The problem was thus: I was given a prompt "Encountering conflict is unavoidable". Simple, no? Begin a persuasive style piece based on this prompt with reference to the context text we have been studying (The Secret River, just by the way). So I began. Being a context piece, I opened with some general comments on the prompt, and how it related to actual situations. I thought about the validity of the prompt so as to form my contention. I thought about it deeply, and I found that I concurred. And this is where I reached the aforementioned impasse. Yes, I agree that encountering conflict is completely unavoidable. Obviously. But wait, in having agreed with that have I not avoided the conflict of contrasting opinions? It would seem that by agreeing with the prompt I have refuted it (I'll also point out that by now I had reasoned with myself that if I were to disagree and say that conflict is unavoidable I would have become in conflict with the prompt, and thus that refuting the idea is proof of it's validity). So, by agreeing I refute it, and by disagreeing I prove it. Fuck. And then, once I refute it, I must then logically disagree which in fact proves it once again. And oh lordy lordy we've come into dealings with some kind of self-defeating two-dimensional continuum. I tried to get around this, I really did. I thought maybe that this recursive paradox is an unavoidable conflict, so I would be able to agree with the prompt, but then it just slipped into a gentle recursion again. The only way I felt I could have anything to say about this idea was to adopt a neutral stance, a "sometimes yes, sometimes no" stance. And I will not put myself on the side of that wishy-washy bullshit for an essay. So I had a mini freakout and stared at the table instead.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Continuum.
I TRIED to work today in English. Oh Lord, how I did try. There was a certain impasse I reached rather early on that prohibited me completely from progressing further in my ideas. There was a prompt, there was intent, there were even ideas forming and intertwining. Alas, I was doomed to stare blankly at the table deep in reflection for the remaining 40 minutes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I know this probably doesn't help because by the sounds of it you're in year 12, and it would be too late to change clases now. But i think you would find Literature a lot easier, by the style of your writing, you appear to be pretty talented. The people at my school who chose English are also doing 'The Secret River' and the majority of them found it to be more or less ridiculous. Literature is a lot easier. No oral presentations, no issue analysis'. If it's not too late to change, you should really consider Lit! :D You clearly have the talent for it! :)
ReplyDeleteI couldn't stand doing literature. I actually rather enjoy English, just a bit of a bad day. The Secret River really isn't the most preferable of texts for context, but it is ridiculously easy to 'analyse'. We're also studying The Crucible, so I'll probably use that in the final exam.
ReplyDeleteAhh okay, fair enough.
ReplyDeleteI mainly chose Literature because I found out that we get to study Frankenstein. And other than Frankenstein, the other books and plays really aren't that bad! Good luck with English dude! :)
Oh hey, the mysterious angst has a voice! /intrigued
ReplyDelete