This is a negative example of an annotated bibliography. Which of the criteria does it fail to meet? What problems does it have? How can you be sure your annotation meets more of the criteria than this one?
By: Blackmon, Wayne D. American Journal of Psychotherapy. Fall1994, Vol. 48 Issue 4, p624-632. 9p. DOI: 10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.19188.8.131.524.
Wayne talks about three patients he had who benefited from playing the game. One patient played for five hours each week, another played for three, and the third only got to play for one hour! I like this source. They played a game called Savage Word. Wayne says that he tried to create situations in the game that would let the patients practice experiencing things that gave them stress in the real world. This stressful things were just in the game, so the patients knew they were not in the real world. So, they could consider the stressful thing from an emotional distance and think about it without it being too personal. Then, when they did encounter the stressful thing in the real world they were ready for it because they had already thought about it as part of the game that they had played with Wayne. It is wonderful that Wayne thought of this. The thing about this is that I don’t know if the game mechanics of most games are flexible for most doctors in Wayne’s position to do this. Also, a big part of most games is randomness, from either like dice or sometimes shuffled cards. Its not really the game without randomness, but what if the randomness happens in a way that freaks the patient out? That’s not good. How to do patients really make the switch from games to IRL. Maybe if patients are afraid of spiders IRL they could beat some giant spiders in the game, but if patients are afraid to talk to their boss about vacation days, how would that work in the fame? It’s not like dragons sit on piles of vacation days.
Consider this description of mystery fiction from John Lanchester’s “The Case of Agatha Christie” in the London Review of Books.
Her career amounts to a systematic exploration of formal devices and narrative structures, all through a genre with strictly defined rules and a specified character list: a murder must happen, it must be solved by a detective, there must be a murderer, a victim, a set of characters who might be the murderer but turn out not to be, a number of possible motives, most of which turn out to be misleading; the setting must be circumscribed, the list of suspects finite, the motive and crucial evidence something disclosed to the reader but preferably not shown to be significant. And it must come in at around 50,000 words – that’s not a genre rule, it’s just how long Christie thought a murder story should be. . . . The elements of Christie’s fiction are all already in place: a country house, a finite list of suspects, the outsider detective intruding into a place of order and hierarchy that has been disrupted by a crime. . . . She isn’t much interested in the ethics or metaphysics of why people do the bad things they do. But she is unflinchingly willing to look directly at the truth that they do them. . . . Her sense of the world was that people do terrible things and suffer terrible consequences, and she took just enough of the truth of this to ground her fiction in a sense of reality, but never enough to unsettle the reader or disturb the genre frame. . . . In essence, that is what detective fiction is: a mystery about which of a particular cast of characters isn’t who they say they are. And that, I suggest, is a, perhaps even the, core reason for Christie’s appeal to so many readers in so many different times and places. Just as her work is formalist without being modernist, her preoccupation with identity, with the constructed nature of character and society, is a modernist preoccupation, expressed through a deliberately popular and accessible medium. Her work is a cocktail of orderly settings and deep malignity, of comfiness and coldness, and at its heart it asks one of the most basic questions of all, modernity’s recurring preoccupation: who are you?
Here are some examples of tercets.
This final exam is worth fifteen points.
As we’ve discussed during the semester, the exam consists of you sending your final proposal in a business letter format to your audience.
To demonstrate that you have sent it, either CC or BCC me on an email to your audience, or have me watch you put a hard copy into an addressed, stamped envelope. Once the envelope is sealed, I’ll put it in the mail for you.
The late paper policy, as written on the syllabus, applies to the final exam. Turn the exam in on time by demonstrating you’ve sent it before the end of the final exam period which corresponds to your section number on the 11th of December. The exam times are listed at the end of the syllabus. As long as I’m CC’ed, emailing the final exam demonstrates that you’ve sent it.
I will be in my office (CB 407 F) during the final exam period if you need to visit with me in person.
If you have questions about any of this, please contact me.
This take-home final exam is worth fifteen points. The late paper policy as described by the syllabus applies to the final exam. Turn the exam in by emailing it to me before it is due. It is due by the end of the final exam period. When you email the exam, include “English 3420,” the phrase “final exam,” and your name in the subject line.
For the final exam, submit a short story for publication and document that submission.
As you are researching venues for publication, be sure to select venues that are likely to publish your work. Pick a publication that will email you an acknowledgment of your submission. For the final, email a copy of that acknowledgment to me following the guidelines above.
If you have questions about this final, please contact me.
This take-home final exam is worth fifteen points. The late paper policy as described by the syllabus applies to the final exam. Turn the exam in by emailing it to me before it is due. It is due by the end of the final exam period. When you email the exam, include “English 2250” or “English 225H,” the phrase “final exam,” and your name in the subject line.
For the final exam, submit poems and a short story for publication and document those submissions. If you are taking this class as part of UVU’s Honors Program, you are required to submit and document two stories and two sets of poems. Each story and set of poems should be submitted to different publications.
As you are researching venues for publication, be sure to select venues that are likely to publish your work. Pick a publication that will email you an acknowledgment of your submission. Most will do so automatically, but receiving an acknowledgement is your responsibility. For the final, email a copy of that acknowledgment to me following the guidelines above.
If you have questions about this final, please contact me.