Comparative Black Literature

*Attempt only two questions. *Question # 1, Section A, is compulsory. *Choose one more question from Section B. *Keep your answers clear, concise and analytical. *Address your responses to the specific demands of each question. *Illustrate your answers with apt references, and cite key sources used. *Limit your responses to 4 pages per question. total of no more than 8 page *Your answer scripts must include questions chosen, and be in MLA format. QUESTIONS: SECTION A (compulsory) 1) Explore the complexities of the term, ‘Black Literature’, and discuss how they, critically, engage certain social experiences, literary traditions, canons, racial and cultural politics. SECTION B (choose one) 2) With attention to each story’s social milieu, examine the nuanced relationships between racism and gender politics in Going to Meet the Man and Sometimes, a Motherless Child. 3) Analyze, with focus on subtleties, the critical significance of gender, childhood, community, coming-of-age and unnamed protagonists in The Hammer Man, and No Beating Like Dis One. 4) Discuss how the narrative threads of Red Hot Peppers, with regard to forms of inequalities, violations, and resistance, pose questions about identities, gender, social and power relations. READINGS: Adichie, Chimamanda Ngozi. The Shivering Baldwin, James. Going to Meet the Man Bambara, Toni Cade. The Hammer Man Chamoiseau, Patrick. Red Hot Peppers Clarke, Austin. Sometimes, a Motherless Child D’Aguiar, Fred. A Bad Day for a Good Man in a Hard Job  Danticat, Edwidge. Nineteen Thirty-Seven Evaristo, Bernadine. Yoruba Man Walking  Osondu, E. C. An Incident at Pat’s Bar  Silvera, Makeda. No Beating Like Dis One. HINTS: 1. you may use outside sources, where such would enhance your responses, and, crucially, there are NO specifications about how many sources MUST be cited. In brief, assigned reading materials (The Reader) and, if pertinent, any other scholarly sources that support your arguments would do. 2. Qualify your responses, where necessary, to demonstrate polished understandings of the issues. Good scholarship refrains from sweeping generalizations, bad grammar, haphazard organization, and trite political posturing. While most would agree that racism is bad, you will NOT gain points by merely ‘dissing’ it but by deftly showing how the authors have creatively engaged its problematic features in their respective works. 3. Your papers will be graded for depth and logical flow; particularly, as they integrate assigned readings and other credible sources. So, overall, qualify your responses, where necessary, to demonstrate finespun understandings of the issues. Answered shoudl all aspects of the questions. * Cogent application of lectures and readings. * Cited other relevant materials appropriately. * Identified characters, authors and situations aptly. * Clear, engaging, scholarly and logical analyses. * Avoided pointless summaries of texts. * Hardly any spelling or grammatical errors. * No colloquialisms (slangs and informal language). * Kept responses within specified page limits. * No attempts to ‘stretch’ paper, unduly (through creative pagination, font sizes, etc)