UNIVERSIDAD DE COSTA RICA FACULTAD DE LETRAS ESCUELA DE LENGUAS MODERNAS RECINTO DE GOLFITO Bachillerato en Inglés COURSE OUTLINE Name: Comparative Literature Code: LM-1487 Credits: 3 Requisites: LM-1361; LM-1362; LM-1363 Pre-requisites: LM-1477; LM-1472 Co-requisites: None Cycle: II Year: 2018 Classwork hours: 3 Out-of-class: 6 Level: Fourth year Total: 9 Professor: MSc. Randal Esteban Blanco Navarro randalesteban@yahoo.com Type: Theoretical Schedule: Friday 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Office hours: Tuesday 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. I. DESCRIPTION LM-1487 Comparative Literature is the fifth of six courses which comprise the optional area of literature specialization within the Bachelor of Arts in the English program. It is a three-hour, threecredit course designed to introduce students to Comparative Literature by studying relationships between literature and other art forms, diverse genres within the same period of time, and often, between works by authors of different nationalities and /or languages. The course offered this semester concentrates on a specific historical and temporal context the Nineteenth Century and Early Twentieth Century and strives to reach a better understanding of it, through the comparative analysis of works belonging to various genres, as well as through cultural productions of the time, such as painting and architecture. This course provides students with theory as well as practice within the field of Comparative Literature as a means to further understanding, enjoyment, and appreciation of literary and cultural creation in general.
II. GENERAL OBJETIVES a. Develop a more comprehensive view of literary studies by establishing relationships and comparisons across literary genres, but within the frame of the same temporal and historical milieu. b. Assimilate and apply basic theoretical principles, concepts, and strategies that enable the examination of literary works. c. Increase cultural and aesthetic awareness and knowledge by analyzing forms of artistic production other than literature, such as painting, architecture, and film. d. Reach a thorough understanding of the literary and artistic era in question, through a comparative analysis of literary and cultural works; the method applied here rejects the notion that an era might be approached merely through a single discipline, and instead proposes an interdisciplinary approach. III. SPECIFIC OBJETIVES By the end of the semester, the students will be able to: a. Define Comparative Literature in terms of its origins and specify within the larger area of literary studies. b. Identify basic functions of Comparative Literature. c. Identify and differentiate among basic techniques, themes, and stylistic features in given literary works. d. Understand and employ different comparative methods of literary analysis, mainly based on diverse theoretical concepts. e. Utilize comparative methods in order to draw common denominators between various art forms that can be categorized within the same artistic movement. IV. METHODOLOGY Students will be assigned readings in literary and aesthetic theory, and/or literary texts for each class. The professor will lecture on and clarify basic concepts and historical information, as well as guide students in the analysis and discussions of literary works in the form of group activities, oral presentations, comparative essays, and informal discussions. student preparation and active participation are essential to successful completion of the course.
V. EVALUATION Evaluation is continuous in the sense that daily student participation will be taken into consideration. The final grade will be determined on the following basis: 1 Short tests (3) 30% 2 Short papers (3) 30% 3 Reading checks (5) 25% 4 Comparative project (in groups) 15% Short tests (10% each): A series of questions about theory and literary analysis that students will answer in pairs and in class. Short papers (10% each): Three times in the semester, each student will write a 3-to-5- paragraph essay in which he or she will apply the theory studied so far to the analysis of a literary text already discussed in class. The format to be employed is that which is established by the MLA. Reading checks (25%): This corresponds to all activities carried out in class, some of which will be dependent upon previously assigned homework. Comparative project (15%): In small groups, students will adapt/translate a literary work of their choice to another form of art (painting, music, film) or vice versa (15%) and explain the theoretical basis for their work and the process of adaptation orally to the class (10%). VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY Bassnett, Susan. Comparative Literature: A Critical Introduction. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 1993. Domínguez, César, Haun Saussy, and Darío Villanueva. Introducing Comparative Literature: New Trends and Applications. London: Routledge, 2015. Guillén, Claudio. The Challenge of Comparative Literature. Trans. Franz Cola. Boston, MA: Harvard U.P., 1993. Koleb, Clayton and Susan Noakes, eds. The Comparative Perspective in Literature. Ithaca, NY: Cornell U.P., 1993. Prawer, S.S. Comparative Literature Studies: An Introduction. New York: Harper & Row, 1973.
VII. CHRONOGRAM WEEK DATE TOPIC EVALUATION 1 Aug. 17 th 2 Aug. 24 th 3 Aug. 31st 4 Sep. 7 th 5 Sep. 14 th Introduction Definitions of Comparative Literature Film: Out of Africa Readings on Comparative Literature: comparing art forms Readings on Postcolonial Studies Readings on Ecocriticism Nature in British Romantic poetry William Blaze William Wordsworth Samuel Taylor Coleridge Nature in American Romantic poetry Ralph Waldo Emerson Henry David Thoreau Walt Whitman Nature in American Romantic poetry Emily Dickinson Robert Frost 6 Sep. 21 st The American Wilderness Jack London, The Call of the Wild 7 Sep. 28 th The American Wilderness 8 Oct. 5 th Jack London, The Call of the Wild British Imperialism Rudyard Kipling Sir Conan Doyle 9 Oct. 12 th European Imperialism Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness 10 Oct. 19 th European Imperialism Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness 11 Oct. 26 th American Nature in Early Twentieth-Century 12 Nov. 2 nd 13 Nov. 9 th 14 Nov. 16 th Ernest Hemingway, short stories Latin American Nature in Early Twentieth- Century José Eustasio Rivera, La Vorágine Latin American Nature in Early Twentieth- Century José Eustasio Rivera, La Vorágine Latin American Nature in Early Twentieth- Century José Eustasio Rivera, La Vorágine First short paper due Short test #1 Second short paper due Short test #2 Third short paper due 15 Nov. 23 rd Documentary on Banana Plantations Discussing summary of Mamita Yunai 16 Nov. 30 th Final project presentation 17 Dec. 7 th Short test #3 FINAL GRADES 18 Dec. 14 th Retesting
FORMAT ORGANIZATION USE OF LANGAGE CONTENT VIII. EVALUATION CHARTS SHORT PAPER (10% / 40pts.) COMPARATIVE LITERATURE (LM-1487) Prepared by: M. L. Joe Montenegro B. II-2018 Student s name: Pts. obtained: Grade: % obtained: Unacceptable Minimal Average Above average Outstanding 1-2 - 3 4-5 - 6 7-8 - 9 10-11 12 almost never coherent and sound. Inconsequential use of theory and the primary text. No use of support from secondary sources. seldom coherent and sound. Somewhat irrelevant use of theory and the primary text. Little or no use of support from secondary sources. sometimes coherent and sound. Somewhat relevant use of theory and the primary text. Some significant use of support from secondary sources. Argumentations and ideas are often coherent and sound. Important use of theory and support from both primary and secondary sources. always coherent and sound. Adequate and significant use of theory and support from both primary and secondary sources. 1-2 - 3 4-5 - 6 7 8-9 10 Almost no morphological or syntactical accuracy. Unsatisfactory observance of capitalization rules. Inadequate diction register and lexical specificity. Low degree of morphological and/or syntactical accuracy. Minimal observance of capitalization rules. Deficient diction register and lexical specificity. Some degree of morphological and syntactical accuracy. Regular observance of capitalization rules. Progressing diction register and lexical specificity. High degree of morphological and syntactical accuracy and appropriateness. Satisfactory observance of capitalization rules rules. Proficient diction register and lexical specificity. Superior morphological and syntactical accuracy and appropriateness. Maximum observance of punctuation, spelling, and capitalization rules rules. Exemplary diction register and lexical specificity. 1-2 - 3 4-5 - 6 7 8-9 10 Illogical and/or ineffective thesis statement, topic and concluding sentences, supporting ideas, and/or transitions. Inappropriate or inefficient introduction and conclusion. Somewhat unreasonable or uneffective thesis statement, topic and concluding sentences, supporting ideas, and/or transitions. Mostly inefficient introduction and/or conclusion. Reasonable and somewhat effective thesis statement, topic and concluding sentences, supporting ideas, and transitions. Somewhat efficient introduction and conclusion. Mostly logical and effective thesis statement, topic and concluding sentences, supporting ideas, and transitions. Efficient introduction and conclusion. Logical and effective thesis statement, topic and concluding sentences, supporting ideas, and transitions. Highly efficient introduction and conclusion. 1-2 3-4 5 6-7 8 Almost never observes MLA referencing conventions. Almost no other formal requirements are met. Seldom observes MLA referencing conventions. Other formal requirements are rarely met. Sometimes observes MLA referencing conventions. Some other formal requirements are also met. Often observes MLA referencing conventions. Most other formal requirements are also met. Always observes MLA formating, quoting, and referencing conventions. All other formal requirements are also met.
ORAL PRESENTATION* (10%) ARTISTIC PRODUCT (25%) CONTENT LANGUAGE USE USE OF RESOURCES CONTENT COMPARATIVE PROJECT (15% / 35pts.) COMPARATIVE LITERATURE (LM-1487) Prepared by: Joe Montenegro B. II-2018 Student s name: Pts. obtained: Grade: % obtained: Unacceptable Minimal Average Above average Outstanding 1 2 3 4 5 Argumentations and ideas Argumentations and Argumentations and ideas are seldom coherent and ideas are sometimes are often coherent and sound. Somewhat coherent and sound. sound. Important use of irrelevant use of theory Somewhat relevant use theory and support from and support. of theory and support. both primary and Argumentations and ideas are almost never coherent and sound. Inconsequential use of theory and support. Inappropriate use of grammar, vocabulary, and Argumentations and ideas are always coherent and sound. Adequate and significant use of theory and support. secondary sources. 1 2 3 4 5 Limited use of grammar, Somewhat appropriate Appropriate use of vocabulary, and use of grammar, grammar, vocabulary, and vocabulary, and Careless and/or unimaginative product. Aimless and/or unperceptive approach to the contents of the course. Superior use of grammar, vocabulary, and 1-2 - 3 4-5 - 6 7 8-9 10 Limited thoughtfulness Somewhat thoughtful Sufficiently thoughtful and/or imaginativeness in and imaginative product. and imaginative product. the product. Somewhat Regular and partially Purposeful and insightful aimless and/or insightful approach to the approach to the contents unperceptive approach to contents of the course. of the course. the contents of the course. Unimaginative artistic design and composition. Careless choice and use of materials and production devices. *Individual grade granted here Highly thoughtful and imaginative product. Particularly purposeful and insightful approach to the contents of the course. 1 2 3 4 5 Unimpressive artistic Sufficiently careful Imaginative artistic design design and composition. artistic design and and composition. Unsatisfactory choice and composition. Satisfactory Thoughtful choice and use of materials and choice and use of use of materials and production devices. materials and production production devices. devices. Impressive astistic design and composition. Excellent choice and use of materials and/or production devices.