Journal #1- Since beginning this project, we've mainly been working on solidifying our argument and finding the information necessary to do so. I've been reading Ludvig Holberg's Comedies, which looks extensively into not only how but why Holberg's Comedies work. There is still more to read, but so far I've learned about the individual classifications of his comedies: Comedies of Character, Comedies of Intrigue, Comedies for Special Public Occasions, Topical Comedies, Philosophical Comedies, and Satires of Dramatic Forms.
Basically, Holberg's message within his comedies were to awaken people's common sense. He believed that if everyone could acknowledge their flaws, they could then better themselves. He did not care so much to impress critics and scholars, seeing as he wrote his plays geared for the "common class".
The past week, for my french class, I needed to present a project based around The Lumiere Brothers. Pulling in research skills from this class and combining them while researching for the other project benefitted me greatly. I was able to condense my research and sculpt an interesting and sufficient presentation. i never really appreciated the importance of narrowing down information in order to benefit the learners. It creates a more solid argument that is easier to follow, but gets the job done.
Journal #2 Since solidifying our arguement, and finally constructing the final presentation, we have split the arguement amonsgt each other. From most of my research, I gathered information on the analysis of Holberg's comedies, and so I'll be analyzing a scene from The Political Tinker. In doing so, I'll be sure to emphasize why Holberg differentiated himself from Moliere despite sharing his techniques.
I'm really pleased with the work we've all done so far. Everyone has contributed greatly, and have contributed large sums of information from various areas of study. Not only do we have a lot of information on Holberg, but lots about the history of the civilization around the time we are studying. This has allowed us to develop a very strong, solid arguement.
Journal #3 - The weekend before our presentation, our group was able to meet to run through our presentation to assure that everything was ready to present. We discussed our observations from watching the first groups go. I personally recognized the lack or obscurity of an argument in a few of them. If anything, I think some groups could have benefitted from introducing their argument earlier in their presentation to give the audience a "through-line" that was relatively comprehensible. This was something the group and I agreed on, and was confident that our presentation had a strong and present argument introduced early on. I was glad we were able to meet beforehand, because despite the confidence I've had in our group all along, it was nice assuring each other that our presentation was indeed where we needed it to be. Everyone has had a present part in the development of our project.
Journal #4 - Our presentation went as well as I had hoped it would and I am very relieved! 20 minutes went a lot faster than I thought it would, and I realized that we had HOW MUCH information we came in with. Better safe than sorry...much better. I am glad that people responded to Dan as Holberg as well as they did, leaving them entertained as well as informed. Even though I've found our information to be interesting, I think our skit assisted in the audience's interest level, which is great! From watching the last of the presentations today, the gladiator group went with the performance route as well, and it was interesting to see how much it helps drive the presentation from an outside point of view. Overall, I am very pleased with how well this process played out. I think many people went into this project doubtful due to past group experiences, but the way the entire process was structured throughout helped many. I know it helped my group and I. Without the guidelines and due dates for piece after piece, I don't think we would've been as focused. It gave us a constant outlook on where we were striving to be, and ultimately I think we got there.
TrackBack URL: http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/201820