Two things I've been thinking about this week:
1: I want to be the devil's advocate of this project. I think that Christopher Marlowe the man and Marlowe the myth are two different things. The information that I've been learning about him and the time period he lived in are making me think that a lot of what people perceive about Marlowe are largely influenced by a western lens (lens! Huzzah!). Especially the stuff about him being a spy and his homosexuality, these things are perceived under a western 20th/21st century lens. Sexual identity was perceived differently at the time and while he may have seemed like a rebellious man for being gay, it just wasn't perceived the way it would be now. Sexual identity is really a 20th century convention.
2: I want to navigate our presentation. I want to make sure we keep our lecture compelling, on track, and can navigate our "debates." I like the idea of us disagreeing with each other and participating with the audience, but I want to make sure we stay on track and keep within the confines of the time allotted and the subject itself. I think what will be hard is making sure, also, that we have a clear structure from the beginning that we stick to if we are planning to present it this way. I think our idea for our project has a lot of potential but I don't know if we can pull it off. I think we can we just have to be rigorous with ourselves and our presentation.