CIA 1, (Mid Sem Exam) I M.A. English

CIA 1 (MID-SEM EXAM), I M.A. ENGLISH
Submission: Research Paper
Last Date for Submission: 21st August, 2009
Time: 9 a.m. (if submitting on the above mentioned date)

Topics (Any one):
1. A critique on Eagleton’s ‘What is Literature’
2. A critique on Eagleton’s ‘Rise of English’
3. Differing views of Plato and Aristotle on “Mimesis”
If you have any suggestions about another topic (it has got to be from the syllabus itself), you must correspond the same to Mr. Pinto within the 10th of Aug (Monday) and get his approval.

FORMAT
Font Size: 14
Font Style: Times New Roman/ Book Antiqua (If any other, run it by Mr.Pinto first)
Line Space: 1.5 (One and half)
Front Page:
-----------------------------------------------------------

(Align Right)
Name
Register Number
Course: Literary Criticism
CIA 1
Submitted to Anil Pinto
(End align right)

(Align Center) TITLE

(After 2 line spaces) Begin your writing here…

----------------------------------------------------------
Further Instructions:
1. Length of the Submission: Minimum 4 pages. Maximum 5 pages.
2. Copy if you must but copy systematically. It will be accepted as long as you cite the source with complete details.
3. No footnotes. End notes are allowed for references. Use appropriate index numbers or symbols to mark these references. (superscript/ subscript them against the text within the body of the paper and detail them out in the end note)
4. For quotes: After the quote (Person’s Name: Name of essay/book/other source, Year of Publication, Page num and Line)
5. Eg. Leitch, Vincient B. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism, New York/London: WW Norton, 2005, pp 49.
(or)
Give an index number and detail it in the end note.
6. Bibliography: As per the MLA Handbook format forwarded to everyone by Mr. Pinto.
(or)
Any logically constructed format that is comprehensible and consistent.

Suggestions on what the critique should cover:
- Find flaws within arguments

- Trace the arguments/ ideas from elsewhere
- Examine where the author is borrowing his framework from. See if the framework itself can be challenged
- Challenge assumptions and foundations
- Author’s argument can be acknowledged as valid but avoid eulogizing the author’s arguments. Critique should challenge rather than flatter.
- Personal opinions and value judgments are not going to be entertained so if you have any grievances to air about the author/essay/topic/ Mr. Pinto, go search for a complaint box on campus.

Any further queries can be directed to Mr. Pinto. He’s on campus/ at the library/ the department/ email/ blog/ the phone/or just sit in the main block quadrangle and meditate, he might appear. (The last one actually hasn’t been tested yet but we’re looking for volunteers.)