A quick post mortem of the thesis
Mar. 2nd, 2009 02:56 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
hmpf- The title does not accurately describe the content.
- The attempt at contextualisation is rubbish. I'm making a lot of words while saying very little that's actually useful to someone who really doesn't know the field(s). It's essentially name dropping without (most of) the names – saying “I know this and this and this sub-section of literature/society/... exists,” but not saying anything beyond that.
- The chapter on the comic's publishing history and the attempt to give a short overview of general themes etc. is too short, and doesn't have the right kind of information, and is thus sort of useless.
- The terms of the discussion are not properly defined.
- The main part of the discussion does not follow a consistent system/structure. There are three sub-sections that each have four sub-sub-sections, which makes it look as if there's some kind of system there, but there isn't. The four sub-sub-sections are not the same for each of the three sub-sections.
- Chapter 6, “Boundaries of the Human,” is not properly connected to... anything. It just kind of floats in there. It's conveniently mostly left out of the conclusion, as well, so I'm really not sure what it's doing in the thesis at all. Ah, yes. I found it too interesting to cut. That's why it's still there. But it doesn't fulfil a purpose.
- The conclusion ignores chapter 6 (see above.) Also, neither the conclusion nor the discussion preceding it manages to take a step back and look at what it all means to a reader in the context of our own society.
- The attempt at contextualisation is rubbish. I'm making a lot of words while saying very little that's actually useful to someone who really doesn't know the field(s). It's essentially name dropping without (most of) the names – saying “I know this and this and this sub-section of literature/society/... exists,” but not saying anything beyond that.
- The chapter on the comic's publishing history and the attempt to give a short overview of general themes etc. is too short, and doesn't have the right kind of information, and is thus sort of useless.
- The terms of the discussion are not properly defined.
- The main part of the discussion does not follow a consistent system/structure. There are three sub-sections that each have four sub-sub-sections, which makes it look as if there's some kind of system there, but there isn't. The four sub-sub-sections are not the same for each of the three sub-sections.
- Chapter 6, “Boundaries of the Human,” is not properly connected to... anything. It just kind of floats in there. It's conveniently mostly left out of the conclusion, as well, so I'm really not sure what it's doing in the thesis at all. Ah, yes. I found it too interesting to cut. That's why it's still there. But it doesn't fulfil a purpose.
- The conclusion ignores chapter 6 (see above.) Also, neither the conclusion nor the discussion preceding it manages to take a step back and look at what it all means to a reader in the context of our own society.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-03-02 02:14 pm (UTC)It's done now. And hey, at I may know nothing about academics, but I liked it a lot. Worrying will solve nothing.
Plus, it was a hell of a lot better than MY thesis, for sure.
I'm not worrying!
Date: 2009-03-02 02:48 pm (UTC)I just figured that now that it's done and I've read it a couple of times, and noticed several flaws, I should make a note of those flaws. Part of learning how to write/think/argue better is analysing what you did wrong in previous attempts, isn't it?
Also,
Date: 2009-03-02 02:51 pm (UTC)Really, I'm not too worried. Even with the flaws, if *I* had to grade my thesis I'd probably give it a 2- at this point (that's "good, but not great"), which is not really something to worry about. And university here in Germany has so far had a tendency to grade me slightly better than I would grade myself.
Re: Also,
Date: 2009-03-02 04:55 pm (UTC)Which is awesome. Because, dude, YOU DID IT. You wrote your thesis. It's finished. YOU DID IT.
(Also, my thesis was a novella; I think you even read it - huh so we've read each others' theses! Which, yes, apples and oranges, but believe me, I could write a whole hell of a lot more than this if I was trying to note down all the flaws I think that story had... o_O So I guess it's probably just a normal impulse, but after watching you work so hard on it, I'm still going to tap you on the head and remind you that YOU DID GOOD.)