First Writing Assignment

In approximately one-and-a-half typed, double-spaced pages, criticize one of the following two articles contained in the reader by Kelley and Hicks. (You may, in fact, personally agree with the article, but, for the purpose of this assignment I am asking you to disagree with it.)

I
John Enright: "What is Poetry?"

In your own words, first explain Enright's definition of poetry. Then criticize the definition. One possible way to criticize the definition would be by counter-example. Identify what you propose to be at least one instance of poetry, which would be excluded from the concept of poetry by Enright's definition. Include a complete copy of the proposed counter-example, either quoting it in the text of your paper, or including it in an appendix at the end (Depending on the length of the proposed poem, this inclusion may cause your paper to run beyond the page-and-a-half recommendation.). You will need to argue that the example you cite is, indeed, an example of poetry. If you wish to propose your own definition of poetry, which results from your discussion, you may do so.

II
Justice William Brennan: "Furman v. Georgia"

In your own words, summarize one of Brennan's four arguments that capital punishment is cruel and unusual. Then criticize some part of the argument. For example, on pp. 94-97, Brennan advances various reasons to believe that the death penalty violates the principle that " … an unusually severe and degrading punishment may not be excessive in view of the purposes for which it is inflicted." (p. 97) In section 23, he proposes a reason that concerns the rationality or irrationality of criminals: Few would be so rational, at the moment of the crime, as to be deterred by the prospect of the death penalty but not by the prospect of life in prison. How might this reasoning be criticized? Could a mistake concern when the criminal is irrational? Might the (typical?) criminal be irrational during the commission of the crime, but not before? Might the criminal's rationality before commission contribute to deterrence due to the thought of possible death? If so, what might be the significance for this criticism of such data as Brennan attributes in the previous paragraph to Justice Marshall?

Whichever essay you choose to criticize, as you write, keep two goals in mind: (A) a precise grasp of concepts, (B) concise, precise, powerful expression. Two principles facilitate achievement of the latter goal.

1. Use strong verbs.

2. Refer directly to the subject; refer only infrequently, if at all, to yourself.

Your paper should reflect an awareness of words that are associated with male gender. Avoid biased use of masculine pronouns. If an unjustified preponderance of masculine pronouns characterizes your paper, replace them either with expressions such as 'she or he' and 'him or her', or simply 'she' and 'her', or a combination of 'she', 'he', 'her', and 'him'. Some people accept plural pronouns with singular antecedents, since plural pronouns do not denote gender ('them', 'their'). I prefer the other alternatives since they violate neither our grammatical principles of agreement nor our moral sensibilities about fairness with respect to gender. For the purpose of this paper, you should use some kind of unbiased language that does not violate the principle of pronoun/antecedent agreement.

While the assignment asks you to avoid sexist language, if you do use sexist language, that use will not affect your grade. Poor grammar, however, could affect your grade. Therefore, no matter how you handle the problem of sexist language, you should avoid using plural pronouns with singular antecedents. The following examples illustrate both grammatical and ungrammatical use of pronouns.