Anyway, the evidence of learning that I'm considering presenting will probably take the form of a Socratic dialogue between different reviewers arguing and sharing their opinions on Whitman's work. The reason I want to make it a dialogue is because that way it's more like a conversation and there is a negotiating process between the reviewers (and perhaps Whitman might be there incognito) on what good poetry is supposed to be.
I think you have a solid, specific topic and method outlined in your previous post and this one. I was interested in doing a project on the reviews, too, but have had difficulty especially with how to present it, and your Socratic dialogue sounds like an effective and fun approach.
ReplyDeletei like the idea of a conversation between reviewers, it allows to bring up arguments and good points not obvious to others. it would be cool to have Walt there but i think you should throw yourself in there too.
ReplyDeleteThanks both of you for the comments.
ReplyDeleteAnd Tawny, that would be fun to put myself in there. I will definitely take that idea into consideration.
Great . . I like the idea of "dialogue" - - e.g. that the reviews are really dialogues . . . almost "trialogues' between poem, reviewer, and reader . . .
ReplyDeleteHey! Can you check out my latest post? It's for the Ruckeyser group to get in touch with each other. :)
ReplyDelete