The narrator in LeGuin’s “The Question of Sex” might reveal just as much about herself as she does about the subjects of her anthropological inquiry. What does she rely on to anchor her understanding of the universe, herself, and others? How does she try to cope with understanding people alien to her? Do you think she has good or bad strategies for that? Don’t just generalize. Explain how a particular moment in the text helped you come to your understanding of the character.

The narrator in LeGuin’s “The Question of Sex” might reveal just as much about herself as she does about the subjects of her anthropological inquiry. What does she rely on to anchor her understanding of the universe, herself, and others? How does she try to cope with understanding people alien to her? Do you think she has good or bad strategies for that? Don’t just generalize. Explain how a particular moment in the text helped you come to your understanding of the character.

The narrator in LeGuin’s “The Question of Sex” might reveal just as much about herself as she does about the subjects of her anthropological inquiry. What does she rely on to anchor her understanding of the universe, herself, and others? How does she try to cope with understanding people alien to her? Do you think she has good or bad strategies for that? Don’t just generalize. Explain how a particular moment in the text helped you come to your understanding of the character.

The narrator in LeGuin’s “The Question of Sex” might reveal just as much about herself as she does about the subjects of her anthropological inquiry. What does she rely on to anchor her understanding of the universe, herself, and others? How does she try to cope with understanding people alien to her? Do you think she has good or bad strategies for that? Don’t just generalize. Explain how a particular moment in the text helped you come to your understanding of the character.

How do you understand Lorimer as a narrator in “Houston, Houston, Do You Read?”  How do his memories impact his view of the events he’s witnessing in the present of the story?  What is one particular example of the way his earlier experiences color his view of his male crew members or the women on board the Gloria?

How do you understand Lorimer as a narrator in “Houston, Houston, Do You Read?”  How do his memories impact his view of the events he’s witnessing in the present of the story?  What is one particular example of the way his earlier experiences color his view of his male crew members or the women on board the Gloria?

How do you understand Lorimer as a narrator in “Houston, Houston, Do You Read?”  How do his memories impact his view of the events he’s witnessing in the present of the story?  What is one particular example of the way his earlier experiences color his view of his male crew members or the women on board the Gloria?

In the slides, I brought up Justice Antonin Scalia’s use of “Harrison Bergeron” in a dissenting Supreme Court opinion.  Vonnegut is among the most quotable of 20^th-century authors in English, dispensing quips, aphorisms, and confusing proverbs about the modern human condition.  His genius is for simple, compressed phrasing that exposes depths of contradiction, joy, pain, or confusion:

Here’s an example:  “One of the few good things about modern times: If you die horribly on television, you will not have died in vain. You will have entertained us.”

How is this quotation relevant either to “Harrison Bergeron” or “Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow”? How do these stories see television and its social impact?

Or, if you prefer, how does the quotation shed light on an actual and widely televised death that “entertained us” in recent years?  Perhaps some of the truth(s) in Vonnegut’s comment are proven by how often we see people dying on our screens. 

In the slides, I brought up Justice Antonin Scalia’s use of “Harrison Bergeron” in a dissenting Supreme Court opinion.  Vonnegut is among the most quotable of 20^th-century authors in English, dispensing quips, aphorisms, and confusing proverbs about the modern human condition.  His genius is for simple, compressed phrasing that exposes depths of contradiction, joy, pain, or confusion:

Here’s an example:  “One of the few good things about modern times: If you die horribly on television, you will not have died in vain. You will have entertained us.”

How is this quotation relevant either to “Harrison Bergeron” or “Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow”? How do these stories see television and its social impact?

Or, if you prefer, how does the quotation shed light on an actual and widely televised death that “entertained us” in recent years?  Perhaps some of the truth(s) in Vonnegut’s comment are proven by how often we see people dying on our screens.