Reply to comment

Tuesday's class discussion revolved around our fairytale analysis assignments that were due that day.  Members of the class took turns sharing opinions and difficulties that each had had with completing the aforementioned assignment.  After more discussion, the class and Prof. Grobstein concluded that there were four categories associated with the assignment:

1.  People who discovered new things about their fairytale through their own analysis

2.  People who chose not to "mess with" the original idea by over analyzing

3.  People who knew from the beginning what elements they included within the story and were going to analyze

4.  people digging for depth that wasn't actually there -  a.k.a. Made some stuff up

The discussion ran on for the entire span of the class, and we talked about pros/cons of literary analysis and whether true meaning from the text was to be derived from the reader's imagination or from the author's original intent.  In conclusion, Prof. Grobstein remarked that "writing is a way to discover new ways of thinking for yourself."

On Thursday we discussed our forum responses about Galileo.  There were many who remarked on the human side of Galileo portrayed by the play.  Others talked about the notion of theories actually being stories, which in turn led to a huge discussion about the nature of the universe itself.  later on, the discussion veered on to the subject of restriction in certain studies.  Pedophilia was used as an interesting (and disturbing) example and the class was somewhat divided over whether one could truly study any subject without crossing some boundary.  As the class ended, Prof. Grobstein left us with a few topics to think about.  First, Why do stories change?  Second, what were Galileo's motivations in making his discoveries.  Lastly, the idea of a story, within a story, within a story.