 |
Guide for Tolkien (ENGL 4316/MALA 5346) Research Groups |
|
"I am myself and always have been
sceptical about 'research' of any kind as part of the occupation or
training of younger people in the language-literature schools. There is
such a lot to learn first. It is often forced on students after
schools because of the desire to climb on to the great band-wagon of
Science (or at least onto a little trailer in tow) and so capture a little
of the prestige and money which 'The Sovereignties and Powers and
the rulers of this world' shower upon the Sacred Cow . . . and its
acolytes. But many of those devoted to the Arts privately desire nothing
more than a chance to read more." As I mentioned in the research paper prompt, our class will be divided into research groups organized around the following areas:
After your group is formed, you should exchange contact information and agree when and where you will meet. Keep in mind that attendance and participation in these meetings constitutes part of your research paper grade. You are welcome to trade ideas through email or using the group functions in Blackboard. (I'll set this up once we've established groups.) Meet online as often as you wish, but you are required to meet a minimum of three times as a group face-to-face. The graduate student in each group will be responsible for coordinating the meetings and reporting back to me as to the meeting's activities and participation. You might consider one meeting to share ideas on locating sources, another to share the progress of your research, and a third to critique each other's drafts. Each paper topic within the group will be substantially different enough to avoid someone doing someone else' research, but you should exchange ideas and sources. I hope this process will help strengthen your overall work and thinking. Suggested Topics Keep in mind that the following are topics meant to help interpret his primary works; they are not an encouragement for biography. Tolkien and Roman Catholicism
Remember that your topic should be pre-approved by me before you begin serious research. Working together in groups Often
students discover that working together helps uncover the richness of a
work. We realize quickly that others have additional insights that we do
not have. Effective group reading tends to practice five key skills, which
are much like the notions of schema, of good questioning, and of fuzzy
sets that we have been examining:
Of
course, the clarification of meaning with another's help may be as simple
as asking a question or bouncing an idea off another, or it may be as
involved as extended meetings and discussions. Keep in mind that your
purpose is not to do each other's research, but you are encouraged to
share sources as you find them and to critique each other's ideas. The nature of interpretation It might help here to reflect for a moment on the
nature of interpretation itself. The "science" (or perhaps
better said, "art") of interpretation is called hermeneutics. "Hermeneutics"
can simply be defined as the method by which we interpret texts. As a
field of knowledge, hermeneutics arose out of Jewish and Christian concern
with rightly interpreting the Word of God. Yet today, in addition to
religion, hermeneutical issues are researched in fields as diverse as law,
literature, history, philosophy, art, and medicine. Wherever people have
to understand texts, questions of interpretation come up. Of late, this field of inquiry has been divided between those who suggest
that interpretation is simply a set of rules, free from our contexts, that
once perfected offer an air-tight, guaranteed right interpretation, and
those who believe that interpretation is completely relative, that no
common ground of understanding can be found because interpretation is too
subjective and individualistic to ever offer definitive meanings. And it
is tempting for students to feel one way or the other, or times even both ways, as they struggle with making sense of texts. What we
often overlook is the role that mutual interpretation plays in our
understanding: namely, the sense that we depend on working together with
others to understand a text. What
we need is to appreciate the intellectual context that encourages us as
often to be dependent upon others as it does to be self-reliant. The
authors of a recent work on the subject argue: "[I]nterpretation is an activity that Christians engage in within the
context of the promises of God. More important than the question of human
certainty is that of divine fidelity. For the sake of human understanding
and the future of the Christian church, it is more important for God to
be seen as the maker and keeper of promises than it is for us to perfect the
procedures we employ as we interpret texts and the world about us. We
are tempted to believe either in an easy mastery of all meaning on our
part or to despair of ever understanding or coming to a considered,
defended position because we have lost trust in the nature of
communication itself. When we understand God as a keeper of promises, we
learn to put our hope in communication. God has promised us
understanding within the context of relationships. We learn and grow and
argue inseparably tied to those around us. The issues we raise, the
questions we ask, even the words we use, arise out of a specified
time and place in history. Christ the Word offers us a world where
community is possible because communication is possible, and paradoxically
because community is possible, communication is. We should not be afraid
to know in part, or to have to wait on further meaning until other
questions are answered, or even to live at least for a season with a
disagreement among us as to what something means. The
way we interpret a text is deeply a part of our communities and
traditions. This is something to be proud of. We aren't
required to make sense of everything on our own. We have a heritage
of response that shapes our own questions. As Hans-Georg Gadamer has
noted, "To think is to thank." In a very real sense, we are
dependent on all who have gone before us for understanding. Lundin,
Roger, Anthony Thisleton,
Clarence Walhout. The Responsibility of Hermeneutics. |
|