Department of English

Jeremy Goheen


Contact

Courses


E 314L • Goodreads

34960 • Spring 2019
Meets TTH 2:00PM-3:30PM CMA 3.114
Wr

E 314L  l  10-GoodReads

 

Instructor: Goheen, J

Unique: 34960

Semester: Spring 2019

Cross-lists:  n/a

Restrictions:  n/a

Computer instruction:  No

 

Prerequisites: One of the following: E 303C (or 603A), RHE 306, 306Q, or T C 303C (or 603A).

 

Description: Charles Baudelaire, a nineteenth-century French poet, once wrote of Paris, “The life of our city is rich in poetic and marvelous subjects. We are enveloped and steeped as though in an atmosphere of the marvelous; but we do not notice it.”  What “poetic and marvelous subjects” does the city offer?  What has the city come to mean in the books we read?  What purpose does it serve?  What bearing does gender, race, and class have on one’s experience of the city?  How have authors registered such experiences?  Throughout this semester, we will explore the ways in which literary authors have used the complex, lively, and often disturbing atmosphere of cities to make sense of what it means to inhabit this world.

 

The primary aim of this course is to help students develop and improve the critical reading, writing, and thinking skills needed for success in upper-division courses in English and other disciplines. They will also gain practice in using the Oxford English Dictionary and other online research tools and print resources that support studies in the humanities.  Students will learn basic information literacy skills and models for approaching literature with various historical, generic, and cultural contexts in mind.

 

This course contains a writing flag.  The writing assignments in this course are arranged procedurally with a focus on invention, development through instructor and peer feedback, and revision; they will comprise a major part of the final grade.

 

Tentative Texts: Virginia Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway;Indra Sinha’s Animal’s People; Zadie Smith’s NW; Toni Morrison’s Jazz.

 

Requirements & Grading: There will be a series of 3 short essays, the first of which must be revised and resubmitted.  Subsequent essays may also be revised and resubmitted by arrangement with the Instructor (75% of the final grade).  There will also be short quizzes, reaction papers, and required in-class participation (25% of the final grade).

E 314L • Goodreads

35140 • Fall 2018
Meets TTH 3:30PM-5:00PM BEN 1.124
Wr

E 314L  l  10-GoodReads

 

Instructor:  Goheen, J

Unique:  35140

Semester:  Fall 2018

Cross-lists:  n/a

Restrictions:  n/a

Computer instruction:  No

 

Prerequisites:  One of the following: E 303C (or 603A), RHE 306, 306Q, or T C 303C (or 603A).

 

Description:  Charles Baudelaire, a nineteenth-century French poet, once wrote of Paris, “The life of our city is rich in poetic and marvelous subjects.  We are enveloped and steeped as though in an atmosphere of the marvelous; but we do not notice it.”  What “poetic and marvelous subjects” does the city offer?  What has the city come to mean in the books we read?  What purpose does it serve?  What bearing does gender, race, and class have on one’s experience of the city?  How have authors registered such experiences?  Throughout this semester, we will explore the ways in which literary authors have used the complex, lively, and often disturbing atmosphere of cities to make sense of what it means to inhabit this world.

 

The primary aim of this course is to help students develop and improve the critical reading, writing, and thinking skills needed for success in upper-division courses in English and other disciplines.  They will also gain practice in using the Oxford English Dictionary and other online research tools and print resources that support studies in the humanities.  Students will learn basic information literacy skills and models for approaching literature with various historical, generic, and cultural contexts in mind.

 

This course contains a writing flag.  The writing assignments in this course are arranged procedurally with a focus on invention, development through instructor and peer feedback, and revision; they will comprise a major part of the final grade.

 

Tentative Texts:  Virginia Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway; Indra Sinha’s Animal’s People; Zadie Smith’s NW; Toni Morrison’s Jazz.

 

Requirements & Grading:  There will be a series of 3 short essays, the first of which must be revised and resubmitted.  Subsequent essays may also be revised and resubmitted by arrangement with the Instructor (75% of the final grade).  There will also be short quizzes, reaction papers, and required in-class participation (25% of the final grade).

RHE 309K • Rhet Of Sports/Athleticism

43590 • Spring 2018
Meets MWF 10:00AM-11:00AM JES A209A
Wr

In a 2006 New York Times article, David Foster Wallace defined the spectacle of watching Roger Federer play upon the “sacred grass” of Wimbledon as a “religious experience.” Framing such an experience in religious terms, Wallace contends that Federer is “one of those preternatural athletes who appear to be exempt . . . from certain physical laws.” We, as an audience, are asked to imagine Federer’s athleticism and performance on the court less in terms of sheer muscular physicality and more in terms of pure transcendent beauty—a beauty divested of political and cultural meaning. Nine years later, Claudia Rankine would explore in the same venue with a much different agenda “The Meaning of Serena Williams.” Williams, Rankine contends, embodies black excellence, but not the kind of black excellence that performs with “good manners and forgiveness in the face of any racist slights or attacks.” On quite the contrary, Rankine suggests Williams’s performances have rewritten the “unspoken script that demands” black people, and black athletes in particular, to absorb racism without resistance. The “new script” Williams provides is one in which “winning doesn't carry the burden of curing racism, in which [black athletes] win just to win.” While each of these representations of the two athletes could not have more radically different agendas, they share some common denominators. Significantly, both authors ask us to change the way we talk about and perceive sports and athleticism. But in asking us to alter our perspectives, they do something we all do every day (knowingly or not): they subtlety, and sometimes not so subtlety, make arguments. And they do so using a wide range of rhetorical strategies.

In this course, Rhetoric of Sports and Athleticism, we will seek to answer a series of fundamental questions: What are sports? What is athleticism? What rhetorical strategies, specifically, does the media employ as a means of selling the spectacle of sports and athleticism to spectators? What is the price we pay for incessantly talking (and arguing) about sports? What is there to be gained? How is rhetoric used to both destroy and advance individual careers? Whose bodies get talked about and whose bodies do not? Where do sports and politics collapse into one another? Are they (or have they) ever been distinct from one another? In attempt to answer these kinds of questions, students will complete three major assignment divided into three units. In the first unit, students will map a particular sports related controversy of their choice. To help narrow the scope of the project, students will select a single athlete through which they will map the controversy. In the second unit, students will learn to rhetorically analyze televised and live sports events. In the third and final unit, students will make an intervention into the controversy they will have explored over the course of the semester.

Required Textbooks and Handbooks

  • Good Reasons with Contemporary Arguments, Lester Fairly and Jack Selzer
  • Longhorn Handbook

Grading

  • 1.1 Annotated Bibliography (10%)
  • 2.1 Rhetorical Analysis (televised event) (5&)
  • 2.2 Rhetorical Analysis (live event) (5%)
  • 2.3 Rhetorical analysis revision (10%)
  • 3.1 Argumentative Essay (15%)
  • 3.2 Argumentative Essay Revision (20%)
  • Short Writing Assignments/participation (20%)
  • Oral Presentations (5%)
  • Participation (10%)
  • Peer Reviews (Mandatory)

RHE 309K • Rhet Of Sports/Athleticism

44075 • Fall 2017
Meets MWF 1:00PM-2:00PM PAR 208
Wr

RHE 309K: Rhetoric of Sports & Athleticism

In a 2006 New York Times article, David Foster Wallace defined the spectacle of watching Roger Federer play upon the “sacred grass” of Wimbledon as a “religious experience.” Framing such an experience in religious terms, Wallace contends that Federer is “one of those preternatural athletes who appear to be exempt . . . from certain physical laws.” We, as an audience, are asked to imagine Federer’s athleticism and performance on the court less in terms of sheer muscular physicality and more in terms of pure transcendent beauty—a beauty divested of political and cultural meaning. Nine years later, Claudia Rankine would explore in the same venue with a much different agenda “The Meaning of Serena Williams.” Williams, Rankine contends, embodies black excellence, but not the kind of black excellence that performs with “good manners and forgiveness in the face of any racist slights or attacks.” On quite the contrary, Rankine suggests Williams’s performances have rewritten the “unspoken script that demands” black people, and black athletes in particular, to absorb racism without resistance. The “new script” Williams provides is one in which “winning doesn't carry the burden of curing racism, in which [black athletes] win just to win.” While each of these representations of the two athletes could not have more radically different agendas, they share some common denominators. Significantly, both authors ask us to change the way we talk about and perceive sports and athleticism. But in asking us to alter our perspectives, they do something we all do every day (knowingly or not): they subtlety, and sometimes not so subtlety, make arguments. And they do so using a wide range of rhetorical strategies.

In this course, Rhetoric of Sports and Athleticism, we will seek to answer a series of fundamental questions: What are sports? What is athleticism? What rhetorical strategies, specifically, does the media employ as a means of selling the spectacle of sports and athleticism to spectators? What is the price we pay for incessantly talking (and arguing) about sports? What is there to be gained? How is rhetoric used to both destroy and advance individual careers? Whose bodies get talked about and whose bodies do not? Where do sports and politics collapse into one another? Are they (or have they) ever been distinct from one another? In attempt to answer these kinds of questions, students will complete three major assignment divided into three units. In the first unit, students will map a particular sports related controversy of their choice. To help narrow the scope of the project, students will select a single athlete through which they will map the controversy. In the second unit, students will learn to rhetorically analyze televised and live sports events. In the third and final unit, students will make an intervention into the controversy they will have explored over the course of the semester.

Required Textbooks and Handbooks

  • Good Reasons with Contemporary Arguments, Lester Fairly and Jack Selzer
  • Longhorn Handbook

Grading

  • 1.1 Annotated Bibliography (10%)
  • 2.1 Rhetorical Analysis (televised event) (5&)
  • 2.2 Rhetorical Analysis (live event) (5%)
  • 2.3 Rhetorical analysis revision (10%)
  • 3.1 Argumentative Essay (15%)
  • 3.2 Argumentative Essay Revision (20%)
  • Short Writing Assignments/participation (20%)
  • Oral Presentations (5%)
  • Participation (10%)
  • Peer Reviews (Mandatory)

RHE F309K • Rhet Of Sports/Athleticism

84905 • Summer 2017
Meets MTWTHF 1:00PM-2:30PM MEZ B0.302
Wr

Rhetoric of Sports and Athleticism

 

In a 2006 New York Times article, David Foster Wallace defined the spectacle of watching Roger Federer play upon the “sacred grass” of Wimbledon as a “religious experience.” Framing such an experience in religious terms, Wallace contends that Federer is “one of those preternatural athletes who appear to be exempt . . . from certain physical laws.” We, as an audience, are asked to imagine Federer’s athleticism and performance on the court less in terms of sheer muscular physicality and more in terms of pure transcendent beauty—a beauty divested of political and cultural meaning. Nine years later, Claudia Rankine would explore in the same venue with a much different agenda “The Meaning of Serena Williams.” Williams, Rankine contends, embodies black excellence, but not the kind of black excellence that performs with “good manners and forgiveness in the face of any racist slights or attacks.” On quite the contrary, Rankine suggests Williams’s performances have rewritten the “unspoken script that demands” black people, and black athletes in particular, to absorb racism without resistance. The “new script” Williams provides is one in which “winning doesn't carry the burden of curing racism, in which [black athletes] win just to win.” While each of these representations of the two athletes could not have more radically different agendas, they share some common denominators. Significantly, both authors ask us to change the way we talk about and perceive sports and athleticism. But in asking us to alter our perspectives, they do something we all do every day (knowingly or not): they subtlety, and sometimes not so subtlety, make arguments. And they do so using a wide range of rhetorical strategies.

 

In this course, Rhet of Sports and Athleticism, we will seek to answer a series of fundamental questions: What are sports? What is athleticism? What rhetorical strategies, specifically, does the media employ as a means of selling the spectacle of sports and athleticism to spectators? What is the price we pay for incessantly talking (and arguing) about sports? What is there to be gained? How is rhetoric used to both destroy and advance individual careers? Whose bodies get talked about and whose bodies do not? Where do sports and politics collapse into one another? Are they (or have they) ever been distinct from one another? In attempt to answer these kinds of questions, students will complete three major assignment divided into three units. In the first unit, students will map a particular sports related controversy of their choice. To help narrow the scope of the project, students will select a single athlete through which they will map the controversy. In the second unit, students will learn to rhetorically analyze televised and live sports events. In the third and final unit, students will make an intervention into the controversy they will have explored over the course of the semester.

 

Required Textbooks and Handbooks

  • Good Reasons with Contemporary Arguments, Lester Fairly and Jack Selzer
  • Longhorn Handbook

 

 

1.1 Annotated Bibliography (10%)

2.1 Rhetorical Analysis (televised event) (5&)

2.2 Rhetorical Analysis (live event) (5%)

2.3 Rhetorical analysis revision (10%)

3.1 Argumentative Essay (15%)

3.2 Argumentative Essay Revision (20%)

Short Writing Assignments/participation (20%)

Oral Presentations (5%)

Participation (10%)

Peer Reviews (Mandatory)

Profile Pages