In this paper, you will choose one of the theorists we have read (Žižek, Althusser, Sedgwick, DuBois, Woolf, or Haraway) and use the analytical tools provided in their work to analyze an interpretive problem in Pale Fire or Rashomon. In order to begin this paper, I recommend thinking back to one of these texts and considering a particular moment that seemed difficult to discuss or understand in our earlier conversations. Think of something about one of these texts that resisted interpretation through our other methodologies. Then, try to think about that problem using the theoretical framework provided by one of the theorists we have read. What becomes visible that wasn’t clear before? How does the theory give you a language for discussing the text? Introduction: In your introduction, begin by framing the interpretive problem in the text as specifically as you can. Why does this particular issue resist analysis? Are there contradictions? Is the emotional or rhetorical structure of the text seem in contest with the content of the scene? Are characters behaving according to motivations that are hidden from the viewer/reader? After describing the interpretive problem, briefly describe how the work of the theorist you’ve chosen might suggest a fruitful re-reading of this problem. Your thesis should not attempt to “prove” anything, but should instead argue for a new perspective on the text that brings something to light. Body: For this paper, I would suggest that you really only use one or two paragraphs explicating quotations from the theorist you’ve chosen. Even from within a short essay like “Courtly Love; or, Woman as Thing,” you should choose a particular aspect that you will be employing, like, for example, Žižek’s description of sadism. Briefly explicate quotations that situate your reader in a very specific theoretical framework so that I know what I’m looking for as I read the rest of your paper. For the remainder of the paper, you should explicate evidence from the scene (or scenes) in Pale Fire or Rashomon that you are focusing on, through the lens of the theoretical framework you have just isolated for use. As in all your papers, these paragraphs should be built around quotations or, in the case of the film, very specific descriptions of the moment in the film you are discussing. When explicating this evidence, for this paper, you will be using some of the language and concepts you’ve learned from the theory you’re using. Be creative, but be sure to do justice to the theory. Make a strong case for why this theory is useful for this text. (I am thinking at this moment about the homosociality of the samurai and Tajomaru in the woodcutter’s last story; the samurai manipulates Tajomaru out of his heterosexual alliance with the woman by convincing him to join a homosocial alliance with himself against her. Why are these relationships necessarily in tension with one another? What would Sedgwick say about it?) Explications should be especially thorough in this paper, so paragraphs might be a bit longer. Conclusion: As usual, the conclusion is a good place to suggest something about how the method you’ve chosen to employ might be used in other places in the text, suggesting future study or application. Rashomon video link: