Melissa MaceroENGL 611

Alex MuellerMay 14, 2013

Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!: The Difference between History and Historicity

Unit Rationale

This 10-lesson unit is constructed as part of a larger senior capstone course for

undergraduate English majors. This unit will focus on the larger question of historicity, or an

individual’s ability to actively engage with history. More specifically, I would like to take a look

at two aspects of history itself: (1) its construction: is it objectively or subjectively constructed?

and (2) its stability: can history change over time? Subsequently we will examine how Absalom,

Absalom! could be considered exemplary of what Fredric Jameson describes in The Political

Unconscious as the “historicist perspective,” in which “readings of the past are vitally dependent

on . . . experience[s] of the present” (11). To achieve this aim, we will read one primary text:

William Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom! and two secondary sources: Walter Benn Michaels’

essay, “Absalom, Absalom!: The Difference between White Men and White Men” and the first

chapter of Georg Lukács’ The Historical Novel.

This unit will begin with the primary source of Faulkner’s novel. We will discuss the text

at great length, focusing primarily on the form of the novel—in particular its experimental

nature, the novel’s treatment of the relationship between the past and the present, and the novel’s

commentary on the concept of historicity. Due to its multiplicity of narrators and the timeframe

that they span, both the reader and the characters themselves should be unable to actively

experience the past. And yet, Quentin and Shreve drag the reader back in time and down to the

deep South in search of this ability. Are they successful? Does the reader emerge from the book

with a complete picture of the Sutpen family’s legacy? Certainly not. However, there is “value,”

1

in Sheridan Blau’s sense, to the state of confusion in which the novel leaves its reader. Blau

states in The Literature Workshop, “any reading is valuable insofar as it is a product of a

student’s own engaged and mindful act and leads to subsequent readings and further reflection

on text in a way that might yield a more adequate or even a confirming reading” (198). In other

words, the value of reading and interpreting—even if the interpretation is “[in]adequate”—is the

act of “engaging” with the text in a critical and focused way, a way that raises questions that may

not be resolved on the first read through or even the second (or at all), but drive the student to

continue to search for a possible resolution.

A related and more specific value to engaging with a novel like Absalom, Absalom! is

that it hones students “performative literacy skills” (Blau 210). In particular, Three of the seven

traits of performative literacy can be shaped and toned using this novel: (1) “willingness to

suspend closure,” (2) “tolerance for failure” and (3) “tolerance for ambiguity, paradox, and

uncertainty” (211). Faulkner’s writing is notoriously challenging and almost never offers a tidy

resolution to a narrative. Therefore, students will not only have to “suspend closure” while

reading the novel, but once they have finished it as well. This is not to say that we will simply

throw our hands n the air and give up. Instead, we will use the difficulty of Absalom, Absalom!

to highlight the fact that there is no one “right answer” when it comes to literary interpretation

and thus empower students to make claims of their own. Equally important in this endeavor to

empower students’ sense of interpretive authority is building a “tolerance” for “failure” and

“ambiguity, paradox, and uncertainty.” I expect most students to be confused by a text whose

first sentence is over 120 words long and subsequent sentences go on for far longer. In fact, I not

only expect this confusion, but also encourage it. One cannot not be confused reading a text that

2

jumps between narrators, times, locations, families, and countries without much warning, explicit

reasoning, or formal markers.

In short, I will expect my students to read Absalom, Absalom! “immersively” as

described by Cristina Bruns in Why Literature?. According to Bruns, “the reader must allow

himself to become immersed in the text, to let go temporarily of a sense of himself as distinct as

he surrenders himself to the experience the text provokes” (4). Reading Faulkner, I would argue,

is more of an “experience” than reading a realist novel, in that (and this is true of most modernist

novels) the fragmentation of the traditional narrative structure simultaneously pulls the reader

into the narrative while casting her out. She is eager to know what has happened, is happening,

and will happen, but is also being jerked in and out of the narrative by a deepening sense of

confusion. However, in order to offer my students a tether-cord of sorts, I have focused this unit

on the novels commentary about the nature of history.

According to Marxists.org, “the Marxist study of history seeks both to elucidate the

conditions, and first and foremost the material conditions under which historical struggles are

fought, and then to identify the agents who make history.” Thus, introducing Marxist literary

theory to our discussion of Absalom, Absalom! will not only help to focus our discussion of the

novel, but will also introduce undergraduate students to the realm of literary theory. To that end,

we will also read the first chapter of Georg Lukács’ The Historical Novel. As this class is

focused on literature and is geared towards undergraduates who will most likely have little to no

theoretical foundation, I will not explicitly explain Marxist literary theory in depth. Instead, we

will discuss theoretical texts as “theorizing,” as a “discursive practice” (101), as advocated by

David Shumway in his essay, “Integrating Theory in the Curriculum as Theorizing—A

Postdisciplinary Practice.” According to Shumway, students should be asked to “do theory in the

3

classroom,” as opposed to “merely . . . learning theories” (102). To rephrase, students will be

asked to put these texts into dialogue with one another, rather than apply the theory to the

literature. This is not to say that there is no value in applying theory to literature and, in fact, the

culminating debate of this unit will be a form of application. However, my intention is that by

conducting an “immersive reading” of Lukács’ text, the students will not treat The Historical

Novel as a mere rubric.

This unit, as well as the class in general, will be largely discussion-based, though I will

often ask the students to break into groups and/or undertake other activities with the texts aside

from discussion. Such activities will include: constructing a family tree of the Sutpen family,

outlining the chronology of the novel (without consulting the one in the back of the book),

engaging in an exercise in historicity, reverse outlining scholarly criticism, and ultimately a

debate over whether or not Faulkner’s novel could be considered a “historical novel” by Lukács’

standards. Subsequently, because this is a capstone course, the main objective will be to have the

students complete a seminar, or 15-20 page, paper, in which they will construct a critical

argument about one of the primary texts the course would consider. This paper would also

include numerous secondary sources, most of which will have to be located by the student

through outside research. To give the students some strategies for approaching critical secondary

sources, I will require students to compose an annotated bibliography entry for each secondary

source we read throughout the semester. I will also have students construct a thesis driven

argument with three supporting passages for each of the primary texts we read, so that when the

time to decide on a topic for the seminar paper arrives, students will have numerous theses

already developed that they can choose from, modify, or completely change. In terms of this

unit, then, we will read Walter Benn Michaels’ essay, “Absalom, Absalom!: The Difference

4

between White Men and White Men” after the students have peer-workshopped their thesis

statements. We will “reverse outline” this source to analyze how a scholarly article can be

constructed.

I have structured the actual trajectory of the unit a bit differently than I have discussed it

here in that we will first read Faulkner’s novel, then Michaels’ article, and finally Lukács’ text. I

structured the unit this way to allow the students to refer to Michaels’ argument when

constructing their own for the concluding debate surrounding whether or not Faulkner’s novel

can be considered a Lukácsian “historical novel. ” The primary objectives I hope to achieve by

paring these secondary sources with Absalom, Absalom! are (1) introduce the students to a more

theoretical text (Lukács) than they may have engaged with previously in their studies; (2) show

them how to not simply apply the theory presented to the text, but to put the theoretical and

literary texts into dialogue with one another—to see how they complement or complicate each

other; and (3) to ask them to think critically about both a critical reading of the novel (Michaels)

and a related theoretical source (Lukács), so that they may ultimately craft their own

interpretation of the novel.

5

Lesson 11:Introduction to Absalom, Absalom!

Duration:

50-minute class. However, many of the themes, topics, and approaches addressed in this

class will carry over into the other classes in which we discuss the novel. Subsequently, the mini-

presentations could carry over into the beginning of the next class.

Objectives:

To give students a brief portrait of William Faulkner as an author.

To help students situate this novel in the overarching literary timeline of the class.

To guide students through the complicate prose of Absalom, Absalom!

Materials:

Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!

Chalkboard

Overview:

William Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom! is not only considered one of the best novels in

American literature, but also one of the toughest to get through. Diane Roberts in the “Furious

Fiction” discussion of the novel2 classifies Faulkner’s text as one of the “top three books of

American literature,” while reminding viewers that it is “not a beach read.” Thus, I expect the

students to be highly confused by the novel and subsequently expect that the majority of this

class will be dedicated to beginning to unravel this confusion. This lesson serves, then, to work

on a few aspects of “performative literacy,” as described by Blau: (1) “willingness to suspend

closure,” (2) “tolerance for failure” and (3) “tolerance for ambiguity, paradox, and uncertainty”

1 For this lesson and all subsequent lessons, I will assume that there are 15 students in this class and that all are present on each day to simplify any math that is involved with separating the students into groups.

2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVT-oleU4NA

6

(210-211). I will also attempt to gauge if the pace I have set up for us in terms of reading the

novel should be modified, keeping in mind, of course, that the reading is frontloaded (see

“Reading Schedule” page 34) specifically to force them to work through their confusion on their

own. Therefore, their task in preparation for this class is to write down at least three questions

about the first 100 pages or so of Absalom, Absalom!.

Procedure:

1.) Ask students for their initial impressions about the novel, using low-stakes questions

such as: “What do you guys think?” or “How does this book compare to the others we

have read?”

2.) Give a brief (no more than two minutes) biographical sketch of William Faulkner,

culminating with the publication of Absalom, Absalom! in 1936.

3.) Move into more pointed questions that address the confusion that students have:

- Who is confused?

- What are you confused about, specifically?

- Did anyone stop reading? Be honest. Why?

- Are you as confused now as when you started the novel?

- What questions did you write down for today?

4.) During the discussion that ensues, write down specific questions that students have on

the board with numbers next to them. (Ideally stop at five questions.)

5.) Have the students count off by five. (Make sure there is about 20-25 minutes left for

the group activity)

6.) Separate the students into five separate groups positioned around the classroom.

7

7.) Assign each group one of the questions on the board, using the following prompt: In

the next ten minutes, please attempt to answer this question to the best of your

abilities as a group. Use at least one piece of textual evidence to support your answer.

8.) Monitor the progress of each group and answer any clarifying questions they may

have. (It may also be appropriate to offer some words of encouragement if students

seem hesitant about their prospective answers.)

9.) After ten minutes ask each group to present their answer and evidence to the class.

10.) Be aware of time and shape the discussion of each answer to account for how

much time is left. The discussion may (and probably will) carry over into the first ten

minutes or so of the next class.

Questions for Further Discussion:

What strategies will you use/develop to detangle the narrative? What tools do you think

would be helpful as you continue to read?

Homework:

Students will be asked to reconsider what they have read so far in the novel and to note

any unresolved questions. They will also be expected to have read up to and including page 140

(end of chapter 5) in Absalom, Absalom!

Assessment:

I will primarily uses the class discussion to assess how the class is adjusting to the

difficulty of Faulkner’s prose. If the discussion does not go very well—in that only one or two

students are carrying the entire conversation or the conversation occurs in fits and starts—then I

would collect the questions they were expected to write down as a reading check.

8

Lesson 2:Detangling Faulkner

Duration:

50-minute class

Objectives:

To continue discussing the novel.

To begin filling out the two handouts (“Family Tree” and “Timeline of Absalom,

Absalom!”)

To help students develop active reading strategies to aid in the process of reading and

understanding difficult texts.

Materials:

Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!

Family Tree handout (see page 35)

Timeline handout (see page 36)

Chalkboard

Overview:

I have provided two supplementary handouts to help students structure the rest of their

reading: (1) “Sutpen Family Tree” and (2) “Timeline of Absalom, Absalom!”. The goal of this

specific class is to explain these handouts and the rationale behind them to the students and begin

to fill them out together as a class.

Procedure:

1.) Check-in with the students:

- How’s the reading going?

- Are you more or less confused than last class?

9

2.) Ask students to list all the characters we have met so far in the novel. Write this list

on the board.

3.) Hand around the “Sutpen Family Tree”.

4.) Ask students how the characters listed on the board are related to Thomas Sutpen and,

therefore, what box they should inhabit and what type of connection they have to him

and their closest relatives.

5.) Ask students to list a few of the major events that have happened so far in the novel.

Write a quick word or two about each of these on the board.

6.) Hand around the “Timeline of Absalom, Absalom!”.

7.) Ask students to number the events on the board in terms of which events occur first

(in terms of years, not within the novel), second, third, etc.

8.) Have students transfer the timeline we have started on the board onto the timeline

handout.

Questions for Further Discussion:

What other supplementary materials would aid your reading process? What does

Faulkner achieve (aside from confusion) by telling the story this way?

Homework:

Read up to page 175 (end of chapter 6). Note any new characters, relationships between

characters, and events on your handouts.

Assessment:

The ease with which students name the characters and describe the events will be a great

indicator of how many people have been keeping up with (and at least processing some of) the

reading.

10

Lesson 3:Form and Faulkner

Duration:

50-minute class

Objectives:

To introduce students to the genre of modernism and in particular the emphasis it

places on the relationship between form and content.

To analyze the formal aspects of Faulkner’s novel.

To understand how Faulkner’s use of form is exemplary of modernist aesthetics.

Materials:

Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!

“Characteristics of Modernism” handout3 (separate pdf file on ENGL 611 Wiki page)

Overview:

Due to the challenging nature of Faulkner’s text, it is important for students to understand

why Faulkner wrote this text as he did and what he was hoping to achieve by doing so. We will

use the handy handout on Modernism that I located through the Northern Valley Regional High

School of Demarest, NJ to guide our discussion of the basic characteristics of modernism as a

literary movement. We will also add to this list the formal devices we see at work in Faulkner’s

text and discuss how they interact with those already listed. To achieve this end, the students will

be asked to “notice what they notice” (Blau 36) about two specific passages in the reading they

had to complete for this class period: pp. 141-143 and pp. 167-169.

Procedure:

3 This handout was taken from the Northern Valley Regional High school website: https://fcserver.nvnet.org/~cardino/FOV1-00066EA6/S059E2235.3/Modernism.pdf

11

1.) Check- in with students about their progression through the reading.

2.) Pass around the “Characteristics of Modernism” handout.

3.) Go through the handout with the class, asking them to suggest passages from

Absalom, Absalom! to use as examples of some of the characteristics listed.

4.) Ask students to turn to the beginning of Chapter 6 (141).

5.) Ask for two readers. Instruct one to read the normal typeface and the other to only

read italics.

6.) Read from page 141 to page 143 aloud.

7.) Ask the students: What do you notice about this passage? What sticks out to you

about it? It can be anything at all...

8.) List the aspects they notice on the board.

9.) Ask the students to turn to page 167 (“So he showed Judith the license…”)

10.) Repeat steps 5 through 8 for this passage. [only stop on page 169 (“…and now

retuned to it”)]

11.) Add the formal aspects the students noticed to the handout.

Questions for Further Discussion:

Monitor Faulkner’s use of italics. What do they signify? Is this consistent? How do you

know?

Homework:

Read through page 234 (end of chapter 7) in Absalom, Absalom! Pay particular attention

to the description of Sutpen’s West Virginia history and note two passages in your reading that

use italics in different ways.

Assessment:

12

Students will be assessed via their active participation in the class. This is a rather low-

stakes assignment, in that I am only asking them to notice what is on the page in front of them.

Thus, this could be an easier way for a shy or insecure student to jump into class discussion.

13

Lesson 4:Faulkner and Hegel and Godden, Oh My!

Duration:

50-minute class

Objectives:

To challenge students with a snippet from an extremely dense theoretical text.

To demonstrate the difference between simply applying a theoretical text to a

literary text and putting these two texts into dialogue.

Materials:

Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!

Excerpt from Hegel’s Phenomenology of the Spirit (separate pdf file on ENGL 611 Wiki

page)

Chalkboard

Overview:

Richard Godden’s “Absalom. Absalom!, Haiti and Labor History: Reading Unreadable

Revolutions” asserts that one way to better understand the formative scene in Sutpen’s history

when he learns the “difference between white men and white men” through an interaction with a

“balloon face nigger” is by placing it into a conversation with Hegel’s Master/Slave dialectic. He

traces how Sutpen fluctuates between a “master” and a “slave” in this section and how this

complements or complicates Hegel’s theory. Godden’s essay takes numerous sharp turns in

different (often deeply theoretical) directions and so I opted not to assign it as part of the course

reading. However, I think that this conversation between Faulkner and Hegel is one that is worth

having and would serve as excellent preparation for our later debate between Faulkner and

Lukács. Furthermore, the Master/Slave dialectic is an extremely beneficial interpretive tool for

14

students to add to their hermeneutic toolbox. Thus, I plan to implicitly—as opposed to explicitly

as assigned reading or excerpted in a handout—include aspects of his argument into this lesson

by having the students take a stab at making some of these connections themselves. To that end,

I will be handing around a (relatively long) excerpt from Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit.

Procedure:

1.) Ask students to describe the West Virginia territory:

- Physical features

- Social system

- Economic system

2.) Discuss what happens to Sutpen in this location and how it shapes the man he

becomes.

3.) Hand out the excerpt from Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit.

4.) Direct students’ attention to point number 189.

5.) Read the majority of the excerpt aloud, stopping frequently to rephrase or ask the

students to rephrase what has just been read.

6.) With the students, paraphrase the master/slave dialectic.

7.) Once the students have a pretty solid grasp of what this dialectic is, ask them how we

might be able to relate this concept to the scene between Sutpen and “Pettibone’s

nigger”. (More leading questions may be required to walk students through the

connecting process).

Questions for Further Discussion:

Could we put Hegel’s Master/Slave Dialectic into conversation with any of the other

texts we have read so far this semester?

15

Homework:

Read through page 287 (end of chapter 8) of Absalom, Absalom!.

Assessment:

Due to the level of difficulty of Hegel’s text, my only basis for assessment will be if the

students at least attempted to engage with the text, even if that engagement takes the form of

utter confusion.

16

Lesson 5:Close Reading Faulkner

Duration:

50-minute class

Objectives:

To help students select and analyze passages for close reading from an extended

work of fiction.

To provide students with the opportunity to model a close reading of a passage to

the entire class.

To invite students to “immerse” themselves into the language of Faulkner’s

narrative.

To have students think critically about each other’s analysis of passages.

Materials:

Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!

“Close Reading Nomination” assignment (see page 37)

Chalkboard

Overview:

I will have students break into five groups of three and select one passage to propose to

the class as the “best” passage for a close reading. This prompt, of course, begs the questions:

what characterizes the “best” passage for a close reading and, even more broadly, what

constitutes a “good” passage for a close reading. This will not be the class’s first foray into close

reading, and as they are all senior (or very advanced junior) English majors, they should have

tackled close readings in previous classes as well. Thus, adding a little friendly competition

17

(there will be a vote at the end of class) seems like a useful way to have them think about the

types of things that make a successful close reading as well as the uses the close reading can

have.

Procedure:

1.) Check-in with students:

- Are there any questions that have come up with regards to your reading?

2.) Ask students to identify some of the themes of Absalom. Absalom!. Write the list on

the board.

3.) Have the students count off by five.

4.) Handout the “Close Reading Nomination” assignment.

5.) Have the students break off into their respective groups and spread out around the

classroom.

6.) Allow 10 – 15 minutes for the students to complete steps 1 and 2. Touch base with

each of the groups during this time to make sure that there are no duplicate passages

and that all of the groups understand the task at hand and are staying on point.

7.) Bring the groups back together as a whole class.

8.) Have each of the groups pitch their passage to the class. After each pitch allow/ask

for discussion about the claims being raised in relation to each passage.

9.) Vote on which passage is the best and then discuss why.

Questions for Further Discussion:

What are some other larger claims that can be made about the novel? What other themes

could you explore? Are there any recurring images or symbols?

18

Homework:

Finish Absalom, Absalom!

Assessment:

The discussion that takes place both with in the individual groups and the class as whole

will serve as my main avenue of assessment.

19

Lesson 6:Historicity, or the Problem of Perspective

Duration:

50-minute class

Objectives:

To conclude our discussion of Absalom, Absalom!

To help students feel comfortable with the fact that many questions about this novel will

never be answered and that what, exactly, happened in the Sutpen drama will never be

known for certain both in terms of the criticism surrounding the novel and inside the

narrative structure itself.

To solidify the concept of “historicity” for the students.

Materials:

Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!

“Historicity Drama” handout (see page 38)

Chalkboard

Overview:

The activity of this lesson will serve two primary purposes: (1) to demonstrate what,

exactly, historicity looks like by using a very mundane and quotidian example and (2) to provide

students with a little break before moving on to their own arguments about the text, Walter Benn

Michaels’ arguments about the text, and a theoretical text by Lukács. I am hoping that during the

meta-discussion at the end of class the students will b able to draw parallels between their

experiences in the activity and the experience of characters like Rosa Coldfield and Quentin

Compson, as well as the overall experience of reading a text that is filtered through many

different narrators, many of whom are removed from the “present” of the action of the Sutpen

20

story. Furthermore, I am specifically not giving the students anything to work on while they wait

in the hallway to increase both confusion and suspense, which are two major facets of Faulkner’s

narrative strategies.

Procedure:

1.) Brief general discussion

2.) Ask the students to define “historicity” and write their definition on the board.

3.) Have the students count off by three.

4.) Ask all of the ones and the twos to leave the room and wait (quietly) in the hallway.

5.) Handout the “Historicity Drama”

6.) Have the students select/ assign them roles.

7.) Give them no more than 2 minutes to construct their respective characters.

8.) Start “dinner”.

9.) Allow the conversation to go on for about 10 minutes.

10.) Instruct the students to remain in their respective characters, but not to continue

the conversation when the other group comes back in.

11.) Invite the twos back into the classroom.

12.) Instruct the threes (the group that remained) to relay to the twos (the group that

just re-entered) what happened during their “dinner”.

13.) Allow about five minutes for this re-telling. DO NOT CONTRIBUTE.

14.) Invite the ones (the group still in the hall) to come back into the classroom.

15.) Instruct the twos (the group that was just told what happened) to tell the ones (the

group that just came back in) what happened at the “dinner”. Instruct the threes (the

group who actually had “dinner”) to NOT TALK AT ALL.

21

16.) Allow about five minutes for this re-re-telling.

17.) Ask the ones: “So, what exactly happened at this dinner?”

18.) Conduct a meta-discussion about the exercise, paying particular attention to how

the different group interacted with the events of the “dinner” and how these events

changed throughout the course of the re-tellings. Then, ask the students how their

experiences relate to the experience of reading Absalom, Absalom!. What role(s) do

each of the three groups from class play within the novel? Which group is closest to

the Sutpens, the Compsons, the reader? How so?

Questions for Further Discussion:

What the history that Faulkner wants the reader to engage with? Is it simply Sutpen’s

failed “design” or it is something larger? Why does he write about the time surrounding the Civil

War in 1936?

Homework:

Construct and analytical argument about Faulkner’s novel with the following

components:

- A thesis statement

- Three supporting pieces of evidence from Absalom, Absalom!

Be prepared to discuss this argument with a fellow student in class tomorrow.

Assessment:

The meta-discussion at the end will serve as the basis of my assessment of both the

effectiveness of the activity and the students’ comprehension of both the concept of historicity as

well as how this activity related to the novel writ large.

22

Lesson 7:Thesis Workshop

Duration:

50-minute class

Objectives:

To have students take a step back from the details of the novel and construct an analytical

argument about the work.

To have students construct a thesis and selective supporting evidence for that thesis.

To prepare students for the final seminar paper.

To have the students step into the role of evaluator and review each other’s work.

Materials:

Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!

“Thesis Workshop” worksheet (see page 39-40)

Overview:

(Blau—teaching vs. learning)

Procedure:

1.) Make sure everyone has one-page paper proposal, including thesis and evidence to be

workshopped.

2.) Separate students into pairs.

In each pair,

3.) The first student “presents” his/her paper to the second.

4.) The second student offers verbal commentary.

23

5.) The second student fills out the “Reviewer” side of the “Thesis Workshop”

worksheet. (Time management is crucial to this exercise, so make sure they start

filling in the sheet with about 25-30 minutes left in the class and the second presenter

has started presenting with NO LESS than 20 minutes left.)

6.) The second student “presents” his/her paper to the first student.

7.) The first student offers verbal commentary.

8.) The first student fills out the “Reviewer” side of the “Thesis Workshop” worksheet.

Questions for Further Discussion:

Has your thesis or evidence changed through this exercise? How did it feel to be offering

suggestions and critiques to your partner? What was the most striking aspect (either positive or

negative) of this exercise? In short, how helpful was this workshop?

Homework:

All students are expected to fill out the “Author” side of the “Thesis Workshop”

worksheet and be ready to discuss their experience with the exercise for the next class. In

addition, they are to read Walter Benn Michaels’ article, “Absalom, Absalom!: The Difference

Between White Men and White Men,” which will be emailed to them as a pdf and compose an

annotated bibliography entry, as outlined on the “Annotated Bibliography Entry” handout (see

page 41).

Assessment:

I will check in with each pair throughout the class to see how the discussion is

progressing. I will also be collecting this worksheet during the next class, which will be the

formal assessment of the students’ engagement with this assignment.

24

Lesson 8:Walter Benn Michaels: Teacher, Scholar, and… Model?

Duration:

50-minute class

Objectives:

To engage with a critical source about a literary text.

To position their own claims on a novel in relation to that of another critic.

Materials:

Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!

Michaels’ “Absalom, Absalom!: The Difference Between White Men and White Men”

“Reverse Outlining” handout (see page 42)

Chalkboard

Overview:

Now that students have constructed and workshopped their own claims about the novel,

we will turn to an example of a published, well-respected article of criticism about the novel. The

essay will serve to model the structure and aim of their seminar paper, though it will be made

quite clear that I am in no way expecting them to write like Walter Benn Michaels—in terms of

style, content, level of engagement with scholarly texts, etc. Instead, reading this essay and

discussing it in class will serve to introduce students to he scholarly conversation that I will be

asking them to enter into with their seminar papers at the end of the semester. Blau’s warns, “if

students were to read any of the presumed models for what they are being asked to write, they

would find the gap between what they had thought they were doing and what is being presented

as their model so wide as to be unbridgeable, either condemning them to failure in their writing

or rendering the model irrelevant” (174). However, this “unbridgeable gap” seems to arise more

25

from how the article coupled with the actual writing assignment is presented to the students than

from anything intrinsically unnerving about scholarly articles.

There are, of course, better articles to use as models than others and this is one of the

reasons that I decided to switch out Godden’s essay for the Michaels’. Michaels’ style is more

conversational, making his prose a more accessible and enjoyable read for students than an essay

like Godden’s that navigates deep and complex theoretical issues into his analysis of Faulkner’s

text. Subsequently, by reverse outlining Michaels’ text, we will be looking at his essay with a

critical eye, asking what the main topic of each paragraph is and how that topic relates to claims

of the essay writ large.

Procedure:

1.) Collect the completed “Thesis Workshop” handouts from last class.

2.) Ask a few low-stakes, warm up questions about Michaels’ article:

- Did you enjoy the Michaels’ article?

- Which did you like reading more this or Hegel? Why?

3.) Move into more argument-based questions:

- What is the “difference between white men and white men” for Michaels?

- What is the significance of that difference in terms of both the novel as a

whole and the novel’s commentary on the larger ideas of society, history,

nation, etc.?

4.) If the discussion lags or only a few people are participating, call on some students to

share their respective annotations with the class.

5.) Once there is a general sense of the over-arching argument of Michaels’ essay, hand

out the “Reverse Outlining” assignment.

26

6.) Give the students about 10 minutes to begin reverse outlining Michaels’ essay.

7.) Regroup into whole-class discussion and construct an outline (on the chalkboard) of

as many pages of Michael’s essay as time will permit.

8.) Stop outlining about 5 minutes before the end of class to ask a few meta-analysis

questions about this process:

- Is reverse outlining helpful in parsing out the steps Michaels takes to present

his argument?

- Why do you think this would be a beneficial revising technique for your own

essays?

Questions for Further Discussion:

How does Michaels’ claims relate to your own? Does it complicate or complement it? If

you choose to write about Faulkner’s novel for your seminar paper, do you think you will

include Michaels’ essay as a secondary source? Why or why not?

Homework:

Read the first chapter of Lukács’ The Historical Novel. Pay particular attention to how he

characterizes the writing of Sir Walter Scott.

Assessment:

I will collect the student’s annotated bibliographies to check (1) that it is completed, (2)

that they attempted to follow the template provided, and (3) the overall comprehension of the

source to see if there is a common misreading that should be addressed next class.

27

Lessons 9 & 10:Lukács

Duration:

Two 50-minute classes.

Objectives:

To engage with a theoretical text.

To parse Lukács’ prose and put his over-arching argument, as well as the sub-arguments

he uses to construct that argument into more accessible language.

To begin to put that theoretical text into dialogue with both a primary literary source (i.e.,

Absalom, Absalom!) and a secondary critical source (i.e., “Absalom, Absalom!: The

Difference Between White Men and White Men”).

Materials:

Lukács’ The Historical Novel (book or pdf of chapter 1)

“Lukács’ The Historical Novel” handout (see page 43)

Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!

“The Great Debate: Is Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom! a Lukácsian Historical Novel?”

handout (see page 44)

Chalkboard

Overview:

I have grouped these two lessons together because I intend to literally split the same

discussion over two class periods. I will expect the students to have read the entirety of the first

chapter of Lukács’ The Historical Novel by the first day of our discussion, but will not expect

them to have completed their annotated bibliography entry until after the first half of the

discussion and before the second to give everyone a chance to not only read the text multiple

28

times but also to discuss the text before attempting to concisely summarize it. I have also

provided a list of passages from chapter one that I want to e sure to discuss in class. This is in no

way an exhaustive list and will, therefore, not be presented as such. In fact, I will ask the students

to add passages that they noted as important to this list. Finally, by spreading our discussion over

two days, it allows us to dedicate more time at the end of the second class period to preparing for

the debate of the following lesson.

Procedure:

1.) Brief biographical sketch of Lukács (no more than 2 -3 minutes).

2.) Ask for students initial reactions to the text:

- What was your experience reading the text?

- Was it more or less accessible than Michaels? Than Hegel or Faulkner?

3.) Handout the “Lukács’ The Historical Novel” list of important quotes.

4.) Separate the students into five groups of three.

5.) Assign each group one quote from the list. Ask them to:

- Rephrase the passage in their own words.

- Preform a close reading of that passage, noting its significance to Luckás’

argument and how it relates to Faulkner’s text.

- Select a different passage from the text (that is NOT on the list) and repeat the

first two steps.

6.) Regroup and ask the groups to share their discussion of the given quote and identify

their new quote.

7.) Hand out the “The Great Debate: Is Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom! a Lukácsian

Historical Novel?” assignment sheet.

29

8.) Split the class into two teams: Team Yay! and Team Nay! by having the class count

off by two. The ones are Team Yay and the twos are Team Nay (due to the uneven

number of students in the class, Team Yay will have eight students and Team Nay

will have seven).

9.) Give students 10-15 minutes to complete the first portion of the assignment.

Questions for Further Discussion:

What remaining questions do you have about Lukács’ text? Are there any aspects of his

argument that are still unclear? If so, what aspect? Can we consider Faulkner’s novel a

“historical novel” by Lukács’ standards?

Homework:

In between Class 1 and Class 2: re-read Chapter One of Lukács’ text and complete the

annotated bibliography entry for this source.

In preparation for Lesson 11: Each student is to select one of the passages chosen in their

respective group to perform a in groups a 2-3 page close reading of that scene with their over-

arching claim (i.e., Faulkner’s text is or is not a “historical novel” by Lukács’ standards) in mind.

Assessment:

I will collect their annotated bibliography entries at the start of the second day of this

lesson and will therefore use that to check: (1) that it is completed, (2) that they attempted to

follow the template provided, and (3) the overall comprehension of the source to see if there is a

common misreading that should be addressed next class.

30

Lesson 11:The Great Debate

Duration:

50-minute class, although it could easily extend into the first part of a second class

depending on the progress of the discussion.

Objectives:

To have the students debate, in a formal debate setting, whether or not Faulkner’s novel,

Absalom, Absalom!, could be considered a “historical novel” by Lukács’ standards.

To have students actively engage with both a theoretical and a literary text by putting

them into dialogue with one another.

Materials:

William Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!

Georg Lukács’ The Historical Novel

“Debate Rubric” (see page 45)

Overview:

Students will not only actively engage with the texts we have been examining in this unit,

but also put these texts into conversation with one another. As Shumway states, “classes should

be places where theory is done, not merely absorbed” (101). Thus, I do not want students to

simply apply Lukács’ theory on the “historical novel” to Faulkner’s text. Instead I want them to

examine how Lukács’ text complicates the already fraught relationship Absalom, Absalom! has

with the idea of historicity and how the past manifests itself in the present. While this is a debate

and the teams are, therefore, arguing a case that seems to be a strict application (Is Faulkner’s

text a Lukácsian historical novel or isn’t it?), my hope is that through this first—and rather

31

expected in that we will have been dancing around this question for two class periods while we

dissect Lukács’ text—move of application, the students will discover new strengths and

weaknesses of each of the texts and new ways to interrogate how these texts relate to one

another.

Procedure:

1.) Team Yay! gives a 10-minute presentation of their position and three pieces of textual

evidence for it.

2.) Team Nay! gives a 10-minute presentation of their position and three pieces of textual

evidence for it.

3.) 5-minute discussion period for the teams to construct their respective rebuttals.

4.) Team Yay! presents a 5-minute rebuttal, using one subsequent piece of textual

evidence, to team two’s claims.

5.) Team Nay! presents a 5-minute rebuttal, using one subsequent piece of textual

evidence, of team one’s claims.

6.) Use the remainder of the time for class discussion and to declare a “winner” of the

debate4.

Questions for Further Discussion:

Are you satisfied with the outcome of the debate? Why or why not? What do you think

the strongest parts of each side’s presentations were? How about the weakest?

Homework:

4 This procedure was adapted from those outlined here: http://www.niu.edu/facdev/resources/guide/strategies/classroom_debates.pdf (This was accessed on March 11, 2013. However the link seems to not be working any longer. Here is the link to the page directly preceding that one: http://www.niu.edu/facdev/resources/guide/index.shtml#strategies)

32

Revise your 2-3 page close reading of one of the passages cited today based off of our

discussion today. Write a one-paragraph analysis of how your reading changed and why you

think it changed the way it did. Staple all three assignments (original draft, revised draft, and

meta-analysis) together and hand them in next class.

Assessment:

Students’ participation in the debate will be noted and each team will be scored via the

“Debate Rubric,” but the primary mode of assessment will be via the close reading assignment

that they will be handing in at the beginning of the next class. In particular, I will pay close

attention to meta-analysis portion of their assignment to (1) gage the useful of the debate

exercise for my own reference when constructing future courses and (2) monitor how students

are thinking about their own writing and more importantly their writing process.

33

READING SCHEDULE(All readings and assignments should be completed by the date they are listed below.)

WEEK 714 Oct. – 18 Oct.

M: NO CLASS (Columbus Day)

W: Absalom, Absalom! pp. 3 – 107

F: Absalom, Absalom! pp. 108 – 140

WEEK 8 21 Oct. – 25 Oct.

M: Absalom, Absalom! pp. 141 – 175

W: Absalom, Absalom! pp. 176 – 234

F: Absalom, Absalom! pp. 235 – 287

WEEK 9 28 Oct. – 1 Nov.

M: Absalom, Absalom! pp. 288 – 303

W: Thesis Workshop

F: Walter Benn Michaels, “Absalom, Absalom!: The Difference Between White Men and White Men” (pdf); Annotated Bibliography Entry

WEEK 104 Nov. – 8 Nov.

M: Lukács, The Historical Novel, Chapter 1

W: Lukács, The Historical Novel, Chapter 1; Annotated Bibliography Entry

F: Debate

34

Sutpen family tree

Thomas Sutpen

Legend:Solid double line = marriageDotted line = sexual relationshipSolid single line = siblings

35

TIMELINE OF ABSALOM, ABSALOM!

36

CLOSE READING NOMINATIONS

Step 1: Choose one passage—no more than a sentence—from William Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom! to propose to the class as the best passage for a close reading.

Step 2: Write your passage (with page number) on the board.

Step 3: Briefly tell us why this passage is significant and provide two claims that it could be used to support.

37

HISTORICITY DRAMA(Group 3)

The Scene: Family having dinner on Thanksgiving.

The Characters: Parent 1 – AuthoritativeParent 2 – Affectionate Child 1 – College Student Child 2 – Working ProfessionalChild 3 – Artist

The Task:1.) Take a minute or two to construct a vague idea of who your character is using the one

or two word characterization given. Focus primarily on three things: (1) their name, (2) their profession/major/over-arching goal in life, and (3) their favorite and least favorite person in the family.

2.) Position yourselves around an imaginary dinner table using the desks. 3.) Have “Thanksgiving dinner” with your “family”. In other words, pretend you are an

actual family getting together for a holiday dinner. What do you talk about? What is the dynamic of the conversation? What about the tone? Or the topic(s)?

38

THESIS WORKSHOP

Author: Reviewer:

Reviewer, please restate the following in your own words:

(I) The claim:

(II) The evidence (briefly summarize the scenes/language the author will focus on) and

how each piece supports the claim:

1.)

2.)

3.)

(III) What other aspects of the novel should the author consider?

(IV) Are you convinced?

39

40

THESIS WORKSHOP

Author, please write a brief response (use only the space below) to (1) your reviewer’s representation of your prosed claim and evidence and (2) your reviewer’s assessment:

41

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY ENTRIES

For every secondary source we read this semester—these will include critical and theoretical texts—please write an annotated bibliography entry.

This should include:(1) A proper MLA-format citation of this source.(2) A summary of the main argument of this source.

- What is the author’s claim?- What type of evidence does he/she use to support this claim?

(3) A brief assessment of the argument and evidence.- Are you convinced? Why or why not?- Are there any inconsistencies in the argument or evidence?

(4) A sentence or two relating it to a primary work (novel or short story) we have read so far in class. N.B. This will be more difficult for the theoretical sources.

Limit your entry to no more than 250 words. Also, please bring a copy of it to class the day we begin discussing the source (unless otherwise noted on the reading schedule).

**Be sure to save a digital copy, as we will be using these again**

Example:

Michaels, Walter Benn. “The First American.” Our America: Nativism, Modernism, and Pluralism. Durham: Duke UP, 1995. Print.

In “The First American,” Michaels argues “the first American is … the last mulatto, but instead of becoming American by being mulatto he becomes American by ceasing to be mulatto” (63). In fact, the entire concept of an American “melting pot” crumbles once “black blood” enters into the mixture (63). The concept of the mulatto vanishes because everyone must fit into one of two categories: black or white (54). Additionally, Michaels claims that Chesnutt presents a “hopeful but temporary emergence of a renewed and transformed commitment to ‘the family black and white’ of the plantation” (55). This argument would be interesting to apply to The Marrow of Tradition, especially in terms of Jane’s feelings towards the Carteret family and the Olivia/Janet relationship. Moreover, Michaels’ claims about the relationship between race and class could enrich our understanding of Captain McBane and Major Carteret: “Progressive racism” sought to shift attention away from class difference and on to racial difference to “replace the gentleman with the white man” (57). This move echoes Carteret’s sentiments that these terms “should be synonymous” (Chesnutt 73). However, McBane stands in the way of a complete merging of these two figures. His acquisition of money has certainly changed his economic status and to a degree his social status, but he is not seen as a “gentleman”. Finally, Michaels discusses the “racialization” of “offensiveness” (57), which serves as the foundation

42

for Jim Crow segregation, a topic central to Chesnutt’s novel and, in particular, the railroad scene.

43

REVERSE OUTLINING

Reverse outlining follows a two-step, repeatable process:

Step One: In the right-hand margin, write down the topic of each paragraph. Try to use as few words as possible. These notes should work as quick references for future study or in-class discussion.

Step Two:In the left-hand margin, write down how the paragraph topic advances the overall argument of the text. Again, be brief. These notes allow you to follow the logic of the essay, making it easier for you to analyze or discuss later.

Be brief. You should be able to complete each step in 5-10 words. Though, if you cannot ask yourself: What about this paragraph is making this process difficult? Are there too many ideas being presented at once? Is there a hiccup in the internal logic of the paragraph itself or the logical progression of where this paragraph fits into the argument as a whole?

Fun Fact: This is an excellent exercise to use when revising your own papers!5

5 This handout is adapted from the Owl Purdue page, “Reverse Outlining: An Exercise for Taking Notes and Revising Your Work” that can be found here: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/owlprint/689/

44

LUKÁCS’ THE HISTORICAL NOVELCHAPTER ONE: THE CLASSICAL FORM OF THE HISTORICAL NOVEL

(19) “What is lacking in the so-called historical novel before Sir Walter Scott is precisely the specifically historical, that is, derivation of the individuality of characters from the historical peculiarity of their age.”

(25) “But whatever the proportions of ‘regeneration and reaction’ in individual national movements, it is clear that these movements—real mass movements—inevitably conveyed a sense and experience of history to broad masses.”

(27) “Progress is no longer seen as an essentially unhistorical struggle between humanist reason and feudal-absolutist unreason. According to the new interpretation of reasonableness of human progress develops ever increasingly out of the inner conflict of social forces in history itself; according to this interpretation history itself is the bearer and realizer of human progress.”

(33) “The ‘hero’ of a Scott novel is always a more or less mediocre, average English gentlemen. He generally possesses a certain., though never outstanding, degree of practical intelligence, a certain moral fortitude and decency which even rises to a capacity for self-sacrifice, but which never grows into a sweeping human passion, is never the enraptured devotion to a great cause.”

(39) “For the being of the age can only appear as a broad and many-sided picture if the everyday life of the people, the joys and sorrows, crises and confusions of average human beings are portrayed.”

(42) “What matters therefore in the historical novel is not the re-telling of great historical events, but the poetic awakening of the people who figured in those events. What matters is that we should re-experience the social and human motives which led men to think, feel, and act just as they did in historical reality.”

(53) “a real historical novel, i.e. one which brings the past close to us and allows us to experience its real and true being.”

(62) “Modernization, therefore, arises of aesthetic and historical necessity, whenever this living connection between past and present is absent or only forcibly created.”

(86) “He shows that those who despite the great events in the forefront of history, go on living their normal, private and egotistic lives are really furthering the true (unconscious, unknown) development, while the consciously acting ‘heroes’ of history are ludicrous and harmful puppets.”

45

THE GREAT DEBATE: IS FAULKNER’S ABSALOM, ABSALOM! A LUKÁCSIAN HISTORICAL NOVEL?

Team Yay! Select two passages from Absalom, Absalom! and one from The Historical Novel

that support the claim that Faulkner’s novel IS a historical novel by Lukács’ classification.

Outline a ten-minute presentation using roughly this format:1.) Overview—student 12.) Passage 1—student 23.) Passage 2—student 34.) Passage 3—student 45.) Conclusion—student 5

The remaining three students will present (though the entire group will help construct) the rebuttal to Team Nay!’s case.

Team Nay! Select two passages from Absalom, Absalom! and one from The Historical Novel

that support the claim that Faulkner’s novel IS NOT a historical novel by Lukács’ classification.

Outline a ten-minute presentation using roughly this format:1.) Overview—student 12.) Passage 1—student 23.) Passage 2—student 34.) Passage 3—student 45.) Conclusion—student 5

The remaining two students will present (though the entire group will help construct) the rebuttal to Team Yay!’s case.

46

47

Found at: http://www.niu.edu/facdev/resources/guide/index.shtml # strategies

48

Works Cited

Blau, Sheridan D. The Literature Workshop: Teaching Texts and Their Readers.

Portsmouth: Heinemann, 2003. Print.

Bruns, Cristina. Why Literature?: The value of Literary Reading and What it Means for

Teaching. New York: Continuum, 2011. Print.

“Instructional Guide for University Faculty and Teaching Assistants.” Faculty Development and

Instructional Design Center Northern Illinois University. 20 Sept. 2012. Web. 10 March

2013. http://www.niu.edu/facdev/resources/guide/index.shtml#strategies

Faulkner, William. Absalom, Absalom!. 1936. New York: Vintage, 1990. Print.

“Furious Fictions: Discussing William Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!.” Furious Fictions. 27

Apr. 2012. You Tube. 6 May 2013. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVT-oleU4NA

Godden, Richard. “Absalom. Absalom!, Haiti and Labor History: Reading Unreadable

Revolutions.” ELH 61.3 (1994): 685-720. Web. 2 July 2012.

Hegel, G. W. F. Phenomenology of Spirit. Trans. A. V. Miller. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1977. Print.

Jameson, Fredric. The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act.

Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1981. Print.

Lukács, Georg. The Historical Novel. 1962. Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska Press, 1983. Print.

“History” Marxist.org Glossary of Terms. Marxists.org. n. d. Web. 13 May 2013.

Michaels, Walter Benn. “Absalom, Absalom!: The Difference Between White Men and White

Men.” Faulkner in the Twenty-First Century. Ed. Robert W. Hamblin and Ann J. Abadie.

Jackson: Univ. Press of Mississippi, 2003.

“Modernism” Northern Valley Regional High School. n. d. Web. 12 May 2013.

https://fcserver.nvnet.org/~cardino/FOV1-00066EA6/S059E2235.3/Modernism.pdf

49

“Reverse Outlining: An Exercise for Taking Notes and Revising Your Work.” OWL. Purdue

University. n. d. Web. 13 May 2013. http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/owlprint/689/

Shumway, David R. “Integrating Theory in the Curriculum as Theorizing—A Postdisciplinary

Practice.” Pedagogy Is Politics: Literary Theory and Critical Teaching. Ed. Maria-

Regina Kecht. Chicago: Univ. of Illinois Press, 1992. Print.

50