"Yo, Adrian, we did it. We did it."

This paper has sucked me dry.  Probably because I actually cared for the subject: The Bible as literature.  And I knew there were a lot of people riding (in a bad sense) my ideas.  

It started with my focus: A Raw Thesis! And then grew into a more solid idea: Claiming a Thesis!

From there it actually got muckier...rather than more clear.  Gathering ideas from outside sources via "The Tweethis Experience" made me think harder and dig deeper for more evidence and support for my claim.  

Charly's feedback was, as usual, helpful in sorting out so many ideas and opinions, and I appropriated the progression of my paper up to that point in finally Choosing a Claim to her. When we were asked to try something new to develop our argument, I thought I'd give Schizophrenia a whirl in order to discuss why I wanted to hound the subject I was hounding...with myself. Discussing Genre was the most helpful exercise I could have done.  It helped me solidify the bulk of my argument.  

I, Jamie Clegg, WROTE AN OUTLINE. 'Twas quite helpful.  'Nough said. 

From there I cranked out a few pages of nothing, really.  My First Draft.  And because I was so short on goods, I decided to explore the library.  I Discovered New Material For My Argument, and finally cranked out a FINAL DRAFT...Draft, but.  

Thanks to our peer reviews (Andrew Alston, you're a saint), I have made enormous revisions, and feel more comfortable with the final product.  I distributed it to trusted friends and family, and appreciated all of their honest and straightforward criticism. With everyone's help and ideas, here, tonight, debuts My Final Paper: Teaching the Bible as Literature.  

Yo, guys, we did it. We did it.   

Getting to the bottom of things via Schizophrenia.

Me:  Okay.  Why do I care whether or not the Bible is taught in public schools?  

Jamie: Yeah, you're done with public school.  

Me:  Yeah, but.  Students should learn about the history that's in the Bible...and the culture that our dense Christian background comes from....right?  Plus there's a bunch of other good stuff...in there.  Like literary devicccccc...esss.. And stuff...

Jamie: Mm. Yeah.  That's good. But.  Why do you care.  Care enough, I mean, to write about it in depth. To argue....for it.  There are a million other things you could write about.  Like Danielle's writing about Jane Eyre.  You love Jane Eyre.  Write about that. 

Me: Mm.  I don'know. 

Jamie:  You don'knowwhwaaat. 

Me:  It's cold in here.  I hate air conditioning. 

Jamie: Me freakin' too. 

They saunter outside.  Mumbling to themselves.  Sorting things out.  Sit on the cement by grandma's fake beehive.  It's so fake.  

Me:  Maybe I care because I'm going to be a teacher someday. 

Jamie: And you would teach the Bible as literature. 

Me: If I could, yeah. 

Jamie:  Would you pound it as hard as, say, Shakespeare? Or other classics?

Me: I don't know.  Maybe?  Maybe not. 

Jamie: Maybe?

Me: Yeah, I guess I would, if it was considered a credible piece of literature.  That my students could reference on an AP exam or something...

Jamie: That's why you care.  Because you want your students to reference it on AP exams. 

Me: Well not just that.  I wish I had studied the Bible as literature throughout school...(I perk up) Wish we had done that in my junior high and high school classes. Or that I could've used it as a reference on my AP tests.  (Sourly) Maybe I would've passed them both.... 

Jamie:  Interesting.  That's why you care.  That's why you're writing about it.  That's it. 

Me: (Defensively) Yeah.  That's it.  That's why I care. 

Choosing the Claim (Metapost)

Can you metapost....on your own...post?  Charly?  

So, I talked in a previous post about broadcasting my ideas to different sources, and how that has affected my thought process.  

Specifically, I sent my idea about the Bible being taught as literature to teachers and professors that I knew would oppose my idea.  Here is the response of one teacher who replied as I had hoped/expected:

I loved her response.  Very honest and thorough.  She has persuaded me to perhaps switch to a definition claim.  Or cause/effect.  A different claim that will argue the Bible to be more than just a religious text--that it could be as widely taught as Shakespeare or the classics, but not try to impose it upon teachers of public schools. 

I'd love your insight/help on which would be most effective.