Analytical Paragraph(s) Assignment
Purpose: This assignment should contribute to the following:
Knowledge: This assignment will demonstrate your ability to write analytical prose about a specific song (the song you chose in your Proposal Assignment for your Term Paper).
Skills: 1) analyzing music in a convincing manner; 2) attending to multiple musical parameters (including but not limited to melody, harmony, form, texture, and instrumentation); 3) writing persuasive prose that convinces your reader of your analysis.
“Real World” Application: Clear explanations derive from clear understanding. If you truly grasp what is going on in a situation (a song, a political argument, a philosophical concept), you can explain it clearly and persuasively. This has an application in most of our daily interactions with others.
Song of choice: Would? by Alice in Chains
Analysis tips:
That song is about Andrew Wood . He was the singer of Mother Love Bone and a friend to Alice in Chains. He died of a heroin overdose. Layne Staley would later also die of a heroin overdose. That was the drug of choice in the Seattle scene. How does it relate to heroin use in the Seattle scene?( this is the real world analysis/theme of choice).
Task: This is the next step in constructing your term paper. Write at least ONE and preferably several paragraphs that analyze the musical elements of your chosen song. Do not bother with a deep discussion of the lyrics at this stage. Focus on the musical elements (melody, harmony, texture, form, and instrumentation) in as much detail as possible. You must clearly articulate an analytical “problem” (or several problems) that you are trying to solve in your analysis. For example, “How does the “Star Spangled Banner” create melodic coherence when it has so many melodic leaps (which tend to obscure the clarity of a melodic line)?” You will then describe the passage you are analyzing in some clear descriptive prose that brings out the points of interest you find in the passage. You will then present your analysis that (one hopes) clarifies the way in which the passage works.
Grading Rubric
|
Dimension |
Exceeds Expectations (4) |
Meets Expectations (3) |
Moving Toward Expectations (2) |
Needs Substantial Improvement (1) |
|
Statement of Issue
|
The analytical “problem” is clearly stated in a manner that encourages interest; the problem is an intriguing one (not something overly typical or obvious). |
The analytical problem is clearly stated but not in a terribly exciting manner; the problem is not as interesting as it ought to be |
The problem is not articulated clearly enough or in a manner that does not intrigue the reader; the problem is not really worthy of examination |
The problem is unclear or nonexistent and/or presented in a boring manner; the problem is not truly an analytical issue at all |
|
Description of Passage |
The passage is described in a clear and accurate manner; no mistaken observations; |
The passage is described in a mostly clear and accurate manner; maybe one mistaken observation |
The passage is described in a less than totally clear or accurate manner; a few mistakes |
The passage is not described clearly or accurately; many mistakes |
|
Analysis of Passage |
The discussion demonstrates an exemplary understanding of the analytical issue; the analysis uses terminology accurately and illuminates the passage creatively |
The discussion demonstrates a fairly strong understanding of the analytical issue; the analysis uses terminology accurately and illuminates the passage adequately |
The discussion demonstrates a relatively weak grasp of the analytical issue; misuses some terminology; fails to illuminate the passage adequately |
The discussion demonstrates a weak grasp of the analytical issue; misuses terminology; misrepresents the passage in an important way |
|
Rhetoric and Flow |
Ideas presented in a logical manner; clear and persuasive argumentation based on logic; smooth transitions from point to point |
Mostly logical flow of ideas with some gaps; mostly persuasive argumentation with perhaps a missed opportunity; mostly good transitions |
Some sense of flow but a bit disjointed; lacking in persuasion/missed opportunities; rough transitions |
Too disjointed in moving from idea to idea; not very persuasive; no clear path from point to point |
|
Writing Conventions |
0-1 grammatical errors; well-formed sentences with a good variety of sentence structures |
2-5 relatively minor grammatical errors; decent sentences with some variety of structure |
Grammatical errors make the paragraph relatively difficult to read |
Many grammatical errors making the paper difficult to comprehend |