Prompts for this Thursday

Option 1:  Use Genesis (using Alter is probably the straightforward way to to do this, but if you have a way to use Crumb cleverly, feel free) to make an argument about Auster.  Obviously you need to go beyond the obvious (the obvious interest in Paradise and the Tower of Babel), but that doesn't mean that your argument cannot use these parts of the text - just that you need to find a way of making an non-obvious argument using details of both texts.

Option 2:  Return to one of the passages we used in class today (including the one you picked), and use it to develop an argument about the text as a whole which either further develops or challenges/pushes against things that were said in class.

Option 3:  Compare/contrast either the concept of nature or the concept of utopia as depicted in Frankenstein and in City of Glass.  Then argue that the concept of nature/utopia in one text is more useful to you (or to us collectively), and explain why it is.

Option 4:  We managed not to talk about the younger Peter Stillman very much today.   Now is your chance to do so.  Analyze his language (that is, details of it - a few sentences, or a paragraph), to seriously consider the question of whether (going to the quote Estella used) he represents a different kind of human potentiality than "ordinary" people.   Note that if you simply think he's damaged goods, and have no interest in any other point of view (and I'm not saying that argument isn't legimate!) this argument doesn't really serve any purpose.