Once Upon a Research Paper

My research paper started with a small idea and a concept that I was struggling to grasp.  I initially was confused at Iago and his amoral nature as well as the way in which he so easily altered himself and adopted new selves to fulfill his revenge upon Othello.  As I was talking to Steve in class, I realized that I needed something hard as evidence to back this cloudy theory that my paper was standing on.  The true makings of my paper were discovered in the tweethis exercise which helped me pull my ideas together and narrow everything down to one succinct topic and purpose.  The major social proofing I did was in class, with my roommates, or with my High School English teacher and the ideas I fostered there really helped my paper get off the ground in terms of sustenance.  My purpose was truly realized in class talking with Amelia.  The way she discussed her topic, I was able to infer the passion she had for her paper, or at least a great sense of purpose for what she was discussing.  I knew that for my paper to truly be something special, I was going to have to find that same purpose.

Going back through the primary texts, I found that Iago was sensible in his change in "disguise" and even more than that, in reflection of Carl Jung's personality theory, Iago was a deep character, perhaps deeper than any of the other stock characters in the story.  He is a maze of complexity inside a the guise of a purposeless and malicious revenge seeker.  However poor my mini rough draft was, I was able to move past it for the most part after meeting with Dr. Burton and published my final draft just in time, both for the class and for the submissions that we all made.

Learning Outcomes in Reflection

 

1. Gain Shakespeare Literacy 

a. Breadth (knowledge of a range of Shakespeare's works):

Throughout the class, I was exposed to four of Shakespeare’s plays that I had never personally read.  To a certain degree, I wish we had stuck more closely to his works and been exposed to more, but it was a great experience to become more familiar with King Lear, Taming of the Shrew, Henry V, and The Winter’s Tale.  Beyond the reading of the plays, interacting with my classmates and reading through their papers, I became more familiar with a broad range of Shakespeare’s plays and on top of that, varying analyses of these.

b. Depth (more thorough knowledge of a single work):

The majority of the class I spent analyzing Shakespeare’s Othello, a play I had previously read in high school, but never in the way that I did during this course.  In the effort to find my own analysis of the work, I was introduced again to the play in an entirely new way and became more familiar with it than I ever could have in High School.

c. Performance (stage and screen):

I had the opportunity to watch film versions of Taming of the Shrew, Henry V, and King Lear.  On top of that, I went and saw the children’s stage version of Henry V.  These productions illustrated to me the true nature of Shakespeare and the way in which it should be produced.  Shakespeare is first and foremost a playwright, and his works have been perpetuated because they can be reproduced and adapted in a myriad of ways.

d. Legacy (history, scholarship, popular culture):

I wrote papers on The Winter’s Tale and on Othello.  This experience introduced me to the background histories of these plays, the staggering amount of scholarship, and the way in which these particular plays have been adapted into pop culture.  Shakespeare has a remarkable presence and his influence has leached into today’s society just as much as he did during his own time.  Movie adaptations baring his plot themes and characters have introduced the masses to Shakespeare’s mastery often without them even realizing it.  His wide range of plays has developed into a remarkable standard for today’s authors to achieve.  He applies to the scholarly just as much as to pop culture as I have come to realize more and more throughout this course.

2. Analyze Shakespeare Critically 

The final research paper that took up a majority of this class has become a remarkable learning experience in terms of familiarity with Shakespeare.  There is so much room for analysis and the perpetuation of his works is better realized in the amount of time I spent researching, a time period that could have carried on and I still would have been discovering new things, new ways of looking at his works.  Studying Othello, helped open up that world to me and the potential there is in studying and analyzing Shakespeare’s works critically.  Even with all the scholarship already accomplished, spanning decades, there is still room for my own analysis.

3. Engage Shakespeare Creatively

At the beginning of the semester, we were assigned a sonnet, mirroring the pattern of Shakespeare.  The assignment, to be honest, terrified me, because I am no poet.  In the process of writing that sonnet, however feeble it was, I spent the time to read many of Shakespeare’s sonnets and watch readings of them on YouTube.  I was thoroughly introduced to the pattern of those sonnets the sheer prowess with which Shakespeare wrote them.

4. Share Shakespeare Meaningfully 

My roommates and I often discuss the things we are researching in our classes.  My roommate Paige in particular is a psychology major and discussing Shakespeare with her is always an interesting journey through the literature.  She especially inspired and helped me through my final paper.  Blogging about my research and the assignments on Digital Dialogue to share our insights on the literature tended toward tedium, but as we got deeper into the course appreciated them nonetheless.  I was able to build off the insights of others and it helped with beneficial discussions during class time that really introduced me to Shakespeare’s work better than anything else could have.

5. Gain Digital Literacy 

This, for me, was probably the most difficult part of the course, but it did help me along with the research process and introduced me to information that I never could have approached.  I learned a lot about blogging and social media and how reaching out to other people can really aid in how we read and interpret Shakespeare, especially in today’s society where technology plays such a big role.

The Final Stretch: Submissions

I finally got down to submitting my paper!  I went through the process with the scholars archive and then moved on to emailing my paper to the Wooden O Symposium. 

Here is the abstract that I submitted:

Shakespeare's Othello, one of Shakespeare's most popular tragedies, showcases the works and cunning of one well-known and even well-loved villains, Iago.  Iago is a chameleon of a character easily capable of  manipulating those around him to meet his ends.  All the cleverness and cold calculation homaged, he lacks any definitive motive or driving purpose, merely revenge on the seemingly guiltless Othello.  This determined denial of a motive and extremity of action reflects well Carl Jung, a well-celebrated personality psychologist, and his theory on personality, specifically the "shadow" archetype.  The shadow is an amoral, metaphorical storage center of humankind's propensity to do evil, and Iago seems to be all shadow and all show.  He puts on a good display of variation in character, but he seems driven only by muddled revenge.  Jung's theories, put against Iago's character, reveal him to be a character of depth and have a role in the play and in the overall themes that extends far beyond the contributions of simple stock characters.

Lauren Remington: "The Villain: Iago as the Pinnacle of Badness"

Shakespeare's Othello, one of Shakespeare's most popular tragedies, showcases the works and cunning of one well-known and even well-loved villains, Iago.  Iago is a chameleon of a character easily capable of  manipulating those around him to meet his ends.  All the cleverness and cold calculation homaged, he lacks any definitive motive or driving purpose, merely revenge on the seemingly guiltless Othello.  This determined denial of a motive and extremity of action reflects well Carl Jung, a well-celebrated personality psychologist, and his theory on personality, specifically the "shadow" archetype.  The shadow is an amoral, metaphorical storage center of humankind's propensity to do evil, and Iago seems to be all shadow and all show.  He puts on a good display of variation in character, but he seems driven only by muddled revenge.  Jung's theories, put against Iago's character, reveal him to be a character of depth and have a role in the play and in the overall themes that extends far beyond the contributions of simple stock characters.

Included is the final draft of the above described paper. 

This Paper has Stages...oh punny

As I have worked through the varying stages of this project I noticed that I have mainly neglected the audience portion of this project.  I know that I have not taken that part of the assignment to heart and the symposiums I have found are pretty nonspecific and somewhat vague.  I have tried to keep up with primary analysis and the most recent post I did outlining a long series of quotes of potential quotes I could use in my paper was very helpful in finding a kickoff point for my paper.

The tweethis was another assignment that really helped me find the direction to my paper.  Previously I had been trying to narrow don my ideas but ultimately, writing out potential arguments, really helped me nail down my topics.

Mainly it was the publishing venue I am still stuck on.  My paper is such a frustrating mess right now that I am cannot comprehend being at a point at which I could publish it and feel confident about it.  Maybe that is part of it...

asentencewithoutspaces

For Me:

Lizy and I traded papers in class today and I received some awesome feedback as part of the process.  As she went through my paper she pointed out the need for me to read through my paper aloud in order to fix some of the sentences that don't fit.  Apparently I have this inability to write coherently.  I think I always knew that...  At this point she pointed out that I just need to finish out my ideas, finish my research, and pump out a good conclusion to tie everything together.


For Lizy:

Just a reminder for Lizy!  In class we talked about cutting your paper down and keeping just the core ideas.  At this point your paper has plenty of back up research and so you may just want to cut it down to your most powerful core points and ideas.  You also have a lot of support for only one of your plays and neglect the other two a little bit.  You may want to even out your secondary research.  I would also rely more heavily on the primary text.  Right now it sounds more like an analysis of secondary research as opposed to an analysis of the plays in relation to your argument about legitimacy.    Hopefully that helps!

A Couple Comments on Some Great Papers!

On Rachel's paper:

I think you do a good job of introducing your ideas. I did lose a little bit what you were arguing in the middle but overall, I felt you argued your thesis well and your idea is well developed. I particularly felt that your section on dismissing the supernatural was a strong argument and it was there that I was most noticeably convinced by your argument. I was a little lost on the applicability of Leontes and the oracle and after going back to your thesis, I was able to derive a connection. Your evidence is strong and your argument convincing. Perhaps more blatantly linking your ideas and evidences back to your thesis will help distracted readers like me keep their focus and remember the significance of each piece and how it applies to your argument.  Your secondary sources are well applied and you use strong evidence from the text and often enough that I know exactly what play you are talking about and become more familiar with it in relation to your argument as the essay continues.  Overall, great job!

On Steve's paper:

I read through your essay and I think you, like Rachel, do a very good job of introducing your arguments.  You use strong evidence and I was able to follow your train of thought throughout the paper.  Your ideas are very well thought out and you do a good job of articulating your thoughts.  You might want to include a bit more background into the story of the play, depending on your audience, just as a foundation for the characterization you do of Coriolanus and his mother-in-law.  At this point it also might help you to include secondary sources both on the play itself and on the nature vs. nurture aspect of your argument just to strengthen your point of view.

Well, those are just some things I noticed.  If you are still looking for guidance on your papers, here is Strong Bad with a few more pointers on writing a great Englilsh paper!

Lauren: A Few Words for You

(This is just a re-hash of some of the stuff I talked about in class).

As far as editing others' papers are concerned, my strengths are in the nitpicky stuff and my weaknesses are in overall structure. This being a rough draft, I won't get into the bits and bites of grammar because you should know what needs improvement. Your paper looks pretty good as far as I can tell. As I said before, I find Carl Jung's idea's intriguing and I like how you are applying them to this case. Being less familiar with Othello I don't know how well this fits with the original text, but I do know Iago by reputation. This also being an incomplete draft, I also feel ill-equipped to discuss your paper as a whole. From what I see, I like how you are using your primary text but I feel like either your quotations or your explanations of the quotes are insufficient. Example:
At one point in speaking to Roderigo he states, “Were I the Moor, I would not be Iago. / In following him I follow but myself” (I.i.57-59).  This exemplifies the twisted nature of his character reflected in the cunning twists of his language. 
 How specifically is his language cunningly twisted? I feel like I don't see all the connections between point A and point B as clearly as I would like. So far, good job. Keep it coming.

Venues for Publishing a Paper in Progress

Here are a couple options that I have further looked into in order to find a definitive audience as well as to ultimately publish this paper of mine.

Academic Conference:

The Southern Shakespeare Association in Mississippi is offering a call for papers specifically on Shakespeare but rather vague beyond that.  In that respect, my specific topic Shakespearean theory fits into the demanded requirements and fills some of their specified preferences for Shakespeare studies of pedagogy, performance, theory, text, or film.  My paper, concerning specifically a psychological analysis of the text and character of Iago could be an interesting addition if I am ever able to reach a point in this paper where I find it acceptable!

Academic Journal:

 The Wooden O. Symposium sponsored by Southern Utah University in Cedar City, Utah is coming up  in the end of August.  Although the call is for papers encourages submissions on the plays Love's Labour's Lost, King John, and The Tempest, it is more widely a call for papers dealing with the text or performance o f Shakespeare's works. 

Academic Blogging:

I will most likely pursues academic blogging with Blogging Shakespeare, an academic blog focused on the works of Shakespeare and an analysis of those works in their application then and now and even further into Shakespeare's influence.  They are focused around allowing Shakespeare to continue to permeate education even in today's digital age.

So this isn't all of it, but its a start

What with a couple other time consuming projects occupying my time, I finally made a breakthrough on this paper but it is still very much a work in progress.  Here is a little more than half, I will post the rest tomorrow hopefully...

Lauren Remington

Dr. Burton

English 382

22 March 2013

Following the Profits

            Although all of Shakespeare’s plays are unique in their own way, and brilliant in style and ability to cater to the masses both then and now, he does seem to have a frame or mold which has worked effectively and which also makes it possible to relate between the plays characters and ideas, particularly his use of disguises.  In his play Othello, Shakespeare, contrary to using disguises, uses the character Iago, who easily transforms himself with each character he talks to, absorbing new identity after new persona in order to reach his dark and also obscure ends.  It is never made completely plain why Iago is motivated to the deaths and despairs he causes and his chameleon like nature make him seem like lass of a human character and more like a series of personas adopted into one individual to serve a rhetorical purpose and provide plot.  Iago's change in character and ability to appease everyone he talks to is directly relatable to others of Shakespeare's characters who easily don disguises to fool their peers because his own change in character has a similar effect on his fellows.  Carl Jung, well-known personality theorist and psychologist, was a contemporary of Sigmund Freud and adopted some of Freud’s ideas to develop a theory in which the parts and attitudes of the unconscious identity, instead of battling each other to take control, are working to have unity within the individual.  Years before Jung’s time, Shakespeare’s character Iago is a negative personification of his theories and the battling that occurs between Jung’s unconscious and contentious attitudes.

            Jung’s theories revolve around the idea that the different levels of the individual battle each other in order to “reside” in an equilibrium, making up an individual’s personality.  As a personality theorist and a contemporary of Freud, Jung’s theories constitute and important contribution to the psychological community and the varied understandings of the human psyche.  Iago is a pivotal character of Shakespeare’s Othello.  As Jung’s theories are applied to the interpretation of his character, an interesting dynamic arises revealing how these varying factors of personality come together, but are revealed openly in his figure.  Iago is the character that manufactures the tragedy for shady motivations.  Not shady in the figurative sense of dark, although they were dark, but shady in that is altogether unclear what truly drive him in his actions.  At one point, he cites Othello’s sleeping with his wife and at another; he is driven by his jealousy of Othello’s rank and position.  Either way, he behaves independent of any emphasis on his motivations and what drives him to his acts of torment on Othello.

            Iago fits into Jung’s theory specifically in the archetypes that dominate the individual.  These archetypes are less biological and more “spiritual” in nature.  Iago, as a character, seems almost to get lost within layer upon layer of varying motivations and characters that he absorbs as he turns from individual to individual whom he needs to help him reach his own ends.  These archetypes that Jung describes fit into the role that Iago plays and Iago, among them, seems to get lost within the layers of personas. 

            The unconscious attitudes fighting for prominence are physically portrayed in Iago’s interactions.  Jung’s archetypes or unconscious is “a universal thought form or predisposition to respond to the world in certain ways,” (Engler 74).  Iago seems to have internalized a number of responses and personas which Jung further refers to as “the social role that one assumes in society and one’s understanding of it,” (74).  Iago is a selfish self-centered character who functions in society through the scope of things that will best benefit him.  Iago’s persona is so varying that it is hard to pin down.  At one point in speaking to Roderigo he states, “Were I the Moor, I would not be Iago. / In following him I follow but myself” (I.i.57-59).  This exemplifies the twisted nature of his character reflected in the cunning twists of his language.  He openly seems to admit to his duplicity further in this dialogue saying, "I am not what I am" and by being open about this, is purposefully more cryptic in the way he communicates it (I.i.65).  The first line in particular "Were I the Moor I would not be Iago," says very little about him in all actuality while appearing to be communicating much.  Iago openly declares that his persona is not true to the definition that Jung describes.  His “persona” is a farce, deeply set up and layered by adopted archetypes in order to confuse and dominate his peers.

            Iago’s behavior sets up a perplexing and troubling perspective on Jung’s theories on personality.  If assumptions are drawn that Iago is a reflection of true human behavior, where is it that the character can truly be defined?  Iago is layer upon layer twisted up on confused motivations and lacking in continuity.  He is a villain, suited to the needs of Shakespeare and his use of stock characters to fit the frame of his tragedies.  Iago in particular, however, constitutes an interesting connection between reality and drama.  In the midst of declaring openly his own deception, Iago does assert that his actions are an illustration of who his truly is by saying, “For when is my judge, not I for love and duty, / But seeming so for my peculiar end” (I.i.59-60).  

As far as this draft goes, I am working on incorporating the scholarly sources for my research on Jung as well as compiling a complete bibliography and totally bringing my idea all together.