| Writing assignment #3, 5 pages, due by the beginning of class on Tuesday, April 15 | |
|
Noyes, Theodore W. Oriental America and its Problems. Washington DC: Press of Judd and Detweiler, 1903. The text can be found under Files in Canvas: assign-text-1903-Noyes-Oriental-America.docx Our third writing assignment features close analysis of a document spotlighting the spirited public debate between pro-imperialists and anti-imperialists in the United States in the wake of the “Spanish-American War” of 1898. Switching from an initial career as lawyer, Theodore W. Noyes served a long career as editor-in-chief of a Washington DC newspaper. This 1903 book collected and revised many of his newspaper articles seeking to inform the American public about what Noyes thought was at stake for the United States in the Philippines, in the aftermath of a three-year counter-insurgency war against Filipino nationalists. The book did not describe reality (such as the over 200,000 Filipino civilian deaths), but strove to reflect a mode of journalistic balance ... even as it aimed to persuade its audience toward a particular viewpoint. You will discern various rhetorical frameworks in Noyes’s account that we have noted as typical imperialist predilections: for instance, future talk, virtue talk, and the like. You will necessarily be alert not only to things stated but also to things either unstated or unexamined: the cultural assumptions; the ideological frameworks; the cultural omissions; the social exclusions. Especially as what is assumed or omitted is invariably incredibly revealing. Noyes had his blindspots. The immediate and central question for this paper is: What were the supposed differences between Filipinos and Americans, and how did Noyes’s notions of such differences shape his imagination of what the United States was / would become in the world at the turn of the twentieth century? An empire? The very title of the book tells you that Noyes was grappling with something new. At the same time it will be obvious that Noyes was trying not to unsettle his audience in any way; he was striving to convey a measured account of American public debate that rendered it mild and safe, not radical and disruptive. Being mindful of his use of future talk, virtue talk, and the like will help you analyze the document. We have collectively done this kind of analysis repeatedly in class, and you have done it in the first two writing assignments. While Noyes has his own preferences, he does not himself tell a single story. Remember, too, that while this book is presented as factual and informative, it is fundamentally an exercise in imagination, so you will be writing about perception, not reality. As always it should be obvious that there is no single right or wrong answer to this question. Rather, you will be evaluated on your ability to develop a forceful yet nuanced analytical argument structuring your analysis, to pinpoint main themes to organize your analysis into coherent paragraphs, and to provide specific evidence from the document, other course readings, and your lecture notes. Be sure to endnote/footnote the precise source of any quotations, derivative ideas, or uncommon facts. There is no need to do any additional outside research. Sample endnotes: |