YESSI WeeDYA SARI

http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~tanguay/english-teachers.htm
http://www.cti.ac.uk/publ/actlea/issue2/pickering/
http://iteslj.org/Articles/Singhal-Internet.html
http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~tanguay/english-teachers.htm

News RSS Feeds RSS Feed
New Technique Avoids Major Surgery If Aneurysm Caught in Time

Carol Pearson 17 December 2010
Photo: VOA - C. Pearson

A man points at the Aorta, the largest artery in the body, while holding a model of the human heart
Share This

* Digg
* Facebook
* StumbleUpon
* Yahoo! Buzz
* del.icio.us

Related Articles

* Research Finds Possible New Way to Attack Sleeping Sickness
* Intensive Care for Newborns is Good Investment

The American Heart Association reports that the death rate from diseases affecting the heart and blood vessels has dropped by almost 30 percent since the 1990's. Still, heart disease remains a major killer in the United States. It is what claimed the life of US diplomat Richard Holbrooke, who died of a burst aorta December 13.

The aorta is the biggest artery in the body. It travels from the heart to the abdomen and carries blood to the other organs and other arteries. Healthy arteries are smooth and elastic, but in a weak one, blood flowing through can cause it to form a bulge. If that bulge tears open, chances of survival are slim.

There are few symptoms beforehand and even with immediate medical treatment, only a small percentage patients survive. Risk factors include age.

Dr. Richard Rubin, the chief cardiologist at Sibley Hospital in Washington, said, "As we get older, the aorta gets a little more brittle. Forces like high blood pressure and athrosclerotic plaque in the arteries can weaken the wall of the aorta and make it more brittle, and then at some point, if the pressure is excessive, it can rupture."

There are other factors, such as excessive weight or sudden bursts of energy.

"What is especially dangerous is a sudden surge in the pressure, for example, when you are shoveling snow or if somebody askes you to move a piece of furniture and you give a tremendous exertion, your blood pressure can skike up suddenly, and that can be especially tearing to the wall of the aorta," said Dr. Rubin.

Aneurysms can be detected by X-ray or by imaging techniques such as an echocardiogram, an MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) or a CT scan. That's how Kevin Healey's doctor detected his aneurysm two years ago.

"He did an echogram, and noticed an irregularity in the size of the heart. So he followed that up with a CT scan and found an aneurysm on the aorta," said Healey.

Doctors repaired Healey's aneurysm, but Dr. Rubin explains that when the aneurysm suddenly bursts, the situation becomes a life-or-death emergency. "When this happens, the volume of blood in your body gets dumped into the chest cavity or the abdominal cavity, and that is a medical emergency. Your blood will leak out, your blood pressure will drop, and then all of the vital organs of the body will not receive the proper amount of blood because it has leaked out through the tear," he said.

Doctors can cut out the aneurysm and replace it with a patch or artificial piece of blood vessel. Some Australian doctors have devised a way to repair an aneurysm without major surgery.

Dr. Tony Grabs performs this procedure at St. Vincent's Hospital in Sydney. "The significant improvement in the design, the technology, has enabled us to undertake this operation really from two small cuts in the groin and also a small cut in the arm to get access to the arteries. So it really is revolutionary and changes the whole way that certainly I think about the treatment of aneurysms," he said.

While age can be a factor, doctors say keeping your cholesterol, blood pressure and weight within normal limits can help keep your aorta healthy and reduce your chances of having an aneurysm.

20 Northpointe Parkway, Suite 188, Amherst, New York 14228
www.cambriapress.com
T (716)568-7828 F (716)608-8338 E sales@cambriapress.com
An innovative, independent, non-subsidy publisher of academic research
NEW BOOK ANNOUNCEMENT
Literature / Women’s Studies / Society
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Hedgecock, Jennifer.
The femme fatale in Victorian literature : the danger and
the sexual threat / Jennifer Hedgecock.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-60497-518-5 (alk. paper)
1. Femmes fatales in literature. 2. English fi ction--19th
century--History and criticism. 3. Women in literature. 4.
Women--Great Britain--Social conditions--19th century.
5. Middle class women--Great Britain--Social conditions-
-19th century. 6. Feminism and literature--Great Britain--
History--19th century. 7. Feminism in literature. I. Title.
PR878.F46H43 2008
823’.809352042--dc22
2008006510
The Femme Fatale
in Victorian Literature
The Danger and the Sexual Threat
Jennifer Hedgecock
6 x 9” Hardcover Level: College & Faculty
350 pages July 2008 US$109.95 / £64.95
ISBN: 9781604975185
Description
The Femme Fatale in Victorian Literature is a Marxist-Feminist reading
of the Femme Fatale in nineteenth-century British literature that examines
the changing social and economic status of women from the 1860s
through the 1880s, and rejects the stereotypical mid-Victorian femme
fatale portrayed by conservative ideologues critiquing popular fiction by
Wilkie Collins, Mary Elizabeth Braddon, Honoré de Balzac, and William
Makepeace Thackeray. In these book reviews, the female protagonist is
simply minimized to a dangerous woman.
Refuting this one-dimensional characterization, this book argues that the
femme fatale comes to represent the real-life struggles of the middle-class
Victorian woman who overcomes major adversities such as poverty, abusive
husbands, abandonment, single parenthood, limited job opportunities,
the criminal underworld, and Victorian society’s harsh invective against
her.
20 Northpointe Parkway, Suite 188, Amherst, New York 14228
www.cambriapress.com
T (716)568-7828 F (716)608-8338 E sales@cambriapress.com
An innovative, independent, non-subsidy publisher of academic research
NEW BOOK ANNOUNCEMENT
The Femme Fatale in Victorian Literature
Table of Contents
Foreword
Acknowledgments
Preface
Introduction
Chapter 1: The Femme Fatale Masquerading Beyond
Fallenness
Chapter 2: “The Old Writing on the Wall”: Dickens’
Fatal Woman Rosa Dartle
Chapter 3: The Cultural Phenomenon of the
Mid-Victorian Femme Fatale
Chapter 4: Social Class Anxieties and Gender
Defi nition in Lady Audley’s Secret
Chapter 5: Sexual Danger and the Threat of
the Femme Fatale in Armadale
Chapter 6: Fallen or Fatal? Feminine Representation
of Hardy’s Tess
Conclusion
Notes
Bibliography
Index
About the Author
Jennifer Hedgecock currently teaches American
and British Literature and writing at the University
of California, Irvine, and at Chapman University. She
received her Ph.D. from Michigan State University,
her Master’s and Bachelor’s from CSU, Sacramento, in
nineteenth-century British Literature, and has studied
the works of Thomas Hardy at Oxford University,
Trinity College.
Description (Continued)
To overcome these hardships, she reverses her socioeconomic
status, an act which demonstrates her
self-reliance compared to other Victorian feminine
literary figures. The femme fatale, in fact, becomes
a precursor to the campaigns against the Contagious
Diseases Acts, to the emergence of the New
Woman, movements that illustrate more empowering
subject positions of women during the later part
of the nineteenth century, and subverts patriarchal
constructions of domesticity and “fallenness” used
to undermine women. More specifically, the femme
fatale in the mid-century novel is a protest against
representations of women as fallen and domestic.
The Femme Fatale in Victorian Literature will
be an important book for scholars in literature and
women’s studies.

How to Cite Literature
in a
Lab Report or Scientific Paper
You must cite any information presented in your lab or paper that is not your own idea.
Not giving credit to the source of your information is plagiarism. There are a couple of
ways you can give credit to literature sources from which you gained information used
in your own lab report or scientific paper.
For one author, use this format:
• Incorporate the author into your sentence.
i.e. Gibbons (1998) states that genetic studies of human and chimpanzee
genomes have shown that at least 98.5% of the DNA sequences are the
same.
or...
• Cite the author at the end of the sentence or paragraph.
i.e. Genetic studies of human and chimpanzee genomes have shown that at
least 98.5% of the DNA sequences are the same (Gibbons 1998).
For two authors, use this format:
• Incorporate the authors into your sentence.
i.e. Carlson and Copeland (1978) speculate that as fireflies radiated into
different species, their flash codes may have become more complex.
or...
• Cite the authors at the end of the sentence or paragraph.
i.e. As fireflies radiated into different species, their flash codes may have
become more complex (Carlson & Copeland 1978).
For three or more authors, use this format:
• Incorporate the first author listed and et al into your sentence.
i.e. Varki et al. (1998) found that human cells are missing a particular form of
sialic acid that is found in all other mammals studied thus far, including the
great apes.
or...
• Cite the first author listed and et al at the end of the sentence or paragraph.
i.e. Human cells lack a particular form of sialic acid that is found in all other
mammals studied thus far, including the great apes (Varki et al. 1998).
(over)
BioLEARN, http://www.wisc.edu/cbe/biolearn/index.html August, 2003
Radish Seed Germination as a Constructivist Approach
For citing online information within the text:
• Cite the author at the end of the sentence or paragraph.
i.e. Human cells lack a particular form of sialic acid that is found in all other
mammals studied thus far, including the great apes. (Online Varki
accessed 29 September, 1995)
For citing an interview within the text:
• Cite the author at the end of the sentence or paragraph.
i.e. The incidence of Tay Sach’s disease has been on the decrease since
1923 in the United States. (John Jones, interview, 29 September, 1995)
Bibliography
At the end of your lab report or scientific paper, you must give full bibliographical
information of any literature you cited in the text of your paper. Authors should be
listed in alphabetical order. Second and third lines of each reference should be
indented.
When citing a magazine or journal article use this format:
Author’s last name, first initial. second initial. year of publication. title of article. title of
magazine or journal. vol.(no.): pg/s.(pg/s).
i.e. Watt, P. M., and S.J. Young. 1999. Effect of predator cues on Daphnia
behavior in both horizontal and vertical planes. Animal Behavior vol 48:
pgs 861-869.
When citing a book use this format:
Author’s last name, first initial. second initial. year of publication. title of book.
publishing company. city and state of publication. pg/s.(pg/s).
i.e. Cole, G.A. 1994. Textbook of Limnology. Waveland Press. Prospect
Heights, Ill., pgs.83-102.
When citing an author or author unknown from online use this format:
Author’s last name, first initial. second initial , title of article, (http://www.cas.usf.
edu/apes/mla.htm), date of access.
i.e. Allen, R.A., Fresh-Water Invertebrate Behavior, (http://www.sandiegozoo.
org), 15 March, 1999.
or
i.e. Author unknown, Alternative Energy Sources, (http://www.flinnsci.com), 11
May,1999.
When citing someone you interviewed use this format:
Person Interviewed last name, first initial. second initial., Date of interview.
i.e. Valaskey, V.E., 12 December, 2000.
BioLEARN, http://www.wisc.edu/cbe/biolearn/index.html August, 2003
**IMPORTANT INFORMATION**
If you have any other questions about citing references, see the
West High School LMC home page at
http://www.madison.k12.wi.us/west/lmc/ .
Follow the Bibliographic Citations link to the
Bibliography/Footnote Examples from the UW link for the
American Psychological Association (APA) style which we use in
science to cite all research.
BioLEARN, http://www.wisc.edu/cbe/biolearn/index.html August, 2003

Writing A Literature Review and
Using a Synthesis Matrix
My professor says I have to write a literature review, what do I do?
Well, to begin, you have to know that when writing a literature review, the goal of the researcher is to determine the current
state of knowledge about a particular topic by asking, “What do we know or not know about this issue?” In conducting this type of
research, it is imperative to examine several different sources to determine where the knowledge overlaps and where it falls short. A
literature review requires a synthesis of different subtopics to come to a greater understanding of the state of knowledge on a larger
issue. It works very much like a jigsaw puzzle. The individual pieces (arguments) must be put together in order to reveal the whole
(state of knowledge).
So basically I just read the articles and summarize each one separately?
No, a literature review is not a summary. Rather than merely presenting a summary of each source, a literature review should
be organized according to each subtopic discussed about the larger topic. For example, one section of a literature review might read
“Researcher A suggests that X is true. Researcher B also argues that X is true, but points out that the effects of X may be different
from those suggested by Researcher A.” It is clear that subtopic X is the main idea covered in these sentences. Researchers A and B
agree that X is true, but they disagree on X’s effects. There is both agreement and disagreement, but what links the two arguments is
the fact that they both concern X.
This sounds like a lot of information, how can I keep it organized?
Because a literature review is NOT a summary of these different sources, it can be very difficult to keep your research
organized. It is especially difficult to organize the information in a way that makes the writing process simpler. One way that seems
particularly helpful in organizing literature reviews is the synthesis matrix. The synthesis matrix is a chart that allows a researcher to
sort and categorize the different arguments presented on an issue. Across the top of the chart are the spaces to record sources, and
along the side of the chart are the spaces to record the main points of argument on the topic at hand. As you examine your first source,
you will work vertically in the column belonging to that source, recording as much information as possible about each significant idea
presented in the work. Follow a similar pattern for your following sources. As you find information that relates to your already
identified main points, put it in the pertaining row. In your new sources, you will also probably find new main ideas that you need to
add to your list at the left. You now have a completed matrix!

The Nobel Prize in Literature*
by Kjell Espmark
3 December 1999

Nobel's Will and the Literature Prize
Among the five prizes provided for in Alfred Nobel's will (1895), one was intended for the person who, in the literary field, had produced "the most outstanding work in an ideal direction". The Laureate should be determined by "the Academy in Stockholm", which was specified by the statutes of the Nobel Foundation to mean the Swedish Academy. These statutes defined literature as "not only belles-lettres, but also other writings which, by virtue of their form and style, possess literary value". At the same time, the restriction to works presented "during the preceding year" was softened: "older works" could be considered "if their significance has not become apparent until recently". It was also stated that candidates must be nominated in writing by those entitled to do so before 1 February each year.
A special regulation gave the right of nomination to members of the Swedish Academy and other academies, institutions and societies similar to it in constitution and purpose, and to university teachers of aesthetics, literature and history. An emendation in 1949 specified the category of teachers: "professors of literature and philology at universities and university colleges". The right to nominate was at the same time extended to previous Prize-winners and to "presidents of those societies of authors that are representative of the literary production in their respective countries". The statutes also provided for a Nobel Committee "to give their opinion in matter of the award of the prizes" and for a Nobel Institute with a library which was to contain a substantial collection of mainly modern literature.
Accept the Task? Discussion in The Swedish Academy
Two members of the Swedish Academy spoke strongly against accepting Nobel's legacy, for fear that the obligation would detract from the Academy's proper concerns and turn it into "a cosmopolitan tribunal of literature". They could have added that the Academy, in doldrums at the time, was ill-equipped for the sensitive task. The permanent secretary, Carl David af Wirsén, replied that refusal would deprive "the great figures of continental literature" of an exceptional recognition, and conjured up the weighty reproach to be directed at the Academy if it failed to "acquire an influential position in world literature". Besides, the task would not be foreign to the purposes of the Academy: proper knowledge of the best in the literature of other countries was necessary for an Academy that had to judge the literature of its own country. This effective argument, which won a qualified majority for acceptance, showed not only openness to Nobel's far-reaching intentions, but also harbored Wirsén's and his sympathizers' ambition to seize the unexpetected possibilities in the field of the politics of culture, and to enjoy, as he wrote in a letter, "the enormous power and prestige that the Nobel will bequeaths to the Eighteen [members of the Academy]".
Nobel's Guidelines and Their Interpretations: A Short History
As guidelines for the distribution of the Literature Prize the Swedish Academy had the general requirement for all the prizes – the candidate should have bestowed "the greatest benefit on mankind" – and the special condition for literature, "in an ideal direction". Both prescriptions are vague and the second, in particular, was to cause much discussion. What did Nobel actually mean by ideal? In fact, the history of the Literature Prize appears as a series of attempts to interpret an imprecisely worded will. The consecutive phases in that history reflect the changing sensibility of an Academy continuously renewing itself. The main source of knowledge of the principles and criteria applied is the annual reports which the Committee presented to the Academy (itself making part of that body). Also the correspondence between the members is often enlightening. There is an obstacle though: all Nobel information is to be secret for 50 years.
"A Lofty and Sound Idealism" (1901-12)
The first stage, from 1901 to 1912, has the stamp of the secretary Carl David af Wirsén, who read Nobel's "ideal" as "a lofty and sound idealism". The set of criteria which resulted in Prizes to Bjørnstierne Bjørnson, Rudyard Kipling and Paul Heyse, but rejected Leo Tolstoy, Henrik Ibsen and Émile Zola, is characterized by its conservative idealism (a domestic variation of Hegelian philosophy), holding church, state and family sacred, and by its idealist aesthetics derived from Goethe's and Hegel's epoch (and codified by F.T. Fischer in the middle of the nineteenth century). Those standards had earlier been typical of Wirsén's and the Academy's struggle against the radical Scandinavian writers. Nobel's testament gave Wirsén – called "the Don Quixote of Swedish romantic idealism" – the opportunity to carry his provincial campaign into the fields of international literature. This application was actually far from Nobel's values: he certainly shared Wirsén's disgust for writers like Zola, but was radically anticleric, adopting Shelley's utopian idealism and religiously coloured spirit of revolt.
A Policy of Neutrality (World War I)
The next chapter in the history of the Literary Prize could be entitled "A Literary Policy of Neutrality". The objectives laid down by the new chairman of the Academy's Nobel Committee at the beginning of the First World War kept, on the whole, the belligerent powers outside, giving the small nations a chance. This policy partly explains the Scandinavian overrepresentation on the list. The Prizes to the Swede Verner von Heidenstam, the Danes Karl Gjellerup and Henrik Pontoppidan – one of the few cases of a shared Prize – and to the Norwegian Knut Hamsun still in 1920 are to be comprehended from this point of view.
"The Great Style" (the 1920s)
A third period, approximately coinciding with the 1920s, could be labeled "The Great Style". This key concept in the reports of the Committee reveals the connections with Wirsén's epoch and its traits of classicism. With such a standard the Academy was, of course, out of touch with what happened in contemporary literature. It could appreciate Thomas Mann's Buddenbrooks – a masterpiece "approaching the classical realism in Tolstoy" – but passed his Magic Mountain over in silence. By that time, however, the Academy had got rid of its narrow definition of "ideal direction". In 1921 this stipulation of the will was interpreted more generously as "wide-hearted humanity", which paved the way for writers like Anatole France and George Bernard Shaw, both inconceivable as Laureates – and, sure enough, rejected – at an earlier stage.
"Universal Interest" (the 1930s)
In line with the requirement "the greatest benefit on mankind", the Academy of the 1930s tried a new approach, equating this "mankind" with the immediate readership of the works in question. A report of its Committee stated "universal interest" as a criterion and the Academy decided on writers within everybody's reach, from Sinclair Lewis to Pearl Buck, repudiating exclusive poets like Paul Valéry and Paul Claudel.
"The Pioneers" (1946- )
Given a pause for renewal by the Second World War and inspired by its new secretary, Anders Österling, the post-war Academy finished this excursion into popular taste, focussing instead on what was called "the pioneers". Like in the sciences, the Laureates were to be found among those who paved the way for new developments. In a way, this is another interpretation of the formula "the greatest benefit on mankind": the perfect candidate was the one who had provided world literature with new possibilities in outlook and language.
In Österling's epoch, the word "ideal" was deliberately taken in a still wider sense: the new list started with Hermann Hesse who, in the 1930s, had been rejected for "ethical anarchy" and lack of "plastic visuality and firmness" in his characters, words which echo Wirsén's time. Later, the compatibility of Samuel Beckett's dark conception of the world with Nobel's "ideal" was put to the test, one of the last occasions when this condition was central to the discussion. It is only at "the depths" that "pessimistic thought and poetry can work their miracles", said Karl-Ragnar Gierow in his address, emphasising the deep sense of human worth and the life-giving force, nevertheless, in Beckett's pessimism. The borderline of this generosity can be seen in the handling of Ezra Pound. He appealed to the Academy because of his "pioneering significance", but was disqualified by his wartime applauding, on the Italian radio network, of the mass extermination of the East European Jews. Member Dag Hammarskjöld, in a representative way, concluded that "such a 'subhuman' reaction" excluded "a prize that is after all intended to lay weight on the 'idealistic tendency' of the recipient's efforts". (This repudiation did not prevent Hammarskjöld from negotiating, on the Academy's commission, with the American authorities for Pound's release from the mental hospital where he had been interned to be saved from a death penalty for treason.)
This new policy, at the same time more exclusive and more generous in its interpretation of the will, was actually meant to start with Valéry but he died in the summer of 1945. Instead we find, in 1946-50, the splendid series Hesse, André Gide, T.S. Eliot, and William Faulkner. In his address to the author of The Waste Land, Österling drew attention to "another pioneer work, which had a still more sensational effect on modern literature," James Joyce's Ulysses. With this reference to the greatest omission of the 1930s, he extended the 1948 acclaim of Eliot to cover also the dead master. The explicit concentration on innovators can, via the choices of Saint-John Perse in 1960 and Samuel Beckett in 1969, be traced up to recent years.
The criterion lost weight, however, as the heroic period of the international avant-garde turned into history and literary innovation became less ostentatious. Instead, the instruments pointed at the "pioneers" of specific linguistic areas. The 1988 Prize was awarded a writer who, from a Western point of view, rather administers the heritage from Flaubert and Thomas Mann. In the Arabic world, on the other hand, Naguib Mahfouz appears as the creator of its contemporary novel. The following Prize went to Camilo José Cela, who had, in an international perspective, modest claims to the title "pioneer", but who was, in Spanish literature, the great innovator of post-war fiction. Still found among the innovators of certain linguistic areas is 2000 Laureate, Gao Xingjian, whose œuvre "has opened new paths for the Chinese novel drama".
Attention to Unknown Masters (1978- )
Another policy, partly coinciding with the one just outlined, partly replacing it, is "the pragmatic consideration" worded by the new secretary, Lars Gyllensten, and, again, taking into account the "benefit" of the Prize. A growing number within the Academy wanted to call attention to important but unnoticed writers and literatures, thus giving the world audience masterpieces they would otherwise miss, and at the same time, giving an important writer due attention. We get glimpses of such arguments as far back as the choice of Rabindranath Tagore in 1913 but there was no programme until the early 1970s. The full emergence of this policy can be seen from 1978 and onwards, in the Prizes to Isaac Bashevis Singer, Odysseus Elytis, Elias Canetti, and Jaroslav Seifert. The criterion gives poetry a prominent place. In no other period were the poets so well provided for as in the years 1990-1996 when four of the seven prizes went to Octavio Paz, Derek Walcott, Seamus Heaney, and Wislawa Szymborska, all of them earlier unknown to the world audience.
"The Literature of the Whole World" (1986- )
A new policy, long on its way, had a breakthrough in the 1980s. Again, it was an attempt to understand and carry out Nobel's intentions. His will had an international horizon, though it rejected any consideration for the nationality of the candidates: the most worthy should be chosen, "whether he be Scandinavian or not". The problem of surveying the literature of the whole world was, however, overwhelming and for a long time the Academy was, with justice, to be criticized for making the award a European affair. Wirsén expressly confined himself, as we saw, to "the great figures of Continental literature". In the 1920s it was certainly laid down that the prize was "intended for the literature of the whole world" but instruments to implement the idea were not available. In the 1930s, there were, on the whole, not even reasonable nominations from the Asiatic countries and the Academy had, at that time, not yet developed a scouting system of its own.
The Prize at last to Yasunari Kawabata in 1968 illustrates the exceptional difficulties in judging literature in non-European languages - this was a matter of seven years, involving four international experts. In 1984, however, Gyllensten declared that attention to non-European writers was gradually increasing in the Academy; attempts were being made "to achieve a global distribution". This includes measures to strengthen the competence for the international task.
The picture of the Academy's Eurocentric policy was also significantly altered by the choices of Wole Soyinka from Nigeria in 1986 and Naguib Mahfouz from Egypt in 1988. Later practice shows the extention to Nadine Gordimer from South Africa, to Kenzaburo Oe from Japan, to Derek Walcott from St. Lucia in the West Indies, to Toni Morrison, the first Afro-American on the list, and to Gao Xingjian, the first laureate to write in Chinese. It is, however, important that nationality is not involved in the discussion. It has sometimes been suggested that the Academy should first decide upon a neglected language and then seek out the best candidate in it. Doing so would amount to politization of the Prize. Instead, efforts are being made to widen the horizon so that, in the course of the normal process of judgement, it is possible to weigh sometimes a prominent Nigerian dramatist and poet, sometimes an Egyptian novelist, against candidates from closer parts of the linguistic atlas – with all such evaluations continuing to be made on literary grounds. Critics have quite often neglected the Academy's striving for political integrity. Naturally, an international prize can have political effects but it must not, according to this jury, carry any political intention.
The criteria discussed sometimes alternate, sometimes coincide. The spotlight on the unknown master Canetti in 1981 is thus followed by the laurel to the universally hailed "pioneer" of magic realism, Gabriel García Márquez, in 1982. Some Laureates answer both requirements, like Faulkner, who was not only "the great experimentalist among twentieth-century novelists" – the Academy was here fortunate enough to anticipate Faulkner's enormous importance to later fiction - but also, in 1950, a fairly unknown writer. On this occasion, the Prize, for once, could help a great innovator outside the limelight to reach his potential disciples as well as his due audience. The surprising Prize to Dario Fo in 1997 can also be said to have a double address: it was given to a genre which had earlier been left out in the cold but also to the brilliant innovator of that genre.
The Prize Becoming a Literary Prize
The more and more generous interpretation of the formula "in an ideal direction" continued in the 1980s and the 1990s. Academy Secretary Lars Gyllensten pointed out that nowadays the expression "is not taken too literally... It is realized that on the whole the serious literature that is worthy of a prize furthers knowledge of man and his condition and endeavours to enrich and improve his life". Cela's candidature, again, put the principle to the test. His dark conception of the world posed the same problem as Beckett's, and provoked a similar solution. The Prize was given "for a rich and intense prose, which with restrained compassion forms a challenging vision of man's vulnerability". As Knut Ahnlund said in his address, Cela's work "in no way lacks sympathy or common human feeling, unless we demand that those sentiments should be expressed in the simplest possible way". In this "unless" we glimpse the repudiation, implicit in recent practice, of the early narrow interpretation of the will. The Nobel Prize in Literature has gradually become a literary prize. One of the few reminiscences of the "ideal direction" policy of the earlier age is the homage paid to those great artistic achievements that are characterized by uncompromising "integrity" in the depiction of the human predicament (cf. below).
International Neglect of the Change of Standards
International criticism of the Literature Prize has usually treated the Academy's practice during the first century of the Prize as a whole, overlooking the differences in outlook and criteria between the various periods, even neglecting the continuous renewal which makes the Academy of, say, 1950 a jury much different from Wirsén's.
As to the early prizes, the censure of bad choices and blatant omissions is often justified. Tolstoy, Ibsen and Henry James should have been rewarded instead of, for instance, Sully Prudhomme, Eucken and Heyse. The Academy which got this exacting commission was simply not fit for the task. It was deliberately formed as "a bulwark" against the new radical literature in Sweden and much too conservative in outlook and taste to be an international literary jury. It was not until the 1940s - with Anders Österling as secretary - that the Academy, considerably rejuvenated, had the competence to address the major writers of, in the first place, the Western World. On the whole, criticism of its postwar practice has also been much more appreciative. Objections in recent times have less often been levelled against literary quality, rather referred, mistakenly, to political intentions. Also blame for eurocentricity was common, in particular from Asiatic quarters, up to the choices of Soyinka and Mahfouz in the 1980s.
Special Articles
Nomination
In the first year, the number of nominations was 25. In the early time of the Prize the members of the Swedish Academy were reluctant to use their right to nominate candidates. Impartiality suggested that proposals should come from outside. As no one abroad nominated Tolstoy in 1901, the self-evident candidate of the time fell outside the discussion. The omission caused a strong reaction from Swedish writers and artists who sent an address to Tolstoy - who answered by declining any future prize. During the First World War the number of nominations decreased, to fall to twelve in 1919, compared with 28 in 1913. This wartime slackening of initiative from the outside world induced the Academy to make use of its right to propose. In 1916 the Committee members themselves put forward five names. In recent times, members of the Committee - but also other members of the Academy - regularly add their nominations to the outside names to make the list as comprehensive and representative as possible. The number of nominations has towards the end of the century been about - and even substantially surpassed - 200.
The Nobel Committee
The Nobel Committee is a working unit of 3-5, chosen within the Swedish Academy, (with a rare additional member from outside). Its task is to examine the proposals made and study all relevant literary material to select the candidates to be considered by the Academy. Formerly the Committee presented only one name for the decision of the Academy, which usually confirmed the choice of its Committee. (There are exceptions though: the Academy preferred Tagore in 1913 and Henri Bergson in 1927.) From the 1970s and onwards, the members of the Committee have presented individual reports, which enables the Academy to weigh the different opinions and consequently gives it a greater influence.
The Committee's first task is to trim down "the long list" nowadays about 200 names of to some 15, which are presented to the Academy in April. Towards the end of May, this "half-long list" is condensed to a "short list" of five names. The œuvres of these finalists make up the Academy's summer readings. At its first reunion in the middle of September, the discussion immediately starts, to end in a decision about a month later. Naturally, the whole production of five writers would be too heavy a workload for a couple of months but most names of the previous short list return the current year, which makes the task more reasonable. It should be added that in recent times a first-year candidate will not be taken to a prize the same year. In the background looms one of the main failures, Pearl Buck, the Laureate of 1938. A first-year candidate, she was launched by a Committee minority as late as 19 September, to win the contest a short time afterwards, without due consideration.
The chairman of the Committee has usually been identical with the Academy's permanent secretary, with some displacement at transitional stages. Thus, Carl David af Wirsén was chairman in 1900-1912, Per Hallström (secretary from 1931) in 1922-1946, Anders Österling (secretary from 1941) in 1947-1970, Karl-Ragnar Gierow (secretary from 1964) in 1970-1980, and Lars Gyllensten (secretary from 1977) in 1981-1987. An exceptional period is in 1913-1921 when the historian, Harald Hjärne wrote the reports. In 1986, when Sture Allén became secretary, Gyllensten remained as chairman, to be succeeded by Kjell Espmark in 1988. Since 1986 the tasks have thus been divided between secretary and chairman.
"Ideal" – A Textual Examination
As was shown by Sture Allén, the adjective "ideal" referring to an ideal was used by several of Nobel's contemporaries; one of them was Strindberg. However, the word is, he found, an amendment made by Nobel in his handwritten will. He seems to have written "idealirad", with "idealiserad" (idealized) in mind, but checked himself in front of the reference to embellishment in this word for upliftment and wrote "sk" over the final letters "rad", thus ending in the disputed word "idealisk". Allén concluded that Nobel actually meant "in a direction towards an ideal", and specified the sphere of the ideal by the general criterion for all the Nobel Prizes: they are addressed to those who "shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind". "This means, for instance", Allén added, "that writings, however brilliant, that advocate, say, genocide, will not comply with the will."
Shared Prize
The Nobel Prize for Literature can be divided between two - but not three - candidates. However, the Swedish Academy has been restrictive on this point. Divisions are liable to be regarded as - and sometimes are - the result of compromise. That was the case with Frédéric Mistral and José Echegaray in 1904 and with Karl Gjellerup and Henrik Pontoppidan in 1916. A shared prize also runs the risk of being viewed as only half a laurel. Later divisions are exceptional, the only cases being the shared Prizes to Shmuel Yosef Agnon and Nelly Sachs in 1966 and to Eyvind Johnson and Harry Martinson in 1974. In the 1970s a policy was laid down, stating (1) that each of the two candidates must alone be worthy of the Prize and (2) that there must be some community between them justifying the procedure. The latter requirement no doubt offers a real obstacle for divisions.
Competence for the International Task
In the Swedish Academy, linguistic competence has, as a rule, been high. French, English, and German have posed no problems and several members have been excellent translators from Italian and Spanish. Also noted Orientalists have found a place in the Academy. One of them (Esaias Tegnér, Jr.) could have read Tagore in Bengali (but in fact contented himself with the author's own English translation of Gitanjali), another (H. S. Nyberg) could report on Arabic literature. In 1985 Göran Malmqvist, one of the West's foremost experts on modern Chinese literature, became a member. The present Academy includes competence also in Russian. Above all, however, the area of scrutiny has been extended by means of specialists in the various fields. Where translations into English, French, German or the Scandinavian languages are missing, special translations can also be procured. In several cases such exclusive versions - with no more than eighteen readers - have played an important role in the recent work of the Academy.
"Political Integrity"
The Literary Prize has often, in particular during the cold war, given rise to discussion of its political implications. The Swedish Academy, for its part, has on many occasions expressed a desire to stand apart from political antagonisms. The guiding principle, in Lars Gyllensten's words, has been "political integrity". This has quite often not been understood. Especially in the East it has been hard to grasp the Swedish Academy's autonomous position vis-à-vis state and government. In fact, the Academy does not receive any subsidy from the state, nor would it accept any interference in its work. The government, in its turn, is quite happy to stand outside the delicate Nobel matters.
Naturally, there is a political aspect of any international literary prize. It is, however, necessary to make a distinction between political effects and political intentions. The former are unavoidable - and often unpredictable. The latter are expressly banned by the Academy. The distinction, as well as the autonomy of the Academy, can be illustrated by the prehistory of the Prize to Solzhenitsyn. Considering the sad consequences for Pasternak of his Prize, the secretary Karl-Ragnar Gierow took the unusual step of writing to the Swedish ambassador to Moscow, Gunnar Jarring, to gain some idea of Solzhenitsyn's position, stressing that the question related, of course, only to what might "happen to him personally." On this point, Mr. Jarring could give a reassuring answer (which proved not to be prophetic). But he also had another message. He wanted to postpone the decision, specifying, in a letter to Österling, that a prize to Solzhenitsyn "would lead to difficulties for our relations with the Soviet Union". He received the reply: "Yes, that could well be so, but we are agreed that Solzhenitsyn is the most deserving candidate." This exchange illuminates a fundamental fact: the Academy has no regard for what may or may not be desirable in the eyes of the Swedish Foreign Office. Its unconventional inquiry was concerned solely with the likely effects of the decision for the candidate personally. However, the exchange also offers a good example of the way in which a likely political effect may be taken into account - not, of course, that the Academy intended the possible disturbance in Soviet relations, but that it was aware of the risk and chose to take it.
The history of the Literary Prize offers a case where this delicate balance was endangered, the prize to Winston Churchill. When the decision was taken in 1953, after many years of discussion, it was felt that a sufficient distance from the candidate's wartime exploits had been gained, making it possible for a Prize to him to be generally understood as a literary award. The reaction from many quarters showed that this was quite a vain hope.
Now, there can be no doubt that the Committee and the Academy attributed exceptional literary merits to Churchill the historian and the orator. They certainly concurred in the address to the Laureate, "a Caesar who also had the gift of wielding Cicero's stylus". The problem was how this Caesar, a mere eight years after the war, could be mentally separated from the Ciceronian prose. After all, Churchill was not only the winner of World War II but prime minister and leader of one of the key powers in the cold war world. It can be asked if any of the Academy's choices has put its political integrity at such risk. At any rate, one well-known conclusion was drawn: ever since, candidates with governmental positions, such as André Malraux and Léopold Senghor, have been consistently ruled out.
During the last decades there is one seeming case of a "political" Prize, the award to Czeslaw Milosz. "Has Milosz been given the 1980 Prize because Poland is politically in fashion?" asked Der Tagesspiegel and many other newspapers joined in. The suspicions did not account for the time involved in each nominee's candidacy. As was disclosed by a member, Artur Lundkvist, Milosz had been on the list for three or four years and had been shortlisted in May 1980 - in other words, long before the Danzig strike. The strike caused several members to hesitate, said Lundkvist, but he added that it would have been equally impossible to drop Milosz because of the events in Poland.
His argument no doubt reflects the opinion within the Academy. This jury realizes not only the damage that a political choice would inflict on the Prize; the integrity of the award could be jeopardised also by a non-choice in a delicate situation. Still, Milosz was a dissident, and so were Jaroslav Seifert and Joseph Brodsky, the Laureates of 1984 and 1987. These choices all caused great irritation in the East. There one failed to see that the Academy's overriding concern was literary. The pronouncements of the secretary repeatedly stressed the existential dimensions of these great contemporary poets, values corresponding to the humanistic traditions of the Literary Prize. From that point of view it is essential that Milosz's political defection be thus formulated by Gyllensten (after a reminder of how during the cold war the political climate had altered in a Stalinist direction): "With his uncompromising demand for artistic integrity and human freedom, Milosz could no longer support the regime". Uncompromising integrity and a call to rally round human values - these are qualities that the Swedish Academy, following the spirit of Nobel's will, has again and again sought in combination with great artistic achievement. And just as repeatedly, this mode of evaluation has collided with Marxist/Leninist aesthetics, which interprets such a focus as mere camouflage for political intentions.
The process of judgement, while "primarily a literary matter", does not, of course, prevent subsidiary evaluations from gradually forming a pattern. Such a pattern is apparent in the sequence Singer-Milosz-Canetti-Seifert. At first sight one could see here what a newspaper headline proclaimed about the choice of Seifert: "The Swedish Academy Greets Central Europe." It is, however, not a question of some politically defined region or some third way in the tug-of-war between East and West. It is rather a question of authors who with great personal integrity have given voice to an old culture that has either been swept aside by oppressors or whose continued existence was severely threatened. In the difficult area of Central Europe, a number of authors have emerged, speaking, out of their sorely tested experience, on behalf of the basic human values - this in keeping with the humanistic tradition of the Nobel Prize. Such a pattern, though, reveals only part of the truth. The Prize is in the end not given to an attitude toward life, to a set of cultural roots, or to the substance of a commitment; the Prize has been rewarded so as to honour the unique artistic power by which this human experience has been shaped into literature.
International Criticism of the Literature Prize
The history of the Literature Prize is also the history of its reception in the press and in other media. Apart from overlooking the changes in outlooks and criteria within the Swedish Academy, international criticism has tended to neglect the crowd of likely names around the Prize a specific year. Thus, Graham Greene was a celebrated candidate towards 1970 and the Academy was criticized for passing him over. But the 1969 Prize went to Samuel Beckett and the 1970 Prize to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, both most worthy candidates. Quite rightly, an international inquiry by Books Abroad in 1951, directed to 350 specialists, came to the conclusion that the first fifty years of the Prize contained 150 "necessary" candidates. The Academy cannot have the ambition to crown all worthy writers. What it cannot afford is giving Nobel's laurel to a minor talent. Its practice during the last full half-century has also largely escaped criticism on that point. Even the inquiry of 1951 found that two-thirds of the prizes during the first half-century were fully justified - "a fairly decent testimonial", as Österling commented. The second half-century as liable to get a still better mark.
As was mentioned above, criticism of omissions and bad choices was often justified as to the early period of the Prize. The Academy headed by Wirsén made only one choice to get general acclaim by posterity - Rudyard Kipling, and then for qualities other than those that have shown themselves to be lasting. The score of the 1910s and the 1920s was better: Gerhart Hauptmann, Tagore, France, Yeats, Shaw, and Mann have been found worthy in several appraisals. The results of the period 1930-1939 are poorer. Two choices have widely been regarded as splendid: Luigi Pirandello in 1934 and Eugene O'Neill in 1936. But the period offers several laureates justly judged as mediocre - and they conceal as many cases of neglect: Virginia Woolf ought to have been rewarded instead of Pearl Buck, and so on. The Academy of the inter-war years quite simply lacked the necessary tools to evaluate one of the most dynamic periods in Western literature. The post-war Academy has in a quite different manner fulfilled the expectations of serious criticism. The Österling Academy's investment in the pioneers has received due recognition in many favorable assessments. Names like Gide, Eliot, Faulkner, Hemingway, and Beckett have won general acclaim. Some names less known to an international audience, like Jiménez, Laxness, Quasimodo, and Andric, have attracted criticism as insignificant, but been classified by experts as discoveries.
Sometimes the complaints about omissions have been anachronistic. Among those missing, critics have found Proust, Kafka, Rilke, Musil, Cavafy, Mandelstam, García Lorca, and Pessoa. This list, if it had any chronological justification, would undeniably suggest serious failure. But the main works of Kafka, Cavafy, and Pessoa were not published until after their deaths and the true dimensions of Mandelstam's poetry were revealed above all in the unpublished poems that his wife saved from extinction and gave to the world long after he had perished in his Siberian exile. In the other cases there was much too brief a period of time between the publication of the author's most deserving work and his death for a prize to have been possible. Thus, Proust achieved notoriety in 1919 by the Goncourt Prize for the second part of À la recherche du temps perdu but less than three years later he was dead. The same short time of reaction was offered by Rilke's Duineser Elegien and García Lorca's plays. Musil's significance did not appear outside a narrow circle of connoisseurs until more than a decade after his death in 1942. He belonged, as was pointed out by a critic (Theodor Ziolkowski), to the category of authors who "on closer examination ... exclude themselves."
Epilogue: At the Turn of the Century
The last literary Nobel Prize of the twentieth century was awarded to Günter Grass, "whose frolicsome black fables portray the forgotten face of history". The choice won general acclaim but the moment was called in question. Why not three decades ago when Grass was at the summit of his craft? And why just now?
The first question takes us back to the situation around 1970 when Böll and Grass were both hot names. When the laurel was given to Böll in 1972 the citation recalled his contribution "to a renewal of German literature". The word had, however, a special meaning here. As was clarified in Gierow's speech to the Laureate "the renewal" was "not an experiment with form" but "a rebirth out of annihilation", "a resurrection" of a ravaged culture "to the joy and benefit of us all": "Such was the kind of work Alfred Nobel wished his prize to reward." This meant that the foremost representative of a moral renaissance from the ruins of the Third Reich was preferred, with a direct appeal to Nobel's intentions, to the country's foremost representative of what was an artistic renewal. The choice took Grass out of focus for many years, and allowed for a discussion of a downward trend in his craft. It remained for the rejuvenated Academy of the nineties to take up the issue again. Several of its new members might have chosen Grass instead of Böll in 1972. As to the alleged decline of Grass's art, the presentation at the announcement certainly called special attention to The Tin Drum and the Danzig trilogy it makes part of, but refused to share the politically biased German view of Ein weites Feld. "We just read the book and it is goddam good", as the permanent secretary Horace Engdahl declared.
Also the second question - why just now? - can be answered. The citation recalls the fabulous historian, with a view to the forgotten face of history. Without neglecting works like The Flounder, beginning at the dawn of history, the jury naturally focussed upon the great recreator of the century just about to end. Grass is, in the secretary's words, "one of the really important writers investigating and explaining the twentieth century to us"; giving him the last prize of the century was "an easy decision". In other words, the choice long due found its perfect moment at the very end of the period that Grass had summed up in his incomparable way.
Grass's stronger position in recent years is, of course, also due to the growing understanding of his role as a source of energy in literature. In 1972 he was still a solitary master. In recent years he has been hailed as a precursor by writers such as Salman Rushdie, Nadine Gordimer, Gabriel García Márquez, Antonio Lobo Antunes, and Kenzaburo Oe. Grass has found his place among the "pioneers".
This choice at the end of the century has, however, also another purport. The Prizes to Hesse, Gide, Eliot, and Faulkner introduced a half-century of new competence for the difficult mission. The 1999 Prize is an indication of how far the jury has managed to make the Prize for Literature a literary award. The reference to moral values at the expense of experimental art in 1972 would be hard to imagine in the present Academy. We also notice the explicit disregard of the political implications that made Grass's last novel an apple of discord in his country. The Literary Prize has made an instructive journey since 1901. At the beginning of the new century it has become the Literary Prize that its name announces.
Bibliography
Espmark, K., The Nobel Prize in Literature. A Study of the Criteria behind the Choices. G.K. Hall & Co, Boston 1991.

Shopping Cart Your Cart

* Log in



* Recent Publications
* Catalogue
* FAQS
* Links

* Related Products
* Parent
o • Ubiquitous Learning: An International Journal
* Associated
o • Screen Nightmares and Media Literacy
o • Multimethod Classroom Instruction as Applied Constructivism
o • Design Model of a Mobile Performance Support System for Researchers
o • Using Technology to Engage the Distance Learner
o • Learning Outcomes Assessment Matrix (LOAM)
o • Making the Primary Grade Curriculum Relevant
o • Anywhere, Anytime - Creating a Mobile Indigenous Language Platform
o • ICT Tools Supporting Teacher Practice in Language Acquisition
o • An Innovative Approach to Bringing Comprehensive Ubiquitous Learning Tools onto the Mobile Phone
o • Digitizing Traditional Notes into Searchable Documents
o More →

Innovating Literature Circles with Computer Assisted Language Learning Technology for Taiwanese EFL College Learners: An Initial Finding
By Gloria Shu-Mei Chwo.
Published by Ubiquitous Learning: An International Journal
Format Price
Article: Print $US10.00
Article: Electronic $US5.00

This study compared the innovative Computer Assisted Language Learning literature circle (CALL LCs) perceptions between two university EFL learners in Taiwan — 41 students at a Technology University in central Taiwan (HKU) and 49 students at a Normal University in southern Taiwan (NKNU). Moreover, learning and communication style preferences, together with the Author Plus Pro (APP) eLearning practice results were analyzed with the HKU learners’ degree of adaptation to CALL LCs’ experience. Comparatively speaking, the NKNU outperformed the HKU in their general LCs experiences. Factor analysis found that the weekly reading hour, reading motivation and interest, together with their preference for shared reading, contributed to the difference. Regarding the general impression on the CALL LCs, students conveyed that the increase of interaction, exchange of ideas and innovative technology were the most motivating and satisfactory experiences. When the adaptation of learning and communication styles and APP eLearning practice results were further analyzed with the HKU’s group, a full and varied repertoire of style modality strengths were also found to be well accommodated with their CALL LCs experience. However, suggestions were also proposed to increase the discussion time, improve technology facilities, and urge good preparation prior to the literature circle time in order to facilitate the flow of discussions.
Keywords: CALL Literature Circles, Learning Style, Communication Style, EFL Chinese College Learners

Ubiquitous Learning: An International Journal, Volume 2, Issue 3, pp.23-54. Article: Print (Spiral Bound). Article: Electronic (PDF File; 1.772MB).
Dr. Gloria Shu-Mei Chwo

Assistant Professor, Applied English Department, Hungkuang University, Taiwan
Dr. Gloria Shu-Mei Chwo earned her Doctor of Philosophy Degree at University of Essex in U.K. in 2005. She is currently an assistant professor at the Department of Applied English Language, HungKuang University in Taiwan. Her research interests include word reading processing, EFL teaching methods, literature circle and eLearning.

* This site is built in CGPublisher.
* Conditions of use.

Social Studies through Literature

by
Carole J. Wilkinson, Teacher-in-Residence
Delaware Social Studies Education Project
University of Delaware
and
Brandywine School District
Questions
Elementary school teachers have been charged with preparing students to meet the Delaware curriculum standards in English language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies. If one looks at the requirements in any one of those subject areas, it can be overwhelming. Because student promotion is linked to adequate success on the state reading assessments, elementary teachers feel bound to put reading at the forefront of their instruction. Soon success on the state mathematics assessment will also be tied to promotion. Where does that leave social studies?
For years, time in the classroom for reading and mathematics has been inviolable. Interruptions are allowed only at other times in the school day. Those other times are often during social studies lessons. On a good day, there are about three and one half hours of academic instructional time in which teachers are to teach reading, writing, math, science and social studies. Two and one half-hours are to be dedicated to reading and writing, while math takes at least one forty-five minute period per day. How, then, is a teacher to teach the four strands of social studies - civics, economics, geography, and history – as required in the Delaware State Social Studies Standards with such limited time left in an average school day?
Social studies have often been the subjects children denounce as “boring.” In the past social studies textbooks have not always been stimulating enough to captivate children. History textbooks did not always have extensive civics, economics, and geography lessons. Those individual subject areas seemed isolated in texts and in presentations. While many publishers have made great strides in producing child-friendly texts and in integrating the social studies strands, how can we bring life to the social studies?
What are the answers? Everyone enjoys a good story, generally, so the logical approach seems to be to teach the social studies through reading whenever possible. With careful selection, one can find children’s trade books through which two or more strands of the social studies can be taught while the children revel in an absorbing story.
One of my favorite children’s trade book is Foster’s War by Carolyn Reeder (1998) because there are lessons derived from this book that address nearly all of the sixteen benchmarks for the grade 4-5 cluster in social studies. I find the children’s curiosity about social studies topics ignited by this engrossing story. They care about the history, geography, economics, and civics that are associated with the story. Life is infused into their study of social studies.
Story Summary
Foster’s War is a story about life on the home front during World War II. It takes place in San Diego, California in the early years of the war and revolves around a ten-year-old boy named Foster Simmons.
Foster’s closest friend is a Japanese-American boy, Jimmy Osaki. Following Pearl Harbor, Foster watches the Osakis suffer because of hateful prejudices against the “Japs”. He later corresponds with Jimmy and his family who are sent to a Japanese Internment camp.
The Simmons family becomes very involved in helping the war effort. They buy saving stamps and bonds, build a victory garden, participate in metal and rubber scrap drives, volunteer in U.S.O. canteens, serve as neighborhood civil defense wardens, scrimp on foods and materials that are rationed, and volunteer for the Red Cross Nurses’ Aide Corps. There are numerous other wartime activities and life-style changes mentioned throughout the book.
Mel, Foster’s older brother, is killed in the Battle of Midway in 1942, and the family suffers through the loss, each in his/her own way. Foster and his friends no longer think it’s fun to play war.
The story is, at varying times, funny, poignant, and riveting. The reader is alternately filled with rage at injustices, empathy during sad or tender moments, and hilarity at childish pranks. It is a book that children thoroughly enjoy reading.
Lesson Suggestions
Some topics in the book which lend themselves to economics lessons are: 1) wartime shortages and rationing; 2) defense stamps and bonds; 3) the black market; 4) sacrificing candy or the movies to buy defense stamps (opportunity cost); and 5) the entrance of women into the work force. For example, rationing is a case where the government interfered with the economy by setting a ceiling price for such items as sugar and limiting how much a person could buy. One can illustrate with graphs the ordinary supply and demand curves and the market-clearing price. With rationing and price fixing, however, those curves are significantly altered. Further, international trade was interrupted by the war. Most of our rubber came from the East Indies, so we could not readily get that vital commodity. Rubber was demanded for defense vehicles, so the average drivers on the home front could not buy tires. In addition, gasoline was rationed. These two factors caused a significant reduction in the use of cars, resulting in a domino effect on the rest of the economy.
The Japanese internment is a hot box for civics lessons. In my classroom the children were enraged by the injustice of that government action, and eagerly sought more information. They explored the Internet to find out how this could have happened. What justification did the government have for denying Constitutional rights to United States citizens? In the process of searching for those answers, they studied the Bill of Rights, the Fourteenth Amendment, due process of law, and primary source documents such as Executive Order 9066 and Civilian Exclusion Order No. 33. They wanted to read stories written by internees telling about their ordeals. They wanted to see how much was written in their social studies textbooks about this travesty. They were reading – BIG TIME! They were analyzing, interpreting, and evaluating.
The children wanted to know where the Japanese internment camps were, what they were like, and how long the people were imprisoned. All of a sudden, there were geography lessons, ready made, with little effort on my part. They were learning about places – the climate, the topography, the flora and fauna. They were exploring maps. When they found that two of the internment camps in Arkansas had no barbed wire fences or guards around them because they were surrounded by swamps filled with four of the most poisonous snakes in the world, they delightedly searched for information about Arkansas’ geography! On the Internet they found pictures of many of the camps which lay in isolated, desolate places with extremes of temperature, dust storms, and other such disagreeable living conditions. They yearned to know more about these places and searched geography books for the answers.
Foster’s War takes place in San Diego, California. Throughout the story, mention is made of the port, shipbuilding, the naval base, the warm weather, and the berry farms and orchards. The children put a sticky dot on San Diego on the wall map. They were gaining a sense of “place.” They expressed in journals why the people of San Diego feared a Japanese attack. They wrote about the Japanese Americans’ loss of their fine berry farms and orchards when they were hastily removed to internment camps and about the greedy Caucasian farmers who snatched up that land. They included in their journals the characteristics of an ethnic neighborhood, such as the Japanese Americans had in San Diego and in the internment camps. Everyday they wrote in their journals some new or interesting information they gained about social studies topics in Foster’s War.
Throughout Foster’s War the main character reads in Life Magazine about Pacific War battles and about numerous land and water sites in the Pacific. The natural extension of that was to place a sticky dot on those locations on a wall map, along with the date of a battle. Happily, the students sought to learn more about those battles from their social studies books, other books, and/or the Internet. Because Foster’s brother was killed at the Battle of Midway, they were especially curious about that one. Here were geography lessons about location and regions, as well as an activity in chronologically looking at history and studying historic events. Through it all, lots of reading was going on.
The children in the book find playing “war” a favorite past time. The girls in the neighborhood pretend to be nurses attending to the wounded. They continually remind one another of the Geneva Convention. The obvious question that emerged was: “What is the Geneva Convention?” Another trip to the Internet was called for, and we found out that the Geneva Convention was a series of conventions held over many years. Part of the agreement reached by the participating nations was the humane treatment to be afforded prisoners of war. That new knowledge, most assuredly, was added to their journals.
History Standard Three asks students to interpret historical data. In searching the Internet for information about Japanese internment, a wealth of information was found that condemned the internment. Books written by internees further supported the claim that the whole historical episode was a mockery of justice. It took considerable searching to find anything current that supported the government actions. However, that was found; along with the official government documents and newspaper and magazine articles written in the early years of World War II, students analyzed and interpreted the very diverse viewpoints about Japanese internment. Needless to say, lively debate ensued.
Another expectation for Delaware students is that they write well. One of the concluding activities for the literature unit was the following writing prompt:
Foster’s War Text-Based Writing Prompt
You have read Foster’s War. Write the text for a speech that Foster would present at a Town Meeting explaining how children and adults can help the war effort. Use information from both the book and other sources.
Think About
Answering the following questions can help you plan your writing.
• What activities did Foster and other members of his family participate in that supported the war effort?
• From your contact with people you have interviewed, what other activities supported the war effort?
• From the primary sources you have explored, what additional activities supported the war effort?
• Have you explained why each activity is important?
• What order will best present your ideas logically and clearly?
• Is your sentence structure clear?
• Have you corrected errors in spelling, capitalization, punctuation, etc.?
In the Delaware Civics Standards, students are expected to understand that citizens have rights, as well as civic responsibilities and that participation in the democratic system is essential. Throughout Foster’s War the family members and others in the community show their sense of civic responsibilities by volunteering in the Red Cross, the Jr. Red Cross, the U.S.O., and as Civil Defense Wardens. They organize civic groups to advertise, sell, and distribute defense stamps, and bonds. They help organize and implement scrap drives. Victory Gardens proliferate in the community. There is intense patriotic fervor and eagerness to support the war effort. One of the assignments my students especially enjoyed during the reading of Foster’s War was interviewing people who lived during World War II. They wrote up their interviews and shared them with the class. Often, interviewers discovered ways, other than those mentioned in the book, in which people at home supported the war effort. In responses to the writing prompt, they included information gained from the book, as well as from interviews and Internet explorations. Following the writing activity, students met in small groups and decided what essential information had to be included in the paper to earn a “4” in “development” as defined in The Delaware Holistic Scoring Criteria for writing. The children critiqued each other’s written responses. Time was given for each child to rewrite his/her paper before submitting it for final grading, using the Delaware Holistic Scoring Criteria.
Conclusion
While this essay suggests how to use one children’s trade book to teach social studies through reading, the message is applicable to many pieces of children’s literature. Historical fiction centers around historical events and people (content), and the chronology of events is generally present in such a story, as well. For instance, Johnny Tremain by Esther Forbes (1943) takes place in the early stages of the American Revolution, and such people as Paul Revere and Sam Adams play strategic roles in the story. The Boston Tea Party, the plans and meetings prior to it, and the battles of Lexington and Concord are chronologically arranged. Frequently, diverse viewpoints are presented in a story, as in My Brother Sam is Dead by James Collier (1974), so analysis and interpretation of conflicting data is possible.
Historical fiction has a place (s) in which it occurs. Geography lessons associated with location and place naturally arise from the setting. Often geography standard two is also addressed- i.e., humans modify or respond to the natural environment, as in Prairie Songs by Pam Conrad (1985). Sometimes students gain an understanding of the character of regions and the connections between them (geography standard four) in books such as Henner’s Lydia (1936) or Thee Hannah (1940) by Marguerite De Angeli.
An historical period or event is often filled with major economic upheaval. For instance, in the book Fever 1793 by Laurie Halse Anderson (2000), the economic activity of Philadelphia is severely affected by the yellow fever epidemic when hordes of people flee the city and farmers refuse to enter the city with foodstuffs. Stores and businesses are closed, and some critical human needs cannot be met. Abandoned homes are broken into in the desperate search for food, money, and other necessities of life. Bread is made with sawdust. Prices for the few products that are available are outrageously high. Paper is not available for printing newspapers. Ships with international products refuse to dock in the Philadelphia port. Such a book as Fever 1793 serves as a fine springboard for economic lessons.
Civics lessons abound in Mildred D.Taylor’s books, The Gold Cadillac (1987), Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry (1976), and The Road to Memphis (1990). These books detail the experiences of people who have been denied their basic rights.
In summary, then, the elementary teacher need not always squeeze social studies into a separate spot in a schedule already bursting at the seams. Teach social studies through literature and infuse life into subjects that children, heretofore, may have thought they didn’t like. A good story stimulates interest in the history, geography, economics, and civics that contribute to its dynamic character. Take it from there.
References
Anderson, L. H. (2000). Fever 1793. New York: Simon & Schuster Books for Young
Readers.
Collier, J. and Collier, C. (1974). My Brother Sam is Dead. New York: Four Winds
Press.
Conrad, P. (1985). Prairie Songs. New York: Harper & Row.
De Angeli, M. (1936). Henner’s Lydia. Garden City, New York: Doubleday.
De Angeli, M. (1940). Thee Hannah. New York: Doubleday.
Forbes,E. (1943). Johnny Tremain. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Reeder, C. (1998). Foster’s War. New York: Scholastic Inc.
Taylor, M. D. (1987).The Gold Cadillac. New York: Dial Books for Young Readers.
Taylor, M. D. (1990). The Road to Memphis. New York: Dial Books.
Taylor, M. D. (1976). Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry. New York: Dial Press.