Outside Reading Set #5: Book Review

3/21/11

“‘The Instructions:’ A Thousand-Page Debut Splash”

Bill Goldstein

Book Review

http://www.npr.org/2010/11/01/130979766/-the-instructions-a-thousand-page-debut-splash

In his review of Adam Levin’s The Instructions, Bill Goldstein takes a mostly formalistic critical approach interspersed with some archetypical comments. To compare the relative “worthiness” of the book, Goldstein incorporates details such as allusions to other famous literary works, primarily Leo Tolstoy’s War and Piece: “Perhaps the more pressing literary question is whether Levin’s apocalyptic fantasy of a four-day end-times battle at Illinois’ Aptaksic Junior High, in November 2006, is enthralling enough to pass the Tolstoy Challenge.” Referencing Tolstoy’s book again later on, he deems Levin’s book to be less worthwhile: “In this case — even having been dazzled by much of The Instructions — I’m not sure I wouldn’t have been better off on the battlefields of czarist Russia.” Goldstein’s approach here makes me somewhat skeptical. In order to compare Levin’s book to a standard, Goldstein has to ensure that the standard he is using (War and Peace) is universally accepted to be a “better” literary piece. In this review, however, he does not give sufficient evidence to convince me that War and Peace is far more superior. Thus, this assumption results in a weak point in his analysis.

To further emphasize the length of The Instructions, Goldstein provides imagery of the book itself: “The spine of Adam Levin’s gargantuan first novel is 3 inches thick, which means it will take up almost twice as much space on your bookshelf as Jonathan Franzen’s Freedom.” Goldstein repeatedly emphasizes the size of the book because the premise of his criticism is that the length should be directly proportional to quality. Goldstein also employs imagery to illustrate the emotional appeal of the book; he paints a picture of the main character’s appearance and evokes the artistic connotations of words such as “vibrant” and “convincing.”

For the most part, Goldstein focuses on the concepts and plot of the book, thus criticizing mainly from a formalistic angle. Through this critical approach, he finds “conceptual flaws” with the book. However, Goldstein also uses careful diction to make points from an archetypal point of view. He deems the “delicate” emotional “observations” in the book as one of its most “momentous strengths” because everyone can relate to young love: “The reader swoons along with Gurion as he kisses his first love, Eliza June Watermark.” “Swoons” captures exactly the right feeling both Gurion and the readers share. In summary, Goldstein says that “At the heart of this Instructions is the tender story of a precocious and lonely 10-year-old boy who, bookish, brooding and pious, daydreams through the endless detentions and yearns to find peace as he is caught between attentive but warring parents.” Using specific adjectives to capture each facet of the main character’s personality, Goldstein creates a general archetype and illustrates that a major appeal of The Instructions is that fundamentally, all readers can share the same emotional reactions to it.

The discussion of length versus quality reminds me of both Ernest Hemingway’s books as well as writing style. I do not agree with Goldstein’s approach; he seems to think that the longer a book is, the better it has to be in order to gain literary merit. By this argument, shorter books do not have to “try as hard.” The Old Man and the Sea (a relatively short book), however, has been assessed just as rigorously as any other novel. Length should have no bearing on quality. Overall, the strength of this review is its ability to capture reader’s attentions. Though I did not agree with everything I read, Goldstein does bring up many intriguing points.

Outside Reading Set #5: Editorial

3/21/11

“A Can-Do Nation”

Bill Bradley

Editorial

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1604984,00.html

“Why are we still addicted to oil? Why do 47 million Americans lack health insurance?” By opening his editorial with weighty rhetorical questions, Bill Bradley immediately begins to craft a strong voice. Within the questions themselves, he uses specific statistics to appeal emotionally to readers. “47 million” becomes a rallying point for him. By including these convincing details, Bradley effectively stirs a reaction in readers; they cannot help but be drawn into his argument. To further shape his voice and argument, Bradley cites the opposite viewpoint: “It’s a ‘can’t do’ story—as in ‘We can’t save Social Security’ or ‘We can’t cure our oil addiction.’” With conviction, however, he completely cuts it down: “Historically…We have been open, generous, expansive, forward looking, creative, egalitarian, and optimistic. And that’s who we still are today. All we need is a new story about what is possible—and the political courage to honor our best selves.”

Throughout his article, Bradley repeatedly employs parallel structure. This syntactical device lends more authority and musicality to his voice. Instead of a loosely structured opinion essay, he presents a powerful, packed, speech-like piece. First, Bradley insists on facing the truth: “No lying. No fudging the numbers. Just the truth about our current moment—which means facing up to the consequences…” Starting these three sentences with an unusual construction gives them more punch and creates a more confident voice. “Certainly, we can regain the world’s respect. Certainly, we can achieve balanced economic growth and assure all our citizens health care for their families, a good education for their children and security in their old age.” Placing such an extreme word at the beginning of the sentence lends “certainty” to the statement itself. Through parallel structure and strategic arrangement of key words in sentences, Bradley crafts a thoroughly impassioned, opinionated voice.

To further contribute to his argument, Bradley effectively evokes the connotations of certain imagery. Most importantly, he describes the American flag to illustrate the importance of unity: “As Americans, we are not red or blue; we are red, white and blue.” Because most people link patriotism strongly with those three colors, Bradley cleverly introduces this concept without directly mentioning the word. To point out America’s future hope, Bradley alludes to an image of its successful past: “One look at the iconic Apollo image of Earth from space is all it takes to realize that our continuing welfare is a global proposition and each of us is responsible for it.” Bradley’s use of imagery to promote concepts, especially broad ones such as non-partisanship and determination for the future, add to the strength of his voice.

The engaging nature of this piece is its biggest strength. Bradley’s oratory style captivates me as a reader and poses a thoroughly convincing argument. On the other hand, this may also be a weakness of the piece. Bradley is so caught up with big statements about cooperation and unity that he fails to address the nuances of how to achieve those goals. Readers feel empowered after reading this article, but Bradley provides almost no details on how to practically apply all of his grandiose statements. Precisely due to the oratorical nature of this piece, the voice is not appropriate for the AP exam. The AP exam requires a formal and logically structured piece. Bradley’s voice creates a less organized speech which has more emotional than logical merit.

Outside Reading Set #5: Reflective Essay

3/21/11

“Marriage: The Beginning or the End?”

Jeremy Worsham

Reflective Essay

http://www.pifmagazine.com/1998/04/marriage-the-beginning-or-the-end/

Jeremy Worsham begins his essay with a largely mellow, musing tone. Towards the end of his piece however, his tone grows stronger and gains conviction; this change demonstrates the solid conclusion he draws at the end of his reflection. Worsham’s initial tone prepares readers for the philosophical questions he attempts to address: “Who was it that came up with the institution of marriage? Was it a man or; was it a woman? Let’s assume that men invented marriage; what would be his reasons for doing so?” These rhetorical questions not only function to introduce new ideas, but also illustrate his thoughtful air. The repetition of “Was it a…” allows readers to follow his thoughts more intimately; it is almost as if Worsham is simply thinking aloud. By using this syntactical repetition, Worsham makes readers feel more like his friends, influencing them to become more receptive to the content of his piece. Sometimes, Worsham employs details such as parenthetical asides, which also increases his familiarity with the readers.

Prevalent in Worsham’s language are phrases such as “Take for instance…” and “Now let’s assume…” Again, these phrases create a thoughtful, conversational tone. It is almost as if Worsham is inviting readers in, especially when he uses first person plural. Along with language choices, Worsham uses specific diction to illustrate his points and set his tone, particularly when his tone changes from lighthearted philosophizing to purposeful analysis. Once again addressing readers, he says: “Here we have a blatant celebration of the free man, free of course from the duties required of a married man.” It is not any celebration, but a “blatant” celebration. By calling on the connotations of this particular word, Worsham exposes the fundamental differences between men and women. In addition to making specific word choices, Worsham analyzes diction himself, therefore starting to take a more investigative and logical approach: “On the other side of the spectrum there is the bride to be; they celebrate the up coming event by having a bridal shower. The very name looks forward to the oncoming event just as the name bachelor party looks back.” He takes apart the words “bridal shower” themselves to point out another difference between men and women.

As a reader, I particularly like Worsham’s conversational, musing tone. I also think the tone shift in the middle of the piece makes it more captivating. Thus, Worsham’s overall skill in setting the mood and holding the reader’s attention is a strength in his piece. One weakness of this essay is the abruptness of its ending. At the end, Worsham sounds angry rather than enlightened. He could have transitioned more naturally from analysis to annoyance. Overall, the tone of this piece works somewhat for the AP exam. On the one hand, when Worsham switches to a more analytical tone, he provides many specific examples to back his argument up. This is very appropriate for the AP exam. On the other hand, Worsham is very conversational and thus sounds a little rambling during the majority of the piece, so the informal tone that creates would not work for the AP exam.

Class Notes: Weeks 20-21 (3/7/11-3/18/11)

Modernism (roughly WWI-WWII):

• slogan = “Make it new!”
• felt that old generation had betrayed them
• need to find universal truth so that WWI never happens again
• new forms of narrative:
• unreliable narrators
• multiple narrators
• minor characters as 1^st person narrators-e.g. The Great Gatsby
• nonlinear narrative
• stream of consciousness
• important artists:
• Pablo Picasso: cubism
• superimposition: laid all point of views in one face
• illustrated modernists’ ideal: don’t want to force a truth; want to acknowledge all point of views
• layering effect
• Hemingway: reconstructed emotions
• audience is forced to figure out relationships
• artists were very skeptical of the media
• old generation didn’t accurately reflect reality
• therefore, new generation must break old rules and create new ones

Postmodernism (roughly WWII-present):

• what caused modernism to let go wasn’t solely WWII
• war created new, angry generation
• real influence = TV
• this is also why modernism ends later in U.S. and Britain (ended later-1960s in the latter country because TV’s became popular more quickly in the U.S.)
• can instantly switch point of views
• instant access to different point of views
• individual control of point of view
• postmodernism = modernism – universal truth + irony
• cultural erosion: anything can be true
• no new invention of the rules
• all truth is local
• blending of high and low culture-e.g. opera about Elvis
• self-reference: pretense that mediated world exists in the same way that our world exists
• characters from that world can cross over to our world
• character in a book can talk about being in a book
• characters can move from medium to medium
• simulacrum (Jean Beaudrillard):
• mimic something so much that the copy becomes the real thing; the real thing doesn’t exist anymore
• real thing gets replaced
• e.g.: Wild West shows-simulacrum of the Old West-circle of innocent settlers gallop around and around when confronted with Native Americans
• surrealism: movement in the arts between WWI and WWII
• unexpected juxtapositions in ways intended to activate subconscious associations that highlight truths hidden from us when we are trapped in linear, “logical” patterns of thought
• psychological “though processes” rather than logical ones
• attempts to join worlds of dream and fantasy to create “larger” reality
• bizarre
• Freud and Jung
• everyone has the same reaction to things-just may not be able to articulate it exactly

“The Hollow Men” (T.S. Eliot):

• important Biblical allusions/details
• 5 o’clock is the traditional time that Jesus rises from the dead
• multifoliate rose = traditional reference to Christ
• three Kingdoms are a reference to the circles of Hell?
• or does each Kingdom symbolize a different place? Purgatory vs. Hell vs. Heaven?
• the Hollow Men are stuck in Purgatory
• eyes are important-same eyes from the cover of The Great Gatsby?
• Men can’t meet eyes of God, broken jaw, valley of death-all these details added together symbolize erosion of religion?
• other points of discussion:
• reference to Guy Fawkes: failed gunpowder plot
• Hollow Men are stuck; can’t carry out plans
• Kurtz isn’t a hollow man because at least he has the guts to conduct his acts of violence
• repeated mentions of sterility
• again, represents inability to complete things
• shows how sterile modern life has become
• Mistah Kurtz = very specific moment-Why is this important?
• Hollow Men can’t meet the eyes of something-Kurtz? God?
• those who have passed into death aren’t afraid of the eyes
• the Hollow Men are avoiding judgment

“The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” (T.S. Eliot):

• What’s the big question that he won’t share at the beginning?
• It leads to some kind of truth-but what truth?
• this is a question we never actually answered in our discussion…
• repeated mentions of baldness: symbolizes his fear of aging
• many sharp images of sterility
• yellow fog is like a faithful hound
• this links the industrial world directly to him
• emphasizing the staleness of the modern world
• many references to women’s body parts
• peach reference
• poem emphasizes the narrator’s indecision
• comparison to Hamlet: infamous for indecision

Overall Connections:

• The assertion that everyone has the same reaction to things in surrealism reminds me of archetypal and mythological criticism. Essentially, both argue that human beings have the same raw feelings as each other; they just might express those feelings differently.
• It’s really funny how different the “Love Song” reads now than from when I tried to read it in Perrine at the beginning of the year. I didn’t think about modernism at all when I read it the first time; I was only concerned with the plot of the poem.
• “Into the Woods” is a good example of postmodernism; it pulls characters from my different stories into one play: eclectic
• “Bride and Prejudice” reminded me a little bit of the modern version of Romeo and Juliet. I quite enjoyed that movie. :)
• Self-reference reminds me of the moving portraits in Harry Potter. xD

Class Notes: Weeks 18-19 (2/21/11-3/4/11)

Theories of Comedy:

intellectual theories:

• ethnic humor-funny to those who have no personal interest in the joke
• can make fun of any group from “dumb blondes” to Poles to fraternities
• Arthur Schopenhauer: humors depends on the pleasure of finding unexpected, intellectual connections between idea

superiority theories:

• we laugh at people because they have some failing or defect, are at some disadvantage, or may suffer some small misfortune
• stock figures of comedy: miser, glutton, drunkard
• person hit with custard pie
• egregiously incorrect answers, bad grammar, faulty pronunciation
• all humor is derisive-laugh because we feel superior
• Thomas Hobbes = originator of this theory
• we laugh at the misfortunes or infirmities of others or at our own past follies provided we are conscious of having now surmounted them and of unexpected successes of our own
• Alexander Bain: expands Hobbes in two main directions
• need not be directly conscious of our own superiority-e.g. may laugh sympathetically with another who defeats an adversary
• need not be a person who is derided-may be idea, political institution, or anything at all that makes a claim to dignity or respect

incongruity theories:

• unexpected with the expected, unusual with the usual, misfit in what has been established as a social norm
• Immanuel Kant
• incongruity = often associated with “frustrated expectation”
• abrupt intrusion into the attitude of something that is felt not to belong there, of some element that has strayed from another compartment of our minds
• first, there must be an established set of cultural, human, and societal norms against which incongruities can be found
• internal norms: author provides in text
• external norms: exist in the society for which the text was written
• biggest problem = knowing which norms exist-may become outdated
• but-jokes can still be funny even when the norms change-e.g. Shakespeare’s comedies
• funny because Shakespeare gained most of his humor from human rather than societal norms
• three aspects of incongruity:
• literalization: taking a figure of speech and then performing it literally
• reversal: reversing the normal, taking what is normal and expected and doing or saying the opposite
• exaggeration: taking what is normal and blowing it out of proportion
• greatest incongruity = violating of societal taboos-e.g. discussing subjects which aren’t usually discussed at all in public
• puns = weakest form of wit
• Herbert Spencer: “descending incongruity”
• agrees with Bain: incongruity always involves a contrast between something exalted or dignified and something trivial or disreputable
• but, thinks that incongruity is more important than degradation
• laughter = overflow of nervous energy (crossing over a little into relief theory)

relief theories:

• humor may afford us relief from the restraint of conforming to societal values
• reinforced by Sigmund Freud:
• humor = outwitting the “censor”-superego
• will only allow us to indulge in forbidden thoughts if its is first beguiled or disarmed in some way
• beguiling = done by techniques-punning, incongruity
• dreams are another way of eluding the censor

ambivalence theories:

• less important
• central feature of humor = ambivalence: mingling of attraction and repulsion
• humor makes us squeal at the grotesque

other famous people and their variations/additions to theories:

• Aristotle: comedy is painless
• action is comical only when audience know that no actual physical, mental, and/or emotional harm will come to the participants
• good example: cartoons-e.g. Wile E. Coyote
• Henri Bergson: comedy must be mechanical and inherently human
• ideal = élan vital: elasticity and adaptability
• typical comic character = someone with an obsession (idée fixe)
• humorous when someone acts in a manner inappropriate to a stimulus or situation
• slapstick
• chair being pulled out from someone who is sitting down-does not adapt to situation and continues to sit in a mechanical fashion
• comedy is inherently human
• may laugh at antics of animal only in direct proportion to the animal’s capability of reminding the audience of something human
• laughter = society’s defense against the eccentric who refuses to adjust to its requirements

according to the article, in order for anything to be humorous, it must meet ALL of the following requirements:

• 1) must appeal to the intellect rather than emotions
• 2) must be mechanical
• 3) must be inherently human
• 4) must be a set of established set of societal norms
• 5) situation must be inconsistent or unsuitable to the societal norms
• must be perceived by the observer as harmless or painless to the participants

*Thus, in conclusion: None of the theories incorporate all of these elements. Therefore, each theory is only part of the complex definition of comedy. Together, they fully define comedy.*

Types of Comedy (key points):

• low comedy: lacks seriousness of purpose or subtlety of manner
• little intellectual appeal
• high comedy: pure or serious comedy
• appeals to the intellect-stresses incongruities
• burlesque: characterized by ridiculous exaggeration and distortion
• farce: improbable plot, exaggerated character, slapstick elements
• lampoon: broad satirical peace
• parody: imitating or burlesquing another, usually serious, work
• analogous to caricature and cartoon in art
• satire: ridiculing follies and vices of people or time
• slapstick: boisterous; marked by chases, collisions, crude practical jokes
• travesty: presents serious (often religious) subject frivolously

The Comedic Ladder:

• check handout: it already does a very nice job of summarizing each rung of the ladder
• comedy of ideasàcomedy of mannersàfarceàlow comedy

The Difference Between Comedy and Tragedy:

• again, check handout and wiki

Techniques of Comedy:

• again, check handout: sums up terms very well

Homework:

• annotate Pride and Prejudice (Keep reading for a discussion on this)
• comedy essay paragraphs

Pride and Prejudice Group Discussion:

• How is it a comedy?
• definitely high comedy: comedy of manners-especially demonstrated by Darcy and Elizabeth’s witty banters
• not a comedy as characterized by Fyre’s mythoi because it does not endorse the values of the society-Jane Austen completely satirizes the aristocracy
• Comedic techniques used?
• wit: demonstrated, again, by the verbal banters between Darcy and Elizabeth
• hyperboles: Mrs. Bennet always blows things way out of proportion
• Knaves and Fools: Lydia is definitely a knave; Mr. Collins a fair fool
• comedic characterizations
• Mr. Collins is extremely humorous-always described in oxymoronic terms
• sarcasm/satire: Austen uses a lot of this when she is criticizing the aristocratic society
• Language?
• Austen is a master of asyndeton: she often clumps many adjectives together to lend more emotion to her piece
• Austen is often very long-winded; entire paragraphs are sometimes usually only one sentence.

Overall Connections:

• Trying to define comedy is like trying to define tragedy. There are so many different components and versions. From all the tragedies we’ve read, I think that there is no set definition or even combination of definitions for either. It just depends on the audience, the time period, and the purpose of the piece.
• In Brit Lit, we read a few of Shakespeare’s comedies. Twelfth Night is definitely an example of high comedy. It demonstrates both intellectual and incongruity theories of comedy well.
• Freud’s psychoanalytical perspective of humor reminds me of psychoanalytical criticism. His influence runs very deep in different aspects of literature.
• A lot of the TV shows popular right now actually focus on lower rungs of the comedic ladder. In general, maybe an interesting trend is the shift of focus from high to low comedy.
• Even as I say that, I realize that we also still enjoy high comedy very much. We admire people wit and intellectual humor more than crude humor.

Outside Reading Set #4: Book Review

2/21/11

“Moving 'Beyond Katrina' Through Poetry And Prose”

W. Ralph Eubanks

Book Review

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129378912

In his book review of Natasha Trethewey’s Beyond Katrina: A Meditation on the Mississippi Gulf Coast, W. Ralph Eubanks takes a New Historical approach mixed in with some elements of Formalism. In particular, he emphasizes the background of the author, which he claims impacts the quality of the novel. Eubanks says that Trethewey “faces and confronts demons from her past and the present,” resulting in “a book as moving and compelling as Trethewey's poetry.” To support this statement, Eubanks uses powerful diction to drive his point home about the “compelling” nature of Trethewey’s book. His selection of the word “demons” paints an especially vivid image of Trethewey’s struggles, portraying how captivating her book is.

“What makes Beyond Katrina stand out in the crowded landscape of post-Katrina literature is the raw, personal nature of the story Trethewey tells, as well as the poetic language she uses to tell the tale” reiterates the emotional and personal value of Tretheway’s book. Here, Eubanks adds some elements of Formalism to his analysis. He comments on the “poetic language” Trethewey uses and praises the technique for adding to the compelling nature of the book. Another technique Eubanks himself uses to illustrate his point and to sell Trethewey’s book is abundant citation of details from the latter’s book. He repeatedly quotes Trethewey, often juxtaposing the quotations in such a way to portray the subject matter in its best light. By selectively picking out passages, Eubanks emphasizes the more beautiful aspects of the book.

Eubanks takes care to employ parallel structure when citing examples from Trethewey’s book to illustrate his point. This syntactical move bolsters the fluency of Eubanks’s own writing and also mirrors the flowing, poetic style he appreciates in Trethewey’s writing. To emphasize his points, Eubanks also uses unconventional sentence structures, such as placing conjunctions at the beginning of sentences: “And Trethewey's prose captures memory with poetic precision.” The abnormal construction of this sentence as well as its strategic placement at the end of the paragraph makes it stand out.

This piece reminds me of the forewords and introductions in the beginning of books, especially in classic literature. There, readers try to match what they know about the author to the events in the book. In particular, this reminds me of one analysis I read of Shakespeare’s background and how it applies to his work. The incorporation of the author’s background and personal qualities in this analysis is one of its greatest strengths. Normally, we are used to reading very formalistic approaches to critical analyses. Thus, it is nice to read a different approach for once. Although I like the approach, a possible weakness is the author’s lack of development in the formalistic approach. He could have supported his claim more; the review was particularly biased towards the new historical aspect of his analysis.

Outside Reading Set #4: Editorial

2/20/11

“Revoking the Marriage License.”

Belinda Luscombe

Editorial

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1983883,00.html

“Revoking the Marriage License” is a deeply sarcastic, caustic piece. Using strong verbal irony, unusual sentence constructions, and repeated rhetorical questions, Belinda Luscombe crafts a voice with clear disapproval towards people who constantly marry and re-marry. Immediately, Luscombe condemns the ludicrous decisions of some couples: “Larry King is about to get unhitched for the eighth time. This despite the fact that his wife, Shawn Southwick, is 26 years younger and about a foot taller than he is. In other words, a perfect match.” In addition to biting verbal sarcasm, Luscombe reinforces her point with understatements such as “Losing a life partner or two could happen to anyone, but going through seven requires some effort.” and “She was hoping for a straight man; on the two occasions she married a gay guy, it didn’t take.” With each attack, Luscombe mocks unions which are obviously not going to succeed.

Luscombe’s clear-cut voice draws readers in and pulls them toward her opinion. Her ridiculous portrayal of the topic persuades readers and makes them see the folly of marrying too many times. In addition to manipulating language, Luscombe crafts her voice through unconventional syntax. She often starts her sentences with conjunctions, such as in “And Mr. King will be back in the dating pool” and “But other primates also practice infanticide and poop throwing, and we’re not about to sanction either of those.” Normally, placing conjunctions at the beginning of sentences would have a somewhat childish effect, but in this case, the unusual placement emphasizes these sentences and allows them to stand out. This is an essential tactic Luscombe uses in her writing, since most of her sentences that start with conjunctions are key points in her argument.

To demonstrate blatant doubt of the merit of marrying too many times, Luscombe includes important details such as repeated rhetorical questions: “So why do people who are committed vows abusers keep getting handed marriage licenses at city hall?” and “If batters and violent offenders get only three strikers, why should bad spouses get more?” She follows up later with “So why are we complicit in allowing people to make big public promises they have demonstrated a chronic inability to keep up?” Not only are the points in these questions logical and consistent with Luscombe’s argument, but they drive her point home by constantly influencing the reader to doubt the validity of the actions of people who break marriage vows too often.

This piece’s manipulation of language and syntax into unusual constructions is one of its greatest strengths. Not only does this create a strong narrative voice, it also captivates readers and convinces them of Luscombe’s opinions. Because of the deviation from conventional grammatical structures though, this piece has a rather fragmented feeling. Therefore, its weakness is a lacks of a unified structure; it feels more like a compelling list of details and facts. Thus, the speaker would not be appropriate for an AP exam. The writing is simply not organized and formal enough, although this style serves Luscombe’s original purpose quite well.