Yeah, I've been out for a while... Turns out my router (whatever that is) blew out, so even though Roadrunner's been fine, my PC couldn't connect (if you can't tell, taking two weeks to figure this out = me, technologically challenged).
Last I wrote, I was anxious about the PRAXIS II test... Shoot. The first section was, if not exactly a breeze, well, it was something requiring just a bit of effort, like- well, like a fart. A fart you try to squeeze out in a really crowded and really quiet room, a fart that you surreptitiously pass (as through a teeny tiny straw) silently, and then look on as though nothing were the matter... What's that smell? Why, 'tain't me... Yes, I got away with that first section, squeaky clean, if not entirely odorless... After all, multiple choice questions are no big thing. You just fill them in in a zigzag pattern, and you're bound to hit something right! Right?
The second section was, for the most part, fun. 4 essay questions in 2 hours... I bypassed the whole outlining and organizational procedures and tore right into my written answers... What were the questions? Well, it's been over two weeks... But:
question 1 had to do with some poem by some lady... Can't recall. It was about earthquakes or something or other, earthquakes being the metaphor for the relationship between mothers and daughters... and fathers being surreptitiously injected into the poem as a symbol of the interface between mothers and daughters- like, sometimes the relationship is like rubbing your hand over the stubble of the chin of a father, something like that. It was actually fun analyzing it.
question 2 had to do with some prose by some dude... Again, can't recall... It was the introductory paragraphs to some short story. Descriptions of some grape farm. Shrouded in mist. And everything was passive, quiet, waiting... EXCEPT the mrs. farmer what's her name. She's described as this almost masculine active figure... So, we had to talk about how the author (Mr. what's his ass) utilized setting and character descriptions to introduce this character (Mrs. I'm wearing the pants i
n this household).
question 3... not prose, precisely, but some passage ABOUT writing, written by, well, some writer. Mr. nobody's heard of him yet. He described writing as walking a tightrope, no net. He had this real attitude. Like, I don't give a s**t what you critics think, I'm going to bare my ass to you all (while walking this tightrope) and defecate, and that's art, and who cares if you don't appreciate me "raining on your parade and all..." He was kind of funny... So for this question, we were supposed to analyze the changing metaphors this dude used for his writing process, talk about what it meant and all...
question 4... aye, there's the rub. We had a list of literature to choose from. And we had to choose two to support this argument that the significance of any given piece of literature is heavily dependent upon its historical context... Trouble was, I didn't know or remember any of the stories listed! Goody-goody Amy Tan's "Joy Luck Club" was on the list, as was Hawthorne's "Scarlet Letter." Also, "Grapes of Wrath." Guess what? I NEVER READ THEM. But I BSed the best I could... With information gleaned from SECTION I of the test (oh clever clever), I was able to figure out bits and pieces of Hawthorne's book... And, oh yeah, I saw "Joy Luck Club" (chick-flick time with Lynn)... Something about Chinese American second generation existential angst...
Needless to say, question 4 was DA BOMB. And I mean that in the worst possible sense. My mind, by that time, was fried. Not up to its usual nimble BSing potential... I think I repeated the same sentence over and over when discussing "specifics of the texts." What a joke. Well, true to form, at least my beginning and ending was pretty decent.
...well, great to be back.
No comments:
Post a Comment