In Cold Blood: "The Corner" (251-343), Socratic Seminar
Instructions:
Audience members: in the comments section of this post, make thoughtful observations about the conversation taking place in the "fishbowl." Good observations will do the following:
- Identify when you agree/disagree with observations and specifically state why (ASR: Apt Specific Reference).
- Observe what specific group members did that helped to
- "propel" conversation forward,
- respond to their group members,
- and provide thoughtful observations.
Fishbowl members: students who do well in the "fishbowl" will do the following:
- Come to discussion prepared, having read and researched materials beforehand.
- Work with peers to promote a civil, democratic discussion, set clear goals, and establish individual roles.
- Propel conversations forward by posing and asking questions that probe reasoning and ask for evidence.
- Respond thoughtful to diverse perspectives, synthesize (combine) comments, claims, and evidence, resolve contradictions, and investigate meaning.
Nice job Amanda bringing outside sources to strengthen ideas in the socratic circle
ReplyDeleteAmanda does a good job at pulling in outside knowledge to ask a question, leading the discussion
ReplyDelete.
Tucker brings up a good point that the false end of the book was effective as an ending. Even though it was fabricated. it concluded the book well.
ReplyDeleteAmanda immediately opens with a point relevant to previous discussions we’ve had in our class as to the veracity of Capote’s novel, and provides a concrete claim for discussion to be based upon.
ReplyDeleteI like how Amanda did research and found out how the last scene was "fabricated", and how she poses the question about the importance of it. I also like Shea's observation about how Dick and Perry go by Hickock and Smith towards the end. This is an interesting observation and I agree with Tucker that Capote may have done this because the end of the book would have been such a difficult part to write. I do not think that Capote uses their last names out of respect for Dick and Perry because I think that using their first names makes them seem more humane. I agree with Will that Capote is distancing the characters from himself because last names seem harsher and more formal than first names.
ReplyDeleteI like how they are discussing Capote’s progression of language, however I feel like, except for what Shay just said about the character vs the dead convict, they’re basically recycling ideas
ReplyDeleteI like how they were discussing the transition of names for Dick and Perry, but I think that they missed a point in that by referring to Dick and Perry by their last names, it also creates a disconnect for them and the reader allowing the reader to possible take a less personal approach to the end of the book and the sentences.
ReplyDeleteI like Amanda's point about how Capote changes how he refers to Dick and Perry. It seems to demonstrate how his opinion of the two changed throughout the book from impersonal in the beginning, to sympathetic, and finally, to distancing himself in the end.
ReplyDeleteI feel like Ian very briefly glossed over the importance of Capote's personal narrative in the ending as prior to part for, Capote and his reactions can be linked to Dewey, but now he takes his ideas as his own.
ReplyDeleteI retract this. Ian brought it back.
DeleteAmanda does a good job of propelling the conversation forward by including Sophie. I like Will's observation about how the last scene is about how life went on after the Clutter murder and the trial.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Shea when he said that a lot of the book was Capote talking with Dick and Perry, but there is a lot more of that in the movie. In the book Capote tells it as a tale not a first person narrative and even near the end, he doesn't speak a lot (a lot being the key words) about his personal interactions with the murderers, but his views on the scene as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI like how Ian is more specific about the type of bias Capote demonstrates in his novel, and that it isn’t so much him interrupting the narrative, but rather that his bias is demonstrated through the emotions made clear in the work.
ReplyDeleteI think that they bring up a good point about how Capote was affected by writing this book. He definitely began to show his bias towards the end of the book especially in relation to Perry who he painted in a favorable light. Additionally, he may have even inserted himself into the book when he mentioned "a journalist" talking to Dick.
ReplyDeleteAll of them are doing a good job at providing possible explanations as to why Capote changed how he referred to them.
ReplyDeleteWill makes a good point, because of how close they were Capote would have wanted to make distance between himself and Dick and Perry.
I agree with Sophie, if he meant to show his opinion he did it well but if he didn't mean to show it then his opinion was so strong it was obvious.
Good start Will. They are very precise. Mitchell & co are driving it well. Sophie manages to switch easily enough. Ian changes well again. Conversation isn't really getting dry, so its good not to change anything. Sophie brings up an interesting statement with the Capote's views on death penalty section. Amanda brings up an interesting point, and still manages to shift well. They have done a good job overall.
ReplyDelete- Stephan and Mitchell do a good job noticing how Capote is using last names to distance himself from the murderers.
ReplyDelete- Tucker makes a good point about how a more personal view should have been used in the trial.
- group does a good job understanding that the so called "journalist" is actually Truman Capote.
- Amanda observes that Capote may have written the book/4th section to show the differences between the two people.
I agree with Amanda and her statement that Capote wants the reader to decide their own opinion on the innocence or lack thereof of Dick and Perry.
ReplyDeleteI like how Amanda has a different take on Capote's purpose for writing the book, such as that Capote wanted to show that Perry did not have an excuse for his murder. Overall, the group did a good job of including everyone in the discussion.
ReplyDeleteI like how Margaret is bringing in her research for her essay into the circle to strengthen the conversation
ReplyDeleteMargaret draws on analysis done in her and other people's portfolios which brings some good background info besides just opinions.
ReplyDeleteThanks for using my essays as a conversation topic, Margaret.
ReplyDeleteI like how Alana is giving a quote to start off the conversation with a good level one and margaret kind of gave a level two but there was no level three analysis which is something that would have been really interesting and propelled the conversation
ReplyDeleteDecided to take Dr. B's comment and focus on one thing, this time the psychologist.
ReplyDeleteI like how Margaret tied the discussion back to our essays, as well as her point about the historical context.
ReplyDeleteAlana is referring to the book for evidence which is good. Good that Rothery asked before changing the topic.
ReplyDeleteRothery is doing a good job moving the conversation onto a new topic when things started to die out
ReplyDeleteRothery brings the conversation to something I really wanted to talk about: Perry's old friend who attempts to convert him to Catholicism
ReplyDeleteThe conversation is moving along well, and it is clear that specific examples are more prevalent than wider discussion in this group.
ReplyDeleteSam needs to talk more; his peers nerd to help him get that 10/10.
ReplyDeleteI agree
DeleteCollins trying to convert Perry gives a good point for discussion. I like Zach's idea of being able to save Perry right before he dies.
ReplyDeleteI like how Rothery is asking questions to the whole group
ReplyDeleteThe discussion of who actually killed the Clutters is a surprising one, but begs a good question: Was Perry Lying?
ReplyDeleteI agree that would be something good to bring up. Just because something was said in a court of law doesn't mean whoever said it wasn't lying
DeleteAlana’s claim for Perry killing the family is solid with saying how she wrote an entire essay on the psychological aspect
ReplyDeleteI really like how almost everyone is trying their essays smoothly into the essay. Everyone has a sort of speciality due to this, and it helps propel discussion.
ReplyDeleteI like that they are talking about how Perry says that he killed all 4 but might not have, or definitely did. I wish that they had decided to discuss how Perry seems to be taking on the Sins of Dick and himself, Martyrdom? Subtle Christ imagery?
ReplyDeleteThey are very much getting into more specific nitty gritty analysis of characters and their intentions which is a nice extension of the first group
ReplyDeleteMarc ties in his essay, but forgets that Perry claimed he killed the Clutters. Dick didn't say Perry killed all four.
ReplyDeleteMany people are mentioning their essays in the conversation, but some aren’t really on topic or propelling the conversation
ReplyDeleteI agree with Shea about how sticking to their essays gives good specialties, though I do think it gives a sense of repetitiveness.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Shea about how sticking to their essays gives good specialties, though I do think it gives a sense of repetitiveness.
ReplyDeleteI think Marc's comment about how Capote is lying to us about who did the murders is interesting but if Capote liked Perry so much, why would he say Perry was the one who killed all 4 of the Clutters and not Dick?
ReplyDeleteZack brings up the legitimacy of Capotes telling of facts regarding the murders and other members question and discuss how certain things can be trusted which is good healthy discussion.
ReplyDeleteMarc takes his manipulation topic a little too seriously. The entire book is not fabricated, the vast majority of it happened
ReplyDeleteI totally disagree with Marc, wouldn't Capote reveal such a blatant lie after they were executed? What could he have gained from keeping it secret, and there's a good chance someone would have found such information written down on his documents that were rifled through after Capote's death. It is an interesting idea and I can see his evidence but I think Marc is taking this idea way too far. I would like to see his evidence for these claims.
ReplyDeleteAlso the fact that they weren't alone in most of these scenarios, so somebody would have come out and said it was false.
DeleteI like how they are bringing up the Duality of Capote's work, the truth and what Capote either makes up or convinces himself is the truth.
ReplyDeleteGeneral Notes:
ReplyDeleteWhat we talked about with the second circle seems to hold true here, as I have noticed throughout the year.
One thing that I notice a lot is that people often lack assertion. Starting many sentences/statements with "I feel like", or a phrase to specify that what they are about to say is just a thought and not to be taken too too seriously. In addition, a common way to end sentences is with "but that's just my opinion" or some variation of. More sentences starting with what they want to say, and stating it as if they know/believe it (in other words, more assertion in what is said) could help to propel the conversation better in general.
Comments specific to today:
I really like how Alana opened the conversation with a page reference and clearly defined topic to discuss.
The group does a good job of correcting others when they are wrong, but in a way that builds discussion.
I'm having difficulty following what the group consensus is. It may just be my personal fatigue and poor comprehension but it seems that people's individual opinions are clear, but the group is lacking a general consensus on the topics discussed before moving on.
Alana does a good devils advocate by suggesting Dick might have killed the family. Margaret makes a good point on how we can’t go back in time to find out.
ReplyDeleteMargaret is trying to propel the conversation and people are stuck on one topic but I do like Marc's comment developing on what Margaret said saying we can't really confirm anything
ReplyDeleteA big problem with Marc's ideas is that there were multiple other people who saw the aftermath of the murder and Perry and Dick matched what they did with the evidence the police found.
ReplyDeleteYes, Marc kind of seems blinded by his mistrust of Capote
DeleteI wish they talked more about the specifics of the sections. There was some repetition, but the conversation seemed good
ReplyDelete