So when I plotted out the words-per-five-minutes data we collected two weeks back, here's the frequency chart I got:
The mean words-per-five-minutes count is 132; the median is 124.5. If you wrote these essays blindly, putting pen to paper at minute 0 and going nonstop until minute 45, they would come on average to nearly 1,200 words -- the length of a 4-page paper. This strikes me as the sort of strategy that will drown me in inarticulate verbage.
Here's what I suggest: force yourself to spend 5 minutes thinking about the essay (not necessarily at the beginning -- time taken in the middle and at the end of the essay can really revitalize your argumentative strategy) and write a cautious and legible 24 words per minute. By doing this, you will come out with about 1,000 words -- probably the right length for a thoughtful 45-minute essay.
This is a strategy it is probably worth practicing. Set up a study date with a colleague, set an alarm for 45 minutes, and craft out a full response to a challenging essay question. This will not only give you a chance to figure out when it will be best for you to take your 5 minutes to think through your argument, and to see how well you put together an analytical thesis under pressure, but it will also give you a chance to think through some texts and interpretations: good practice all around.
I have not seen the final exam, and it can be difficult to guess exactly which essay topics Prof. Ortiz-Robles will pick, so you might strategize the essay questions on which you concentrate in such a way as to shore up your weaknesses. From personal experience, I have found that time you spend on any essay prompt translates into better performance on all essay prompts; better, then, to spend time focused on those prompts you hope won't show up on the final but which you fear will show up.
While you are mathematically safe crossing two prompts off the list -- you will only have to write on two out of four prompts on the final -- if you do so and those two prompts show up, you'll be stuck writing on the other two: potentially an ugly situation. Safer, again, to strategize answers to all the prompts, or at least to nine of them.
Develop answers to the essays that make use of more than the minimum two texts. If you have answers set to go that usefully compare three or four texts, then you will not only have an easier time figuring out what to say for those 1,000 words but you also won't have to worry about text overlap.
At a basic level, this class is not about information but about analysis: these essays should show not merely that you have been listening during lecture and discussion for the last 15 weeks, but that you have picked up on the basic strategies of intermediate-level literary analysis. Concentrate on creating new arguments from existing texts, and show me that you can synthesize new readings and contextualize the significance of these readings within the theoretical frames of the class -- the thematic shifts from Romanticism to Modernism; the changing relationship of individual to society; the definition and redefinition of man; shifting theories of what art does and/or how it acts in the world.
One last note about these essays: have fun with them! Be brazen; be creative in your interpretations and analysis. Argue your case with flair, and revel in strong connections between strange texts. If you're not having fun, find a new way to approach the question.
