CRITICAL THINKING ASSIGNMENT

Part 1: Preparation and Example

Can thinking be taught? Yes, to a certain extent, because there is, maybe, a method, or at least a trick or two, to thinking. One fundamental trick is comparison. To develop the ability to detect and evaluate similarities (and differences) is especially useful in analyzing a literary text---or a math problem, or a sales pitch, or a job situation, or most anything else!

Step 1: The Assignment

"The more things change, the more things stay the same"---The Leopard

In King Lear, Lear wanders off into the heath because he is outraged by a corrupt society. About 250 years later, in the United States, there was a famous exchange between two now famous men. Ralph Waldo Emerson (famous then) found his friend Henry David Thoreau (famous now, "strange" then) in the Concord, Massachusetts, jail. The astonished Emerson asked, "Henry, what are you doing in jail?" Thoreau responded, "What are you doing out of it, Ralph?"

Use the above anecdote to support the statement from The Leopard.

Step 2: Where do I start?

1. Determine what are the major elements of your analysis.

Answer: This assignment has two major elements: King Lear (a play) and a literary anecdote.

2. Break down each element into its major elements.

Answer: What are the major elements of a play? Briefly stated, these elements---here as in most literary texts---are who, what, when, and where. And what are the major elements of an anecdote? Basically the same as a fictional story---again who, what, when, and where. This is fortunate, as not all analyses focus on such similar elements.

(1) Analyze the smaller topic first.

Answer:

A. Who:

i.Emerson

ii.Thoreau

B.What: Friend visits friend

C.When: 1848

D. Where: Concord, Massachusetts jail

(2) Analyze the larger topic second.

A. Who:

Should you list the cast of King Lear? You could, but it would probably be more effective to limit your analysis to the level as the smaller unit. That is, you should find two characters in the play who would most closely resemble Emerson and Thoreau. Which of the play's characters most closely experiences something comparable to jailing? Of course, Lear himself is one. Does Lear have anything like a friend visit him in this jail? Lear has several fellow inmates (Edgar, Kent, the Fool), but no free visitor. Which character comes closest to playing this role? After thinking about it for a while, it should occur to that Gloucester joins Lear's group. He joins as another inmate, but , since Gloucester was powerful in society when Lear was on the heath--- he would seem to best fit the part. So we have our whos:

i.Gloucester

ii.Lear

B. What: The entire plot of the play? Again, it would be better to narrow "what" to the level of the first, smaller topic. Friend (Gloucester) visits friend (Lear)

C.When: England ca. 1600 (literally Celtic Britain, ca. 400)

D.Where: an English heath, in a storm.

3. Match your components:

A. Who

i.Emerson-Gloucester

ii.Thoreau-Lear

B. What: friend visits friend/friend visits friend

C.When: 1848/1600

D.Where: Concord/England

4. Are you ready to analyze? Almost. You might want tentatively to form some ideas, but before (possibly after) making a full-scale analysis, you should spend some time in the library, researching these elements (which is why I require "3 secondary sources" for your essays). For example, in this case, you might research a few basic facts, such as when was The Leopard written? Who wrote it? Why? Where? And then the Emerson-Thoreau incident---is it true? For what was Thoreau in jail? For how long? What were the consequences? Then you might research the same areas for King Lear.

5. Now you are ready to analyze, to determine the significance of the similarities (and to a lesser extent, differences) between these components.

EXAMPLE

"The more things change, the more things stay the same"---or so said Tomasi di Lampedusa in The Leopard (1958). Though this might be reason for the slothful to rejoice, the novel---like King Lear---actually has a somber message. With this statement, the Sicilian aristocrat questioned the comforting notion of progress. To make this point, di Lampedusa chose as his subject---as did the Elizabethan Shakespeare---the consequences of the established aristocratic order being challenged by and yielding to newer, "modern" social forces. The novel's somber message may be one reason why the author couldn't find a publisher (which suggests that his readers had the same attitude of those who insisted on giving a happy ending to King Lear). This---his only novel---was published after his death.

Lampedusa's stern moral would seem to be confirmed while reading the anecdote about Emerson and Thoreau , with an eye on Lear. The United States supposedly fought a war to found a new nation upon new ideals based upon the dignity and reason of mankind. Yet, nearly three centuries and an ocean away from King Lear, Thoreau found himself ousted from society that was becoming corrupt. America in 1846 was following in the pattern of Renaissance England, rejecting the ideals of the Enlightenment just as rapidly as England had abandoned Renaissance ideals. In the United States the result was rule by the same kind of rotten mediocrities against which the patriots had rebelled in 1776---and against which the English had "rebelled" in the sixteenth century, throwing off medievalism and proclaiming humanist ideals.

In a corrupt society, Thoreau---like Lear---decides that the only place for an honest man is outside of it. In fact, Thoreau, even before his arrest, had separated himself from society, going off into the woods to live at Walden Pond, where he wrote his famous book. Lear too separates himself from society, seeking refuge in nature in some of the most scenes in all of Shakespeare's works. Lear's separation, like Thoreau's, ends in jail. But, since he's reunited with Cordelia, Lear says his jail will be a paradise---not unlike the paradise that many scholars see as a significant theme in Walden!.

The jailed Thoreau is visited by Emerson, his respectable friend. On the heath, Lear encounters Gloucester, his once respectable friend. Now, Gloucester has been victimized by the same corrupt society that had attacked Lear. These friends have their own famous exchange:

Glousester: Is it not the king?

Lear: Ay, every inch a king!

Shakespeare suggests here that no one is safe in a corrupt society. And, indeed, social corruption unleashes a brutality that kills most of the major characters in the play. Shakespeare, then, has a bleaker message than Thoreau---or does he?

Thoreau was jailed for refusing to pay a tax that supported what Thoreau thought was a corrupt war---the Mexican War of 1846. Not dozens but thousands died in this war. And hundreds of thousands were soon to die in another war based on perhaps a more essential corruption: slavery.

In light of Lear, perhaps, we should reinterpret Thoreau's "and what are you doing out of jail Ralph?" This statement has been interpreted to indicate that Emerson also should have refused to pay the corrupt tax, willingly joining his friend in jail. With an eye on Lear, we can see that perhaps Thoreau is indicating not his moral indignation but his surprise at Emerson's freedom. Thoreau is surprised that Emerson has not joined him in jail much as Gloucester joins Lear on the heath---savaged by a corrupt , violent society in which no one is safe. Just as the thousands of Mexican War dead were joined by hundreds of thousands Civil War dead, or Lear is joined on the heath by many of the play's major characters, Emerson (suggests Thoreau) will be joining him in jail in the near future---whether he likes it or not. And, just as Thoreau predicted, Emerson does join Thoreau---in the jail of American literature textbooks, where both are read as pillars of a society that they each would very likely have heartily condemned!

CONCLUSION:

Our analysis has produced a new insight. If something is new---and works---it can mean an advancement for mankind---or a million dollars! Does the above product work? Who knows? For a good guess, I'd have to research more extensively. In any case, our analysis has been well worth it!

If you would like to work more with critical thinking, click here to visit an interesting site with exercises and links.

Finally, you should be aware of the potential of logic. Logic---Greeks and Romans and museums? No. Logic is more closely related to foresight. It is like juggling a dozen things at once and being able to visualize the next position of each item---even five juggles before it's there! So far only computers have been able to do this, at least effectively. An excellent way to to begin to develop this ability is not to study fossilized terms from classicism but to work puzzles, such as those published by Penny Press and available in most stores. Hint: If you buy one of these books, look in the back of the book and order old issues at a bargain price. Also, the regular Logic Problems are often too difficult. Look for England’s Best Logic Problems or England’s Finest Logic Problems.

CRITICAL THINKING ASSIGNMENT

Part 2: Exercise

If you complete this assignment, I'll add 5 pts. to a major test grade. You must post your answer in the WEB-CT "E-Mail-Messages-Postings-Online Discussions/Class Discussions/Critical Thinking forum." You also must respond to a posting.

Respond to one of the following.

1. Superlative tragedy has been written in only two eras: Athens (5^th Century B.C), and England (ca. 1595). Why? You might want to limit yourself to one discussing only one factor.

2.According to a rumor, several years ago, a prominent Russian historian, Vladimir Bakhtin (absolutely no relation whatsoever to the famous Mikhail) while attending the annual Global Marxism convention, in Paris, France, during the breakdown of the Soviet Union, was asked to tell his audience "what really happened during the Russian Revolution of October 1917." Vladimir churlishly retorted, "How am I supposed to know? All those people are dead. And I don't know what's happening in the next room as we speak, much less what went on with a lot of dead people 80 years ago." A colleague in the audience angrily challenged him: "Are you not purportedly an historian, comrade? At least you claim to have your degrees, do you not?" Vladimir cooly replied, "Ah, yes, History---that's the art of telling your colleagues what they can agree upon---or not agree upon." Fortunately for Vladimir, that's when the police arrived, as this debate promised to get very hot. Later, the International Daily Worker, published in Paris, was filled with letters commenting on this incident (Vladimir himself wrote one, confessing he meant his statement as a joke---admittedly a joke in poor taste due, he explained, to the breakdown of the air-conditioning and his reliance on "refreshment" earlier in the day than is usual for him). But much to Vladimir's surprise, many of the letters praised him for his surprising "nerviness" and "uncanny foregrounding dialogic." Vladimir even seems to have started the latest trend in academe (at least in Europe): "Coterie Scholarship."

Write a letter to the Daily Worker, commenting on Vladimir and his cause celebre. In brief, can the past---such as literary history---be known? If it can't, can it at least be studied? Why or Why not?

3. The Prentice-Hall Guide to English Literature, commenting on Thomas Hardy's masterpiece Return of the Native, says that the novel "suffers from a weak conception of the central character, Clym" (p.844). This is an extraordinarily revealing statement about the nature of literature. List at least 5 reasons why---or devise 5 questions raised by the statement---in relation to the nature of literature. Hint: the statement, in my opinion, is true.

CRITICAL THINKING ASSIGNMENT

Part 3: Another Exercise

"The more things change, the more things stay the same"---The Leopard. This statement---a basis of the assignment---is incorrect! A character (Tancredi) actually says, “If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change.”[1]

1). How does this error and correction impact “our analysis” in Part 1? Try to answer this without looking at the clue at the bottom of the page. The clue is in the footnote, and it will help you toward a right answer, but in this instance a wrong answer is as---if not more---appropriate than a right one.

2). When I created this assignment, I thought the first statement---“The more things change, etc.”---was correct. What does this tell you about literary studies?

---

[1] Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa, The Leopard, trans. Archibald Colquhoun (London: Harvill Press, 1996), 21. Tancredi is an aristocrat who explains why he’s joining Garibaldi’s middle-class revolt against a government identified with his own aristocratic class. Tancredi’s success suggests that the new rulers are the same as the old ones, that nothing has changed. Nevertheless, Tancredi’s uncle---“The Leopard”---refuses to join the new government, and his death---literal and figurative---suggests that something has profoundly changed. What is the answer---do things change or don’t they? The answer---probably---depends on the reader! Now haven’t we learned something about critical thinking?