Study program book recommendations for students

Sep 17, 2010 13:12

For those working on the GSP/CTP/IP, here's a rundown of sources in a couple of courses, and what I thought of them:

First, key texts you must own that apply to several courses, or are so indespensible that you should really have them:

gsp, books, ip, ctp

Leave a comment

Comments 7

prophet_maid September 17 2010, 17:37:31 UTC
Ah, I disagree on a lot of the recommendations. Mallory provides good background, but I wasn't enamored with the book enough to want to buy it. Of course, I appear to be the only one in my library to have checked it out in the past 10 years.

I LOVE LOVE LOVE How to Kill a Dragon, and I think any academically-inclined ADFer should own that book. It has some of the best analysis of myth I've ever seen, and makes certain connections clear that I had puzzled over for years. Also, it's the only time I've seen ADF's central dogma discussed outside of ADF (*ghosti). It is an invaluable source, and I've already read it twice.

Also not as big a fan of AA MacDonnell. He's big into that naturalistic interpretation of myth, which while interesting isn't nearly as helpful as something from a Dumezilian perspective.

Reply

chronarchy September 17 2010, 17:42:20 UTC
Well, it's not so much about which books are good so much as which ones are useful for someone trying to get through the CTP/IP/GSP. This is a very, very functional list.

I've just used Mallory so much that I have found it better to have it on hand than not to, particularly for the courses with "IE" in their titles. That recommendation is based on how often I went back to use it rather than anything else.

Watkins, for study program use, is only "useful" for a single question, and that question only requires chapter 2.

MacDonnell gives good depth of detail quickly that can be useful for someone who is only familiar with a single hearth culture, so that's why he's included here as a borderline borrow/buy.

Reply

prophet_maid September 17 2010, 17:46:47 UTC
True. I just had to give out some Watkins love. Cuz really, that with Rees & Rees are like the best IE studies books I've ever seen.

I think I get away with not using Mallory all that much (except for IE Studies 1) because I can find a lot of that info in Puhvel or Watkins or what have you.

Just curious, is it normal to have a really extensive bibliography? My CTP bibliography is currently 5 pages long, and I've only done half a dozen courses. That survey question about needing outside sources, well, with the exception of Structures, Customs, and Policy I've needed significant amounts of outside sources. The recommended reading is like nowhere near sufficient. Or, maybe I'm an overachiever.

Reply

chronarchy September 17 2010, 17:55:03 UTC
Well, I have two bibliographies (and you can see the review process tighten up when you compare them, interestingly enough, as I did my source citations over several years, especially when you compare them to my most recent submissions that had 2009 MLA citations):

Full GSP Bibliography

GSP Bibliography by course (incl. only 8 out of 11 courses for some reason)

That'll give you an idea of how much raw material I worked with, including background reading and such that wasn't directly cited. Not all of it made it into the coursework, but I'd say at least 90% of the second link did, and maybe around 75% of the "full" bibliography did.

So, no, it's not uncommon to hit 5 pages :) I apparently hit 9 :) But I think that does have to do with overacheiving. You can get away with a lot less, if you want to (or are on a tight budget, have a crappy library to borrow from, and virtually no personal library to start with). The best information is spread out among many books, but you can get "passable" information from just a couple.

Reply


wcm September 18 2010, 02:44:16 UTC
1) I love this post.
2) I wish I had this before I started Magic I.
3) When finished, this should be in Oak Leaves!

Reply

spottedtoad October 21 2010, 21:34:30 UTC
...and the important question is, when will it be finished.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up