Vub wrote:
Mate you're missing the point, let me highlight to you how the thread has progressed:
Jenspm: I want to undertake a relatively large literature project involving 3-4 texts.
You: How is 3-4 relatively large? Perhaps for a 12 year old.
Me: 3-4 texts can make a relatively large literature project, it depends on what you're studying.
And what does "When you argue that 3-4 books can be a large amount of literature to deal with, I argue that one could write 20,000 words on 3-4 short modernist stories by the above-listed authors" show? Are you stating that I'm wrong in saying that 3-4 books can be a large amount of literature to deal with?
Also "Your statements about literature were wanky and unsubstantiated, that is all I put forward, and you have hardly dismissed it with your "Well I study English in conjunction with films and Australian TV soaps".", what point does this support? I just compared our different English curriculum, it was a positive statement, unless you can factually disprove what I said, then your argument is invalid.
Clear this up for me, then I'll respond to what you have said. I don't want to double guess you.
Factually disprove what you said? How can I factually prove something about an education system I am not involved in? If your English assignments involve cross-references to TV and other insipid, worthless mediums, then I can only draw assumptive conclusions about the overall quality of the course. Factually, my own personal experience of my own countries' English curriculum leads me to believe that, by all purposes, it is more intensive and more geared towards actual academic analysis, rather than poor 'modern media'-type study.
As I see it, my initial contribution to this thread was stating, to put it simply, that a literature project involving 3-4 books is not a mammoth task. Yes, hypothetically it all depends on what you read and choose to study - but read the tone and purpose of his post - he clearly needs a quick solution to complete an assignment that he has neglected for several months (perhaps the deadline-scheduling shows that, yes, someone could compare the works of Homer to Virgil with a Marxist interpretation, if they did so care). The answer I provided was to get on with it, and to remember that an 'open' literature project could basically boil down to comparing 4 short-stories, if he wanted to minimize the amount of time he would have to devote to reading and research. I provided a list of authors that each have literary oeuvres that are ripe with material to discuss and analyse, all in the more digestable format of short stories and prose. Despite my incredulous and dismissive tone, I don't think my posts "aren't worth it", so you can kindly dismiss and ignore the butthurt-ego comments from our local resident no-lifer.
Aussie, are you trying to make my laugh with your "Shakespeare made up words" statement? There's a difference between pioneering thousands of new words for the English vocabulary, and misspelling a commonly used and simple word in a poor mistake. Absolutely dire attempt at arguing, I must say. Also, if you weren't butthurt and had your actual reading-glasses on, you would see that my posts contain more than paragraph-upon-paragraph of "Lolol you can't speel" comments. It was a sarcastic opening comment, nothing more, drop your personal agenda and go back to the murky swampland that you more suitably inhabit.
Last edited by Uzique (2009-07-12 04:35:58)
