion is written in passive voice. Rather than writing that “different interpretations could be made,” Dossett should write that “readers interpret Lucia in different ways. Some perceive her as a heroine; others see her as a villainess.” 
  • The quotation from Parker should be introduced with a signal phrase. In academic writing, a quotation presented at the beginning of a sentence is considered a dropped quotation. Dossett should include a signal phrase that includes the scholar’s full name and his credentials. For example: Literary scholar Robert Dale Parker or Robert Dale Parker, Professor of English at Illinois, observes that “[t]he problem comes with reducing women to little or nothing except their status as an object” (171). Note that I bracketed the letter t because I altered it from capital to lowercase. For more on signal phrases and dropped quotations, see A Writer’s Reference, page 37778.
  • The works cited entries comply with seventh edition MLA style guidelines, which differ from those for eighth edition. For more on MLA works cited entries, A Writer’s Reference, pages 384419. MLA 7th Edition: Parker, Robert Dale. “Feminism.” How to Interpret Literature: Critical Theory for Literary and Cultural Studies. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2008. 148-84. Print. MLA 8th Edition: Parker, Robert Dale. “Feminism.” How to Interpret Literature: Critical Theory for Literary and Cultural Studies. 3rd ed. Oxford UP, 2008. pp. 148-84.

Dossett’s analysis is much longer than yours will be. Hers is more than 2,700 words long; yours will be a minimum of 500. I presented Dossett’s essay to you for two reasons: (1) It demonstrates how to develop an in-depth analysis of a minor character, and (2) It illustrates that a writing assignment you complete for a class can become a publication. Publishing your writing is one way to build your résumé. 

Now we will turn to three shorter analyses written by students of mine last fall.

ENG 111 Maus Analyses

  • At War with Others and One’s Self,” by Emi Ceca, explores the behavioral changes of Vladek’s that underlie the scene in which he throws Art’s coat in the garbage (68).
  • My Analysis of Maus” by Josh Graeber, examines Art Spiegelman’s depiction of the presence of the past in his father Valdek’s life as he recounts his experiences as a prisoner of war (62).
  • The Holocaust Horror,” by Joe York, focuses on Spiegelman’s portrayal of the Nazi’s seizure of Mr. Zylberberg as an example of why the artist may have chosen to depict the characters with the heads of animals (115).

These essays, though strong ones, would benefit from additional revisions and edits, including the ones in the notes that follow.

Notes on “At War with Others and One’s Self”

Spiegelman, Art. Maus I. Pantheon, 1986. p. 68.
  • Ceca should not refer to Maus as a novel. Some book-length comics are labeled graphic novels, but a novel is by definition a work of fiction. “Novel” should be replaced with “graphic memoir” or “book-length comic.”
  • The image that Ceca includes does not feature part of her writing away from the screen. Rather than including a photo of her laptop, she should include an image of her journal notes or a snippet of her handwritten draft.
  • The conclusion should be followed by a works cited list. Ceca documents the sources in her essay with parenthetical citations but omits the list that she included in her file posted to Moodle. For more on MLA works cited entries, A Writer’s Reference, pages 384419.

Notes on “My Analysis of Maus”

Spiegelman. Art. Maus I. Pantheon, 1986. p. 62.
  • Graeber’s title should refer to something specific about his analysis. Since he focuses on the presence of the past in Vladek’s life and his experience as a POW, he might title it “Prisoner of the Past.”
  • The title Maus should be italicized, not enclosed in quotation marks. For more on italics for titles, see A Writer’s Reference, pages 301.
  • Near the end of the first paragraph, Graeber should delete the word “past” before “memories.” For more on redundancies, see  A Writer’s Reference, page 150.

Notes on “The Holocaust Horror”

Spiegelman, Art. Maus I. Pantheon, 1986. p. 115.
  • In his sentences, York should refer to the scene rather than the page number. As I mentioned in my notes on Dossett’s analysis, whenever possible, limit the appearance of page numbers by including them only in parenthetical citations. 
  • In the fourth paragraph, York offers an insightful observation from a secondary source but he presents it in an awkward way. The important words are Gopnik’s, not Wilner’s. Here’s one way he might revise the passage: New Yorker writer and art critic Adam Gopnik contends that the animal heads in Maus express “our sense that this story is too horrible to be presented unmasked” (qtd. In Wilner 109). For more on indirect sources, see A Writer’s Reference, page 391.
  • In the works cited entry for Wilner’s book, the title should be italicized. For more on italics for titles, see A Writer’s Reference, pages 301.

And a Note on You’ve Got to . . .

In February, we examined five of the You’ve Got to . . . assignments. When in-person classes resume, we will examine the remaining twenty assignments.