IFH READING JOURNAL

Due on Nov 13th/Dec 18th Wednesdays

by 5pm, via Email to Ran: maran@nagoya-u.jp

[real human being receiving the mails]

NOTE: if you have not received my confirmation mail after the submission, mail me again; my university mail sometimes is not compatible with your mail system.

BASICS

1) Students are expected to submit TWO 300-word reading journals/literature review (in WORD document) reflecting upon their reading progress in the previous month (1^st Journal to review the literature by Week 4; 2^nd Journal to review literature between Week 5-10);  

2)The submitted WORD file should contain “IFH” + the student’s name in its file name;

3)Preferred style is Harvard. Please self-study the style (handout distributed in the Introduction; Citation Tools will help you to do the job effectively!).

Don’t be overly concerned with grammar (although spell-check will be helpful!), but do put a lot of thinking into your reading journals since they will be key to fruitful discussions in class and even your final paper.

FORMAT

Include the following information at the top of each assignment:

Your Name Course Title Submission Date             Title of article  [please do NOT use the bibliographical item as your title…] Main Body Works Cited

What We Want?

Reading Journal is a simplified version of Literature Review (if you do not know what is literature review, refer below); we use it to keep updated about your learning progress, and get to know your understanding of specific cinema culture, contexturalised and historicized.

Which Literature?  You should engage with at least ONE reading listed in our syllabus for the designated period of time, and focus on a specific cinema/cultural phenomenon (e.g., silent cinema in Asia; French impressionist;Soviet montage and Constructivism etc.) or a specific period of time in film history (e.g., WWI European cinema; new Hollywood; etc. etc.).

We do NOT want a summary of ALL the readings in the previous month (please do NOT do that); even when you are reviewing one chapter, you do not have to paraphrase everything from this chapter (there is no need). A comparison between auteurs, styles, social-cultural conditions etc., is possible, but NOT a must. I’d rather you start from something small and more specific, and orient your discussions around the readings themselves, not simply your own evaluation, subjective feelings (I feel blahblah), and random impressions of certain films=support your discussions with “evidence”.  

How? I know you are reading the historical narrative without being able to carry out the first-hand studies on your own yet. For BAs, at least, you should be able to present your own interpretation and viewpoints (instead of simply copying and pasting quotes). Further relevant analysis of film narratives/styles etc. will be welcomed but NOT a must. For your Final Paper, you are encouraged to develop some of the underdeveloped ideas presented in the Reading Journals, by engaging closely with the case studies (analysis of films etc.).

 [https://guides.library.yale.edu/c.php?g=295913&p=1975851]

A literature review … has an organizational pattern and combines both summary and synthesis. A summary is a recap of important information about the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that information. It might give a new interpretation of old material or combine new with old interpretations. Or it might trace the intellectual progression of the field, including major debates. Depending on the situation, the literature review may evaluate the sources and advise the reader on the most pertinent or relevant of them.