My Exams
I got really good questions. There wasn't really anything on there that I -wasn't- familiar with. Some things less familiar than others (i.e. the N-Town Mary plays, or "Ludus Coventriae," and Piers Plowman), but I knew -enough- to deal. Or so I thought, starting out.
I had to translate two passages of Middle English (out of four), identify which works each came from, and write a brief essay on their formal and thematic importance. I chose one that was from Passus X of Piers Plowman and another that was from the Prologue to the Clerk's Tale in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. The translations weren't difficult at all. I'm very adept at Middle English. The essay was more difficult, though. Either they wanted way -more- than what I gave them, or I was trying to come up with way more than the question really wanted. It was difficult as all-fuck.
Then, I had to answer one larger essay question on Chaucer (out of a choice of two). I chose one that dealt with courtly love, as depicted through Andreas Capellanus and the Romance of the Rose, and how Chaucer both uses and changes those conventions in Troilus and Criseyde. That was the least difficult question I had, since I basically wrote a paper on that in my Troilus class in Spring quarter. Of all of the questions, I'm least worried about my marks on that one.
Then, I had to answer -two- larger essay questions on non-Chaucer works from 1100-1400 CE in English. I had to choose between a question dealing with spirituality in Margery Kempe/Julian of Norwich and Piers Plowman (and as an added bonus I had to bring in a secondary work by a scholar named David Aers, whose work I actually know quite well and was quite prepared for) or answer a question dealing with the depiction of Mary as a female figure in the N-Town Corpus Christi pageants contrasted to the depiction of women in the Wakefield Noah and Second Shepherd plays.
I chose the spirituality question, and knew Margery Kempe reallyreally well, but Piers Plowman less so. I struggled a bit with that one, but I think I did a -fairly- good job on balance. Perhaps even passing.
The last one was the fucker.
I had to choose between a question dealing with the depiction of affective piety in the middle ages (i.e. Margery Kempe, some Middle English lyrics, etc.). I knew enough to answer this one, and could have read the suggested lyrics rather quickly, but.....
There he stood, in all his shining glory.
Malory.
The last question was about Malory and Arthurian legend, which is my -major- interest. And my professors know it. Why try to deal with boring old affective piety and lyrics when you can discuss Malory and the Round Table and issues of translatio studii et imperii?
I -totally- fucked it up. I -know- Malory. So much more than I was able to demonstrate in that damned question. I started off really good, setting the context by discussing the Alliterative Morte Arthure, which I am quite familiar with, also. But by the time I got to discussing Malory, I had so much trouble tying him into what I had discussed with the AM, that the entire product came off awkward and choppy and clumsy. :(
And this for a field in medieval literature that I KNOW SO FUCKING WELL!!!!!!!!
I'm disappointed. Although I wasn't -really- hoping for a "High Pass," it was something that tended to glimmer in the back of my mind from time to time over the past several months as at least a distant hope. Now I'm not even -really- expecting to get a "Pass." What is much more likely is that I will get a "Partial Pass," and have to re-take one or more essay questions.
Taking an 8-hour open-book exam on literature in your period, even if you -are- familiar with 80 percent of what is on your reading list, is not as easy as it sounds. I think I would much rather take the original 4-hour version, non open-book and have the expectations lowered drastically.
My professors told me last week to keep in mind that it is "just" an essay exam. Presumably with the expectations that go along with an essay exam. I.e. you aren't going to be able to write a seminar-quality mini-paper for each question. Which I think is what I was -trying- to do, but I was not able to in the time I was allotted. In the end, at about 10 minutes remaining, I had to hurry up and go back and finish the little essay on the Piers Plowman translation, and as a result it is very puerile sounding and hastily constructed.
At least it's over. Now I just wait for the results, which are promised to be delivered prior to December 15.
And now I get to think about my Dante paper that has to be written by December 15.
*tears hair out*