Below you will find 3 Prompts. You will choose 2 to answer. No works cited page is necessary - you a ...

---

Below you will find 3 Prompts. You will choose 2 to answer. No works cited page is necessary - you are not expected to cite sources outside of those mentioned in the question. If you elect to cite something that is not part of the course material, you may, but you need to attach a works cited page with full MLA citations. You may also cite in-class lectures, if you choose.  The questions below are broad, but that is intentional. The expectation is that you will craft each response as a mini-essay, with a thesis statement and paragraph breaks as you transition between ideas. Your responses should indicate that you have an understanding of the readings in question - so, to the extent required to answer the question (and, preferably, within the 2-page limit) summarize the readings' arguments. You must include at least 4 in-text citations (either direct quotes or paraphrasing) as part of your responses. Upload your responses as a word doc. If you have questions, please feel free to reach out to me. Prompt 1: Analyze Grizzly Man as though you were John Berger. What would Berger say about Timothy Treadwell's behavior? How would he critique Treadwell's treatment of the bears? What desires would Berger say that Treadwell is attempting to fulfill? Prompt 2: Describe the difference between Peter Godfrey-Smith and Bo Ruberg's approaches to Octopuses. How does each writer describe the way in which the octopus transforms our understanding of what it is to be human? Prompt 3: In your own words, summarize Akira Lippit's argument about how the 'animal gaze' is transferred from the animal to the cinematic camera. Describe how you see this transition being addressed in either Au Hasard Balthazar or Nope. (Note that neither film is explicitly addressing Lippit, of course. But this relationship that Lippit is talking about can be a way of analyzing these two texts. I'm asking you to apply a reading to a screening. Your task is not to explain that, secretly, both films are about Lippit's book. You're seeing what your understanding of Lippit's text can add to your analysis of either film)