WRTG 3020, sec. 078, KING LEARAND GREEK TRAGEDY, Spring 2010
Instructor: Joan (Lord) Hall
Class meets, TR 2.0 – 3.15 in EDUC 143
Courseoffice hours and contact information:
TR, 12. 20 – 1.50, and by appointment, in TB1, Room 9 (Temporary Building 1 is next to Clare Small, near the RecCenter). Office phone/voice mail: 303 492 3821
My mailbox is in TB1 (to the left of the main entrance).
Email: (please use this rather than the colorado.edu address)
Home phone (to leave urgent messages when I am not in the office): 303 443 9717
Required texts:
Sophocles: The Three Theban Plays, trans. Robert Fagles (Penguin, 1984)
William Shakespeare, King Lear (Signet edition, ed. Russell Fraser, 1998)
For discourse analysis: Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein, They Say, I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing (W.W. Norton, 2006)
Other critical essays will be supplied as needed, plus excerpts from texts that treat rhetoric and rhetorical theory: e. g. Andrea Lunsford and John Ruszkiewicz, Everything’s an Argument (Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2001); and Jonathan Culler, Literary Theory (Oxford University Press, 2000)
Recommended text: Diane Hacker, A Pocket Style Manual (Bedford/St.Martin’s, 5th ed.), or an equivalent manual, such as LBBrief ( Pearson/Longman, 2008) so that you can check on questions of grammar, style, citation, etc.
Online resources that help you to brush up on writing conventions:
The Purdue University Owl (on-line writing lab):
The ColoradoStateUniversityWritingCenter:
Video materials
Norlin library offers the BBC version of King Lear (1982), and the Granada version with Laurence Olivier (1983). We will review excerpts from other filmed versions: Ian Holm as Lear (1998) and Ian McKellen as Lear (2008).
Course Overview
WRTG 3020 fulfils the core upper-division writing requirement for the College of Arts and Sciences (A&S); it is open to Juniors and Seniors in this college. The broad aim of the course is to sharpen your critical thinking and critical writing skills—to help you to communicate more clearly, gracefully, and persuasively.
Hall, Syllabus
To this end, the course focuses on rhetorical forms and persuasive strategies (particularly analysis and argument) that you will use in academia and the workplace; it emphasizes the relationship between writer, reader, subject, and purpose in the formation of a text.
In this section of 3020, “King Lear and Greek Tragedy,” we engage in close reading of dramatic texts to build convincing analysis and argument papers, which means that you are writing within the specific discipline of literary studies. But your immediate discourse community consists of your class-mates who, majoring in different disciplines and with varying interests and levels of knowledge, provide an audience and context beyond that of literary criticism alone.
The class will be conducted both as a forum for discussion of readings and as a workshop where students receive constructive criticism on their work in progress, either from the whole class or within smaller peer groups. Remember that your own composition, in conjunction with the literary texts, serves as core material in the workshop situation.
CCHE criteria and how they reflectcourse objectives
Below are the key criteria for an upper-division core writing course, as specified by the Colorado Commission of Higher education, with explanations on how this course addresses them:
Extend Rhetorical Understanding. WRTG 3020 advances your rhetorical knowledge and awareness. Since classical times, rhetoric has been defined as the art of persuasive speaking and writing; we now understand it as a way of using both words and images to persuade specific audiences. This course builds on what you have learned in First-Year Writing about focusing on the purpose of your writing, adapting your composition to different audiences and rhetorical situations, and writing in various genres, with an emphasis on analysis and argument.
Extending rhetorical awareness applies both to how you approach the dramatic texts and how you write about them. In reading the plays you will not only analyze how they work in the theater and as literature—through their dramatic structure, use of language, development of character and themes—but also how these tragedies are rhetorically designed to appeal to particular audiences. As a case in point: in his Poetics, Aristotle stresses that the action of a tragedy should generate “pity and “fear.” We will define what this mean for a twenty-first century audience (and for the original ancient Greek audience) and evaluate how successfully each tragedy elicits these emotions. How does the playwright draw in or distance the audience from the main protagonists as they move toward tragic downfall, self-discovery, and suffering? In reading King Lear, you might consider how the rhetorical devices used by Goneril and Regan in the opening scene of the play work more effectively for Lear than does Cordelia’s bluntness.
Hall, Syllabus
Your own critical writing on these plays will alert you to rhetorical choices you can make to communicate your ideas to your audience—how, for instance, you might develop your thesis by making appeals to pathos,ethos, and logos, and how, using the Toulmin model, you can best support your claims with valid reasons, sound underlying assumptions, and convincing evidence.
Gain Experience in the Writing Process. This course offers an opportunity to improve writing through multiple drafts that respond to the perspectives of other readers. As well as revising your work by considering the class’s and the instructor’s suggestions, you are encouraged to seek feedback and expert help from the Writing Center (see for more details and how to make an appointment). Doing so will confirm that writing is a collaborative enterprise that constantly pays attention to the needs and expectations of your audience.
Writing is also a process that takes advantage of current technologies. As you have the opportunity to exchange work and consult with me via e-mail (), please make a point of checking your campus e-mail frequently, and, if you live and study off campus, make sure your computer can access on-line campus library materials.
We’ll discuss ways of enhancing information literacyby accessing research resources responsibly through the Internet. The class also utilizes video materials, ranging from watching excerpts from the plays in performance (and then writing short critiques on them) to receiving further instruction in the editing process from a video such as Richard Lanham, “Revising Prose.”
Master Writing Conventions. By now you should have mastered the conventions of grammar and punctuation proper to academic writing; this course enables you to hone those skills. This is where the handbooks cited under recommended texts and the on-line resources will be helpful. On a more advanced level, you will reflect on how to use style, tone, and diction appropriate to your audience (discourse community) and gain practice in documenting your evidence correctly.
Demonstrate advanced comprehension of content within a specific discipline. You begin by sustained engagement with the literary texts, so that you can move from describing what happens in the plays to analyzing how the various components are constructed to make their appeal to audiences.To communicate your insights into the dramatic texts, you will learn to use some specialized terms from literary theory and literary criticism. Discussing essays of scholars who have published on King Lear (e.g. those of A. C. Bradley, J. Stampfer, and Kathleen McCluskie) will acquaint you with different critical approaches to the plays and ways of writing about them. As you frame questions and develop theses for analysis and argument, you may choose to extend beyond the discourse community of students of literature, developing your topic along cross-cultural or interdisciplinary lines. For instance, if you are majoring in sociology, history, or even economics, you will be encouraged to write on a topic arising from the
Hall, Syllabus
plays that draws on the knowledge and terminology of that discipline but that can still communicate successfully to a non-expert audience.
Assignments and Assessment
About one-third of your grade comes from shorter assignments—written responses to the text and to critical essays on the plays—and from peer reviews and class participation.
One third of your grade is the analysis paper, a 5-10 page essay. This can either develop a literary/rhetorical interpretation of Oedipus the King and King Lear or can select a topic that analyzes the plays through a different discipline, e.g. using historical, psychological, sociological, or feminist perspectives.
The remaining third of the grade is the 5-10 page argument paper. This builds on the techniques of analysis but also takes into account other critical commentaries (some essays from the Signet edition, others to be supplied) to construct a rhetorically convincing argument on King Lear that will incorporate and address counterarguments as part of its strategy.
Grading Standards are rigorous. As specified in the Schedule of Courses, the grade of A = excellent, B = good, C = average, and D = below average.
- An A (excellent)paper is original in its thesis, insightful and substantive, outstanding in form (organization) and content as it communicates with its audience, with a clear, graceful and error-free style.
- A B (good, with B+ moving towards very good) paper is clearly written, with a well-developed thesis, showing good writing craft and with no major flaws.
- A C (competent) paper has a mixture of strengths and weaknesses. It may present and develop a thesis that remains more descriptive than analytical, while in development it contains some logical, stylistic, and grammatical flaws that impair overall coherence and clarity. A grade of C+ is an average and aceptable grade, while C- suggests definite room for improvement.
- AD (deficient) paperis seriously deficient in thesis development, organization, logic, style, and writing conventions. Pervasive errors impair readability; overall it is confusing and fails to communicate clearly with its audience.
How the Class Will Be Conducted and Class Policies
In order to build a writing community in this class, regular attendance and active participation are crucial. Please regard attendance as mandatory. You are allowed three absences, for whatever reason,before your grade will be penalized. Use them wisely: i.e.
Hall, Syllabus
for illness or family emergencies, and find out what you have missed--usually by consulting this syllabus. If you must miss class because of an extended illness, you will need to show me medical evidence for your absence. Since coming in late is distracting to the class, tardiness is not acceptable (the same goes for leaving early), so be sure to make your class copies well ahead of time.
Most class sessions will be conducted as workshops, with constructive criticism of class members’ work to encourage progression through multiple drafts; our maxim is that “All good writing is re-writing.” We begin with full-class workshops and then move to smaller groups as each project progresses. During the workshop weeks, we’ll arrange whose work is to be discussed on Tuesdays and who will present on Thursdays. That will allow for some careful critiquing of others’ work ahead of time. If your work is to be discussed on Tuesday, please e-mail me a copy by Monday, late afternoon () and bring copies to class. If your work is to be discussed on Thursday, please also bring copies to class on Tuesday to be distributed in advance.
Technology in the classroom.Apart from watching play productions on video or DVD, in-class work will use the medium of print: pages on which you can write and circulate comments and suggestions for revision. This means that personal laptops are not encouraged as they take away from face-to-face communication between class members. Outside of the classroom, of course, you are encouraged to use the on-line resources specified under current technologies and to check your campus e-mail frequently.
Attached to the syllabus on a separate sheet is important information about the honor code (which this class will follow), classroom behavior, and allowance for religious observances. Check carefully the potentially severe penalties for plagiarism (stealing or accepting work from another student or from another source; failing to document another’s ideas or to use quote marks around directly quoted material), as specified by the honor code. Students who need special academic accommodations should see me with a letter as soon as possible. You can contact the relevant services in Willard 322, at 303-492-8641, or access
As you work to improve your writing, I encourage you to consult with me in my regular office hours (or by arrangement) and to visit the WritingCenter.
Provisional course schedule
Week I(Jan 12 - 14)
Introduction to the course (Jan 12) andstarting discussion of Oedipus the King (Jan 14), focusing on themes and rhetorical strategies; worksheet provided.
Jan 14: Hand in an answer (1-2 pages) to a question on the worksheet, section A.
Hall, Syllabus
Week 2(Jan 19 - 21)
Jan 19: Continue discussion of Oedipus the King, relating it to Aristotle’s definitions of tragedy in particular.
Jan 21: Discussion; in-class writing; preparation for critical interpretation assignment. Hand in answer (1-2 pages) to a question on the worksheet, section B.
Week 3(Jan 26 - 28)
Workshop assignment on critical interpretation of Oedipus the Kingand its rhetorical appeals to the audience. Take into account essays by Bernard Knox (introduction to the text) and Robert Cohen, “Oedipus and the Absurd Life,” to be supplied.
Weeks 4 - 5(Feb 2 - 11 )
Class discussion of King Lear, with some in-class writing.
Feb 2: Hand in 1-2 page answer to one question on the King Learworksheet
Feb 4: Hand in the revised version of Week 3’s assignment on Oedipus the King, along with your original version, for a grade.
Feb 9: Short assignment on King Leardue (topic to be provided).
Week 6(Feb 16 – 18)
Workshop assignment on a question that analyzes King Lear—themes and rhetorical strategies--in relation to Oedipus the King (handout to be supplied).
Weeks 7 - 10 (Feb 23 – March 18)
Workshop the first paper (ANALYSIS). Beginning with the opening paragraph, work on your own analysis (an interpretation that evolves a strong thesis) of a particular issue arising from the two plays we have studied. This can develop a topic along literary/rhetorical/thematic lines; e.g. the question of the heroes’ moral responsibility for their downfalls; the question of how far the “gods” (or the cosmos) influences the action of each play; the roles of the female characters in the two plays; whether the “downfall’ of each main protagonist generates “pity” and “fear” in the audience/reader; or how the question of kingship is explored in one or both of the plays. Alternatively, you can choose a topic relating to another discipline, such as psychology, sociology, or gender studies. Essays on King Lear that may beconsidered in this light include William C. Carroll, “’The Base Shall Top Th’ Legitimate”: The Bedlam Beggar and the Role of Edgar in King Lear,” and Coppelia Kahn, “The Absent Mother in King Lear.”
Readings: From They Say, I Say, Chapter 7, “So What? Who Cares?: Saying Why It Matters” and Chapter 8, “As A Result: Connecting the Parts”
Feb 25: Hand in the revised version of your response to Week 6’s assignment, along with your original version, for a grade.
Hall, Syllabus
Weeks 7 - 8: Full class workshop of the first part of the analysis paper.
Weeks 9 -10 Reflective practices: peer workshopping in small groups; developing written critiques on the essays in progress; editing and reflecting on full drafts.
Mar 18: Hand in exercise on “So What? Who Cares”
Week 11 (Mar 23 – 25)SPRING BREAK
Week 12(Mar 30 – April 1)
Discussion of rhetorical strategies for constructing arguments and, more specifically, arguments on literature topics. We’ll workshop an assignment that argues for or against claims made in two contrasting essays on similar topics, such as A. C. Bradley’s essay from Shakesperean Tragedy,in the Signet edition of King Lear,juxtaposed with J. Stampfer’s “The Catharsis of King Lear”; or Cristina Leon Alfar’s essay, “King Lear’s Immoral Daughters” set against Kate McCluskie’s “The Patriarchal Bard: Feminist Criticism and Shakespeare.”
Apr 1: Hand in final draft of the analysis paper.
Weeks 13 - 16(Apr 6 - 29)
Workshop the second paper (ARGUMENT). Choose a controversial topic and develop your own argumentative thesis on the play, being sure to address counterarguments. You can choose an argumentative topic that spans both plays or concentrate exclusively on King Lear. Some topics to consider, based on the essays we’re reading might be: whether or not King Lear is anti-feminist, ultimately reinforcing traditional stereotypes about women in a patriarchal society; how far Shakespeare’s play projects an absurd universe; or whether Lear becomes a more sympathetic tragic hero to the audience than does Oedipus.
Readings: From They Say, I Say: Focus on Chapter 4, “Yes/No/Okay, But”: Three Ways to Respond, and Chapter 5, “And Yet”: Distinguishing What You Say From What They Say”; excerpts from Everything’s an Argument, Chapter 2, “Reading and Writing Arguments”
Apr 8: Hand in your revised version of Week 12's assignment, together with the original version.
Apr 13: Complete summary and response to J. Stampfer’s “The Catharsis of King Lear”
Weeks 13- 14: Full class workshop of opening paragraphs and the first part of the argument paper.
Weeks 15 - 16: Reflective practices: peer workshopping in small groups; developing written critiques on the essays in progress; editing and reflecting on full drafts.
This argument paper replaces a final exam; it must be handed in by or before noon on Monday, May 3.
Note: As you revise and add to your longer papers, please attach the immediately preceding draft to the copy of the new version that you give to me.
1