Honors Thesis Colloquium 2009-10

Millicent, please read the 2 posts I have written to the group: the one to Larry and class on method and the one how to propose your main focus (posted Oct. 1).   In terms of your proposal, I think you should ask the question initially about whether China’s current policies will be adequate to the task at hand. That is the key question that spurs your research and your working hypothesis is that it is not adequate.  You have stated supporting reasons for your hypothesis, so I agree with your self-assessment that the project is warranted.  As you point out, you need to acknowledge some opposing views in order to gain credibility for yourself.  Finally, your discussion of research methods should be more precise in terms of your field.

Lawrence, please read the 2 posts I have written to the group: the one to Larry and class on method and the one how to propose your main focus (posted Oct. 1).   These will help you get your proposal thought out and fully drafted.  Please send it to me once you have written it.

Lili, please read the 2 posts I have written to the group: the one to Larry and class on method and the one how to propose your main focus (posted Oct. 1).  Overall, I would say that your draft needs only slight revision and that, furthermore, your own evaluation of what needs to be done is on target. So, as you have said: state clearly your acknowledgment of alternative positions and also make the connection between your mail claim and supporting reasons clearer to show why your project of research is warranted.

Connie, please read the 2 posts I have written to the group: the one to Larry and class on method and the one how to propose your main focus (posted Oct. 1).  In terms of your draft, what most needs to be done is to turn from arguing your position to proposing your research topic and saying how you will go about it. You do have some acknowledged counter-arguments in the course of your discussion but you need to flag them more clearly in terms of how you will address them.

In your last paragraph, you tell a history of American women’s lives prior to Betty Friedan’s publication, which is simply incorrect.  So look into that history more fully to see the more complex cycles of progress and set-back.

Hi Larry, I have gone back to your earlier comments section to discover the important one you made and that I missed, so for these remarks on your proposal draft, I will combine some of that material as well, since it has bearing on the proposal.

You also asked me a good question in an email–one that applies to everyone in the class–so I will address that first. You wrote the following perceptive set of questions: “But I think one of the problems that we were addressing in class is what type of evidence I would be looking for: musical, historical, theoretical? Another problem I had trouble with but I believe I am starting to get is what exactly is research methods. I thought it was something that was already established for each field but I am not sure. It seems to also be something we invent. Is it the developed plan we create get our data displayed in a way that proves our thesis? Or are there prescribed methods?”

There are certain prescriptions in regard to methods of research. Each field has a defined object of study: literature or history or music or soil, etc. What one looks for in regard to that object is also part of a discipline–that is, you become disciplined to look for certain qualities of stability or change in that object, or how it functions in a context (whether it is muscle structure in the context of bodies or music in the context of a culture). Fields often get combine–as in social psychology–because researchers find one approach too narrow.

So, what I am asking each of you to do is, first of all, to state your field of study (or your combined fields if you are using an interdisciplinary approach). Many in the class have not yet done that and it is a necessary step in getting focused. That is one reason, Larry, that you have moved back and forth between claims in your own proposal. On the one hand, you are looking at musical lyrics (music). On the other hand, you are looking at the impact of those lyrics in a culture (sociology). On the third hand you don’t have, you are looking at questions of identity in relation to the music (social psychology). And on top of all that, you are looking at 2 cultures to make a comparison/contrast analysis (cross-cultural sociology and maybe some anthropology). This may be is why you feel confused about method!

Further, there are real issues to be addressed about whether you are looking at the Chinese lyrics in translation or whether you read Chinese. That certainly complicates the question about what is understood within the Chinese culture. So, a proposal helps you see whether you have bitten off more than you can or even want to chew.

In the case of your proposal, you have also indicated your intended testing out of some of the theories and findings of Simon Frith, who is a sociologist who examines popular music for mass culture. You will need to steep yourself in more of his work in order to grasp what his method is–and whether it is the one you will employ. And that would also mean reading analyses by others of his work–to see why they approve or disagree with it. Where, more specifically, do Scott and Rose come in, in regard to Frith’s arguments?

So my advice at this point is to come to terms with your object of study and which method you will likely use. Then you will know what will count as evidence within that focus. Clarify why you have chosen China as your focus for the lyrics and address the question above on translation. And think about how you would gauge impact of these lyrics on Chinese youth. How does Frith make his case for this in his cultural analysis and would it be a useful way for you to approach it? Would you have to be in China to do so or could you use writings about Chinese youth culture? If you can’t really do that, I think what you mean to study is the lyrics themselves–what they say, what aesthetic they follow, what their ideological meaning is.

I hope this helps, but let me know if I need to clarify more. Above all, this is not to discourage you! It is to help you focus on a doable topic. Best, Lee

For next Wednesday, Oct. 7, I have the following times available:  every half hour from 2 until 5, with the exception of  the 3:30 slot, which has been taken.  Please indicate which time you want and I will see you next week.

Hi everyone!

Just a reminder that you can find me in the first floor reading room at Macaulay before class. I get in at about 1 PM on Wednesdays and I’m around until class begins at 4:10. While I’m going to stick my head in briefly tomorrow to say hi, I’m not always able to stay for your class–so if you have any technical questions or concerns, please make every effort to contact me before class. You can also find me in the reading room on Thursdays, 12-3. And of course I am always happy to entertain questions via e-mail.

Finally, you can post your questions as comments to this post, and I’ll answer them here.

Please do ask questions! I would like you to get more out of this set-up as the year progresses.

Nor,

Your initial position paper is already making your case—but it is too soon to do that at this stage of a research project.  You may certainly have a working hypothesis, but until you have studied a range of arguments on your topic, it is premature to be arguing it.  In other words, this assignment calls for you to discuss what position your sources take (which you have done) rather than how they fit into the position you are taking.

For your annotated bibliography, be sure to lay out carefully what your sources claim and how they support their claim—or fail to support it.  Then evaluate the source in terms of credibility and adequate evidence.  Compare and contrast your soures—do they agree, disagree, learn from each other, etc.  Then you can say how it will help direct your further in your research.

For your proposal, again, it is not yet a matter of making your case for your thesis.  You are to propose your topic and indicate the methods of research that will allow you to substantiate your understanding of this situation.  In this case, be sure to indicate that you will look at opposing arguments about Pakistan’s policies.  Only then will you as a researcher come across as reliable, having looked a number of arguments that may disagree with your initial hypothesis.

If you have not yet read the recent article by George Packer about Richard Holbrooke in the September 28, 2009 New Yorker, you will find it of use in regard to both Pakistan and Afghanistan and US policies.

Connie,

You have begun with two crucial sources by focusing on Marx and Friedan.  You might also read Beauvoir’s The Second Sex as a classic feminist text that outlines ways of thinking about women’s reproduction and the effects of society in exploiting it.   Once you begin to look at second wave Marxist-feminist writings, you will see that the problems in borrowing marxist analysis for feminist thought around the issue of reproductive rights was very much a topic in the 1970s and 80s.  One of the issues that came to the fore was how much class as an economic category and work as a practice actually illuminated gender and reproduction as a practice.  In other words, you will save yourself a certain amount of time by reading these Marxist-feminist analyses carefully.   That is not to say that you skip over the initial, classic texts—quite the contrary.  I’m glad to see you start with them, and it will be interesting to see if you pick up on something new for our time in comparison to the 70s and 80s perspectives.

Take a look at Zillah Eisenstein’s work over the past few decades.  Also, it woudl be helpful to you to use a collection called Feminist Theory by Kolmar and Bartkowski because their discussion of these issues is quite valuable and it contains a great range of the kinds of writings that have been done by feminists working on these issues.