Jonathan Safran Foer Materials

AP Language

September 1st, 2010

Themes: , , , ,

Some quick information for those interested in listening to Foer’s talk at 1:30 tomorrow. If you have not yet discussed this with your fifth hour teacher, I recommend writing an apologetic note asking for any material you may miss. It is up to your teacher whether you may attend. As this is short notice, it may be impossible, but you are welcome to go to the talk he will give tomorrow night at Congregation B’nai Emunah at 7.

From The New Yorker: 20 Under 40: Jonathan Safran Foer

From The New York Times: Against Meat,” an article adapted from his newest book, Eating Animals.

From PopMatters, a review of Eating Animals.1

Please read over the materials in preparation for the talk if you would like to attend. (Actually, read over the second article anyway—it is worth your time.) We’ll discuss them in class tomorrow.

Ebert & Video Games

We will continue our discussion of Roger Ebert’s argument tomorrow if time permits. The article we are discussing is here, and a followup, “Okay, kids, play on my lawn” is here.

Kellee Santiago’s talk is below.

  1. Thanks, Shadi []

The Eternal Debate: Are video games art?

AP Language

April 23rd, 2010

Themes: , , ,

The argument:

The counterargument:

Roger Ebert: “Video Games Can Never Be Art

Actually, Santiago’s argument is a counterargument to an earlier assertion by Ebert. But who’s counting.


Article Reminder

AP Language

August 23rd, 2009

Themes: , ,

If you are before “L” in the alphabet, we’ll be discussing your article analyses in class on Tuesday. “M” to the end will be on Thursday. If you have any questions, or need help finding an article, check out my previous post then send an email. On Monday we’ll continue our discussion of the article we read on Friday.

On Video Games as Social Commentary

AP Language

August 19th, 2009

Themes: ,

A former student sent this link to me yesterday. Thoughts? We’ll talk about it tomorrow.

Bonus: Click through the NYCLU complaint link for argument in a pure form; no need for emotional appeals in a legal complaint.