Your Task:
Part One: I have provided you with a sample review, one about contemporary (21st century) receptions of Dracula. You can choose one of these samples to compare it with a review of your choice (if you choose the NYT one, then locate a Victorian periodical/newspaper review). Alternatively, you can look for two samples by yourself and conduct a comparison. You would need to utilize the internet, including the library database, to search for your chosen review sample. The idea is for you to read alongside two reviews of distinct periods and compare them in terms of genre, rhetoric, stakes, cultural/artistic assumptions and beliefs, political awareness, reception history, etc.
Part Two: You will then conduct a 4-6 page comparative analysis of the two reviews logically and coherently with the help of additional background research. You are required to search for 2-3 secondary sources (1 of which must be an academic source) that serve as a useful support of evidence and help broaden the scope of your analysis. Here are some questions that you can consider:
How would you describe the stylistic and generic differences/similarities embodied in these two reviews?
How do these reviews engage with/cater to the expectations of their audiences? What do you think explains their distinctive strategic choices?
What are their respective purposes of writing? Do they disclose the same amount of information? How would you account for the stakes of writing the reviews?
What appeals to the readers do the reviews make respectively? What types of claims are being made?
Where do the reviews diverge in their opinions and interests? If the reviews embody different takes on the novel, what do you think accounts for this difference?
Why does this novel sustain continual interest and how do readers from different periods negotiate and construct meaning (however distinct or similar they may be) from the same artifact?
By delving into contextual information about the novel, the Vampire figure, and the history of their making, how does that inform your understanding of the two reviews and where they stand within a line of evolving receptions?
Note: 1) You do not need to answer all of these questions, but should actively engage in generical, rhetorical, cultural, and reception history comparisons 2) Do not answer these questions one by one, but try to formulate your claim that supports a sustained investigation into the differences and similarities of the two reviews. You may not have a distinct argument at this point (that is okay) but I want you to think about organization and how to showcase your findings in a coherent manner that could sustain the reader’s interest.
Format:
Specify the samples you have chosen in the beginning. All sources and use of sources should be formatted in MLA style, including the samples. 12 pt Times New Roman, double-spaced, 1 inch margins.
