Paper #1--Epics and Culture                       
RUS 370/Fall 2010
Due September 30

    1) Both parts of this assignment must be typed, double-spaced, 1 inch margins, 12 pt (or larger) type and submitted in hard copy, or I will not accept them;

    2) There is no required length. I do not believe in them and I will not even give you a ballpark estimate. Answer the questions as completely as you think is necessary to prove your point, with emphasis on completely;

    3) The goal is for you to analyze American culture as a folklorist would. You should assume that your audience is other folklorists, so that you do not need to explain established theories in great detail. Note: you still must use theories in a detailed enough manner to make clear your understanding, but you need not explain them as you would to a layperson;

    4) Assessment Rubric: This paper will be assessed in the following way:                                                                      

Analysis                            
15    The paper presents a plausible analysis that goes beyond the commonplace     by offering original insights, both in terms of the whole and particular parts of     the data.                                            
12    The paper presents a plausible analysis and may contain one or two original     insights but on the whole does not go beyond the common range of     interpretations.                                        
9    The paper reiterates in general terms a common interpretation of the material     with no original ideas.                                    
6    This paper presents original ideas that weaken the plausibility of the analysis.    
0    The paper does not offer a data analysis.

Strength of Argument                        
10    The paper offers a logical, coherent argument for the analysis with a well-forumated thesis and conclusion. All assertions are supported and amplified with details from personal experience or from other     sources. The writer
            pursues an original line of argument in at least one portion of the paper.    
8    The paper offers a logical, coherent argument for the analysis but only partially supports or amplifies the assertions, the thesis/conclusion are not as well
            formulated. Or the writer does not pursue an original line of argument.        
6    The paper offers an argument that contains some lapses in logic and/or offers     only minimal support or amplification of assertions. Thesis/conclusion not well-     
            formulated                                            
4    The paper offers an argument that is seriously flawed in logic or that fails to     support or amplify most or all assertions. The paper is basically a list with no     attempt to support the argument, no thesis/conclusion.                
0    The paper does not present an argument to support the data analysis.

Incorporation of Counterarguments                    
5    This paper acknowledges significant counterarguments (alternative     interpretations and reasons) and either effectively refutes or successfully     accommodates them into the interpretation being argued.                
4    The paper acknowledges several but not all counterarguments and refutes or     accommodates some.                                    
3    The paper acknowledges at least one counterargument (perhaps more) but is     unsuccessful in the attempt to refute or to accommodate it/them.            
2    The paper mentions at least one counterargument but makes no attempt to     refute or accommodate it.                                    
0    The paper ignores all counterarguments.

Relation to the Whole/Significance                    
15    The significance of the analysis offered (either in relation to culture as a whole or     to the larger context of oral poetry in which the data are situated) forms an     integral part of the argument. The connections are profound, interesting, or     complex.                                        
12    The paper makes clear the significance of the analysis either in relation to     culture as a whole or to the larger context of oral poetry in which the data are     situated. The connections are plausible.                            
9    The paper offers some mention of the significance of the analysis or the     significance is somewhat loosely implied. The connections are plausible, but     somewhat obvious.                                        
6    The paper offers some mention of the significance of the analysis, but the     connections are not plausible.                                
0    The paper makes no attempt to mention significance.

Spelling/Grammar/Citations                    
5    This paper has no errors in language, usage, or citations     (footnotes/bibliography) and uses the required number of sources--see my web site for my language pet peeves        
4    This paper has one consistent error in language, usage, or citations and uses the required number of sources.            
3    This paper has several errors in language, usage, or citations and uses the required number of sources.            
2    This paper has frequent errors in language, usage, or citations and uses the required number of sources.            
0    This paper is incomprehensible due to errors in language, usage, or citations and does not use the required number of sources.

Theory                            
10    This paper demonstrates a thorough understanding of the epic patterns and epic     theories we have discussed to date.                            
8    This paper demonstrates a reasonable understanding of epic patterns and the     epic theories we have discussed to date, but is not as complete as it should be.    
6    This paper demonstrates a rudimentary/surface understanding of the epic     patterns and the epic theories we have discussed to date.                
4    This paper demonstrates a poor understanding of the epic patterns and the epic     theories we have discussed to date.                            
0    This paper demonstrates no understanding of the epic patterns and epic theories     we have discussed to date.


5) Assignment:
    To complete this assignment, you must watch the movie The Deerhunter. Even if you have seen this film, WATCH IT AGAIN. You will be looking at it in a whole new way. You can watch it at the Young Media Library (AV-D2795), you will need your card/id to check it out. You may want to watch it in small groups for additional input on the film. You can also rent it and watch it at home.  Be aware that it is a long movie (well over two hours), so that you may want to watch it in two sittings. Watching the film more than once is recommended as well, remember this is your primary source, so that you should be extremely familiar with it.

Part 1:  Write an essay analyzing the film in view of your knowledge about the structure AND function of epic (recall the patterns of dragonslayer, quest and/or battle epics as well as all the other epic features we discussed).  Include a discussion of whether this movie functions as an epic in American society and why you think so. It is a given that this is not an oral poem, so that you do not need to discuss that issue. Rather you should be concerned with structure and content, mythical patterns, character behaviors and how they reflect ideal, flaws, adult issues, and how epic serves to heal and realign a nation (group and individuals therein). I have seen the movie many times, you do not need to give me a plot summary as part of the paper. If a portion of the plot is instrumental to your argument, a brief recap (so that I know what you are talking about) is fine, but there is no need to give pages of summary before you begin your analysis.

Warning:  The Deerhunter is a violent movie about the Vietnam War. If you think you will be bothered by this, close your eyes, but ask someone else to tell you what happened, in case it is important to your paper. If you cannot do even that, come see me.

Part 2:  This part should be typed on completely separate sheet(s) of paper and is due on the same day as the part 1. Do NOT attach it/staple it to the portion on the the epic function and structure. As you watch, note any cultural features/behaviors/ mores/traditions that are particularly Russian. Make a list of everything you noticed and discuss briefly whether they conform to or contradict your expectations of East Slavic life based on your knowledge of folk practices. This film was made in Slavic communities in Pennsylvania and Ohio, so that you might find quite a few similarities as well as things that surprise you. We will discuss your observations in class. This portion will count as a homework assignment.


6) Steps for this paper to be most successful:

1)    Before you watch the film, research the Vietnam war. The best source is George Herring’s, America's Longest War: The United States and Vietnam, 1950-1975. You must use at least one print source for this paper, e.g. some historical source on the Vietnam War. However, there are also good on-line sources that may help you as well; http://www.vietnam.ttu.edu/index.htm and www.loc.gov/vets are two of those. You may also want to interview people who remember or participated in the war. You might also consider looking into reactions to the film when it was released (in film reviews and the like) as well as one of the many books on the Vietnam War in film available at WT Young;

2)    Once you have done your initial research on the war, review the material on the structure and function of epics that we have discussed; use your handouts and Bailey’s introductions to each epic thoughtfully, they can provide extremely valuable information for your argument. Reread the epics, focusing on the dragonslayer/battle/quest epics. Make specific references to the epics we have read (or to other epics you may have read before). The best papers show a great deal of familiarity with the epics themselves and use them to support their arguments;

3)    Make a check list for yourself on issues/behaviors/material you must watch for while viewing the film to determine whether it might be classified as an epic;

4)    Watch the film, making notes on the elements that either fit or do not fit the epic structural pattern; notice that this is not step 1!;

5)    Do not become fixated on structure alone! Epic function is just as important as structure. Consider this film with the context of U.S. society and whether it might have served to help people cope with the war both individually and as a group. Remember, epics restore social balance and reinforce belief systems;

6)    You should consider whether this film fits into another genre we have discussed as well. It may or may not, but it is worth considering;

7)    Write an outline of the paper. It does not have to be a classic outline with A, B, C, but a sketch of the points you want to make and the way you are going to prove them. Be sure that you understand the concept of counterarguments: possible objections to your claims that I (or another person) might pose. Anticipate alternate conclusions and address why your interpretation of the data is better than those are;

8)    Your bibliography should include not only references to all print materials, but also 1) the film; 2) web sites; and 3) interviews;

9)    Think for yourself. Just because I am asking you to evaluate this film as an epic, does not mean it must be an epic! You need to think critically about the data to write a convincing paper;

10)     Give yourself plenty of time to do all these steps thoroughly. If you try to rush this project, it will be obvious, and the paper will not be as strong.