Play in the City 2013

Last time my lens are too broad and complex- the differences and similarities between Nat and Felix, and the reason for their difference- self respect.

This time I want to narrow lens to the similarities of Nat and Felix（sex with others，same opening narration of the chapter） to illuminate that no matter how hard they are trying to change, they are rooted in their fixed class and why Zadie smith wants to create these similar characters. Maybe because their similarities may reflect and apply more broadly- for the people try to change but can’t. The reason may be social class is solidified, they can’t move on. Maybe I want to relate this to the social solidarity by Émile Durkheim.

When I looked over my essay again after class and even when I origially wote it, I felt that I was only really touching on the surface of the existentialist view of Natalie/Keisha's identity crisis. When I rewrite my essay this weekend, I plan to focus on deepening the ideas I have already presented in the essay and looking closer at her situation to develop the paper more. In parts of the essay I need to shift the focus of my writing back to the main points I was trying to make, this will not only keep my paper on track but also give me the pooprtunity to dig deeper into the true nature of her situation. Overall, I plan to develop my ideas more and organize them in a way that will make them more impactful. 

Between the discussion we had in class and after re-reading my paper, I have decided that I would like to narrow in and shift my focus onto how Keisha/Natalie’s upbringing and socioeconomic background influenced her identity crisis, rather than just an accumulation of all the possible causes of her crisis. I plan on tightening my very long introduction and body paragraphs that relate to my new narrower lens. I then plan on finding more textual evidence as well as additional research to write new paragraphs that reflect my interest in Keisha/Natalie and her transformation, and how that relates to her socioeconomic status. 

This past Sunday's paper, my lens focused on the acceptance of interracial marriage in Brittain. I took the issue of race and focused on how it's factor plays a role in relationship stability and function. I felt good about the paper and like I completed the task of using a lens, but I definitely could have deepen my argument by using the example of leah and michel's relationship and how it plays into importance with the novel. 

For this upcoming paper, I'm not quite sure what my new lens might focus on. I have two ideas, one focusing on the social economic status of the characters and how it affects their romantic relationships as well as how race does. This option would be a lens focusing on the marxism lens. I could also choose to write based on my second idea, which would be on the lens of free will and analyzing the characters social status and their economic status and tie it in with the idea of stagnation. 

For this essay-rewrite, Anne basically did all the heavy-lifting in our writing conference. My lens, "How we must be more cautious about blaming," is clear but needs to be used better. 

The outline: 

Subject- On the Notion of Blame and our Neurology: How Accountable are we for Our Actions?

Thesis: That the human brain is so complex, so much of a mystery to both us and scientists, that we don't know what to make of the chaos and disorder and mystery that goes on inside our own brains, much less other peoples. That is why we go to fiction. To get some sort of order out of the worldly chaos. 

Part one: My rant about NW and my expectations for it. 

Part two: How Zadie Smith might be trying to recreate all the internal chaos and mystery inside of us. Why doesn't she give us what we seek from fiction? 

Part three: Add on/end with the Radiolab piece about blame and the poor man Kevin and his Kluver-Büsey syndrome. 

Last weeks paper I focused on Leah and Michel's biracial relationship.  This week I would like to broaden my lens and incorporate other characters that share biracial and bicultural friendships and relationships such as Frank and Leah, Frank and Natalie, and Leah and Natalie.  I mainly wrote about how Leah and Michel's race pushes them apart but I think it would be interesting to add in other negative and positive factors in their relationship.

For my last paper, I used the lens of structure. I looked at how ZS structured sections differently depending on who they were about, and how that person/character experiences time I also wrote about her authorial voice and inputs into the narration. 

For this newer essay, I want to keep that lens, but elaborate more on where she does and doesn't do this. I also want to look more into the absurdity of the world, as presented through the book. 

I plan to keep my lens of existentialism and deepen it by finding more resources on Kierkegaard and using them to lengthen my paper.

That Leah and Keisha became best friends seems a result of some accidents: Keisha saved Leah from drowning in the pool, and later “a dramatic event” when they confronted Nathan Bogle together. Would they become good friends if these didn’t happen? I guess so. Caldwell is a small community. If not these two exact things, there’s still a great chance that something else dramatic might happen between them. Bought the same dresses and wore them to school on the same day. Or ran into each other on the street and one fell really bad and another accompanied her to the hospital. A lot of things that can possibly bond them as life-long best friends. On the other hand, they must’ve had this sort of interesting encounters with many other people as well. But they became best friends with each other, Leah and Keisha, so that’s not a coincidence, but a choice.

Their childhood friendship was “based on verb rather than nouns”. They liked each other because they spent plenty of time together and did fun things. That’s more like playmates. To me, true friends like each other not because they do fun things together, but because they appreciate each other, the person’s personalities and intelligence and passions. And even when they do boring things like waiting for a bus for an hour or studying all day, they don’t feel dull because each one is a delight to the other.