General Feedback on Oral Presentations

On the whole, I felt that the oral presentations were pretty good. I have some general feedback, for everyone, and some of these points relate to your presentational style while others relate to the structure of your papers...

* When giving a lecture or oral presentation, don't say "I am going to show you X," just show us. The same is generally true for your papers. You no longer need to say (as you might have in high school or early wriitng classes), "My main point is Z and I will demonstrate A, B, and C." Just do it and work on making smooth transitions.

* By the same token, it's good to constantly remind the reader/listener of how your points relate to your overall thesis.

* Give priority to your thesis (which should involve an interpretation of the work, rather than giving all your time (or space, in your paper) to historical contextualization. As I've said before, you should ask yourself how each sentence and paragraph relates to your thesis. If it doesn't, you should cut it. Historical info should be presented in the service of your thesis.

* Do discuss the significance of your arguments. Explain how they relate to your thesis, but also (in your conclusion) answer the "so what question." So what if your thesis is true? Does it help us understand the piece or the artist's work in a better way? Does it tell us something about the world at large? (Of course, it's great if it does, but avoid making gradiose, subjective claims.)

* Find formal elements in which to root your arguments. Your interpretation should involve a very close reading of the physical and conceptual properties of the work.

* Avoid speaking in the first-person. We've discussed this before. Under the heading of this directive, remember that discussing the fact that you can relate emotionally to a piece is not an adequate thesis because it does not involve an interpretation of the work.

* Throughout the writing process, and particularly during revision and proofreading (which you should do many times!) make sure that your thesis says WHAT the work does (if you're not arguing that it says or does something, you aren't interpreting it), and it should ALSO say HOW it does what it does. This is where the close-reading of the formal elements comes into play.

Also, A NOTE REGARDING YOUR NEXT PRESENTATIONS:

I will be splitting our second set of presentations into three days, to give everyone more time. I will expect these presentations to be a full ten minutes. These presentations should be not merely overviews of the work, but real, in-depth discussions of your arguments regarding the work(s).