Research Log Five
End of the Journey (for now)
As the final installment of this Digital Archive, it’s time I reflect on not just the quarter, but the entire year. My research paper isn’t yet complete, but is in its final stages of drafting and editing. I’ve analyzed potential primary sources and landed on researching On a Sunbeam, my favorite webcomic of all time, read dozens of scholarly articles and selected which were most relevant to my argument, and reviewed peer articles throughout the process, all of which built off the skills we practiced in the previous two quarters.
It goes without saying that anxiety, procrastination, and perfectionism have made writing difficult this year, especially with the added pressure of being in a course known for being more rigorous and meant for high-achieving students. Even starting assignments has been difficult at times, with the perfectionist fear of creating imperfect writing that is, of course, essential to beginning the writing process. In the end, I have done the majority of my assignments, but these mental blocks have hindered my punctuality; however, I am doing my best to manage these stresses, and plan on turning in a high quality essay by the end of the quarter, despite what my inner thoughts might say.
Main characters in On a Sunbeam trying to repair their ship before crashing, a somewhat relatable situation as I finished the quarter.
The team successfully fixes the ship and launches into space.
Other than working to balance assignments and mental health, I’d advise future Humanities Core students to be excited about their research paper. In my opinion, you can choose to be invested in what you study; even if the current topic isn’t your passion, coming at Hum Core material with an intention to be curious is critical to sustaining yourself throughout the year. This is especially true with the final research project, considering you will be closely engaged with your primary source for two months. I’d definitely add that students need to keep up with deadlines, and put in consistent, measured work over time to maintain that, but as someone who still struggles with skills in time management, I’m not quite sure how sound my advice would be.
Beyond that, I’d also advise future Hum Core students not to be discouraged about looking for scholarly secondary sources. When I began my research by using terms such as “On a Sunbeam, “webcomics,” and “LGBTQ+ comics” I found about five useful sources, one of which directly discussed heteronormative themes in On a Sunbeam, and the rest which talked about queer presence in comics and webcomics, but as I began writing my essay, I realized that I only needed about two to make my point. I also found that I needed new secondary sources to back up my claims about other aspects of the primary source, such as the difference between sci-fi and space opera, queer safe spaces, and how science fiction presents a great opportunity for LGBTQ+ futuristic utopias.
As the Spring Research Project comes to an end, one of the biggest questions Humanities Core students must answer is why their primary source analysis matters in a larger academic conversation about worldbuilding. My essay makes the claim that heteronormativity can often be unintentionally included in queer relationships and safe spaces, and it’s also important that I reflect on my understanding of worldbuilding so that I know where my argument takes place within the scholarly landscape of worldbuilding.
If growth in drafting, research, discussion, editing, and revision has been the goal of our seminar discussion groups, then understanding the scholarly landscape of worldbuilding has been the premise of our lectures. I feel that one of the most critical things I’ve learned about worldbuilding over the year is that it often takes place on multiple levels within the same narrative or project.
We first saw this with Professor Shemek’s lectures on The Decameron, and then later with Professor Fan’s analysis of A and B stories within Asian American literature, and Ruberg’s discussion on the multiple levels of storytelling, and how both the mode of interaction and the medium of a with a text or game aids in telling the overarching fictional narrative. I particularly loved how the medium of a source, whether it’s a book, graphic novel, video game, or real-life goal to (re)build society or themed space, shapes or directly controls the meaning of the worldbuilding effort. Perhaps this is too vague; I think a better way to say this would be that there are lots of different modes of worldbuilding, and that how a real or fictional world is built is just as critical as the narrative it is trying to tell.
Above: Narrative frames of the Decameron. Image Credits: HumCore Shemek Lecture 1
Continually, I was also fascinated by many of the implicit biases and unintentional messages sent by many idealized world building efforts, such as hearing about the inherent cultural insensitivity of Disneyland basing their “mysterious” and “dangerous” Star Wars Land off of Moroccan and Turkish architecture and objects. These implications of unconsciously biased worldbuilding directly influenced my essay on the unintentional heteronormativity within the queer utopia of On a Sunbeam.
Yet, the worldbuilding theme in Humanities Core also means that we must focus on the kinds of worlds we interact, and in particular, build, as writers, researchers, and thinkers. Based on the reviews of many of my peer editors, I’ve gotten good at noticing and selecting evidence pertinent to my claims, but I could improve on concluding how these pieces of evidence tie together, and the importance of what they indicate. I’d say I have to agree; but on a more positive note, I feel that I’ve become a researcher with a more critical eye of what sources are relevant to my subject, and eliminating sources that aren’t (historically I’ve struggled with gathering too many sources and being unable to distinguish which are most useful or even related to my argument).
As a thinker, I’ve learned that it’s ok to outwardly express my ideas in conversation, even if they’re not always agreed upon, or end up being wrong. While thinking and speaking might be unrelated, I’ve found that talking through my ideas helps me brainstorm better, and when my ideas and interpretations often contributed to discussion, I felt more confident in exploring my own thoughts. Now that Humanities Core has less than a week left, I’m happy to say that the program as a whole, while throwing its fair share of academic challenges, was very enjoyable and beneficial in getting to hear and express different ideas within seminar.