Annie Dillard, "The Wreck of Time: Taking Our Century's Measure," and:

• Jon Krakauer, "Selections from Into the Wild"
• Frans de Waal, "Selections from The Ape and the Sushi Master"
• Oliver Sacks, "The Mind's Eye: What the Blind See"
• Tim O'Brien, "How to Tell a True War Story"
• Edward Tenner, "Another Look Back, and a Look Ahead"

Annie Dillard's "The Wreck of Time"

In many ways, Annie Dillard's "The Wreck of Time" defies our common expectations about what a piece of writing should do: the essay has no clear thesis statement; it has no marked transitions between the paragraphs; it provides no obvious connection between its various subsections. Indeed, upon first reading Dillard's piece, one might be tempted to conclude that it's little more than the recitation of a series of unrelated statistics and the posing of a series of unanswered questions. What is it that Dillard wants us to think about while reading her essay? It isn't immediately clear.

This does not necessarily mean that "The Wreck of Time" is an example of failed writing, however; one could argue that Dillard has extended an invitation to her readers to participate in her project of "taking our century's measure." To be sure, Dillard demands a great deal from her readers: we must make the connections, fill in the blank spots, respond to her many unanswered questions, draw our own conclusions. Dillard's readers must work with her, making sense of the statistics she presents, answering the questions she poses.

For your first writing assignment, I would like you to take up this invitation. What does "taking our century's measure" mean for Dillard? Does Dillard have an argument to make about "our century"? What are you, as a reader of Dillard's essay, supposed to do with the information, the observations, and the juxtapositions she has brought together for your consideration? With these questions in mind, compose a 3-4 page essay that discusses Dillard's project in "The Wreck of Time." Make certain that you cite from Dillard's essay at least three times.

Richard E. Miller, Spring 2000

Back to top

Krakauer and Dillard: The Significance of Death

Jon Krakauer tells us that Chris McCandless died in the Alaskan wilderness. What is the significance of that death? After all, as Annie Dillard quotes murderer Ted Bundy, "there are so many people" (194).

Krakauer tries "to make sense of McCandless's . . . death, yet his essence remains slippery, vague, elusive" (439). Dillard asks, "How can an individual count?" (195) For this paper, I would like to discuss what makes a human death significant or insignificant. As always, your paper should be built around your own argument about this topic as it emerges from your consideration of the readings. Thus three perspectives on how a death can be meaningful or meaningless -- Krakauer's, Dillard's, and your own -- should be put into dialogue in your paper.

Circle or underline your thesis in both your rough draft and final paper. This should be one to two sentences long and should appear on the first page.

Before you turn your paper in, make sure all of the following are true:

1. My essay analyzes the readings rather than merely summarizing them.
2. I have included effective and correct uses of quotation in every paragraph.
3. I have avoided repeating grammatical errors I have made in previous essays.
4. Each paragraph meets the paragraph checklist.
5. I have presented and argued a thesis.

Craig Eliason, Fall 2000

Back to top

Dillard and de Waal: Distress and Other Responses to Another's Pain

"Down with Dualism" concludes with de Waal's assertion "that distress at the sight of another's pain is an impulse over which we exert no control." In "The Wreck of Time," Annie Dillard reflects on major events in the last millennium, including great tragedies that involved the deaths of untold numbers of innocent victims. Do the stories that Dillard has to tell support de Waal's argument about nature or Huxley's? If "moral emotions" are part of the genetic makeup of humans, then how can we account for the disasters that Dillard describes? And how do we account for the fact that some, perhaps including Dillard, feel so little distress at learning about the pain others have experienced?

Dillard and Sacks: Living After the End of the World

Annie Dillard, in her essay The Wreck of Time: Taking Our Century's Measure considers the question “How can an individual count?” in the world, when most of the information that we get every day shows us, in one way or another, just how insignificant a number ‘one' is. She discusses what it takes, or might take, to make sense of all the numbers and information that we are being bombarded with, and how we might use this information to consider our own lives, and our own place in the world. Similarly, Oliver Sacks in The Mind's Eye: What the Blind See looks at various people confronted with extraordinary events in their lives, and shows how they respond – cognitively and emotionally – to what we might consider to be personal cataclysms.

For this assignment, I would like you to write a paper which considers the role of cataclysms in our lives, both knowing about them and experiencing them personally. Please base your essay on an answer to the following question:

How does crisis teach us how to live?

 In your paper, you'll need to make specific claims about what constitutes a crisis, and to discuss the specific effects that a particular kind of crisis will have on us. You should also consider the following questions:

•  What does crisis teach us?

•  How do we learn from it?

•  What does it make us do?

•  How is this different to what we would normally do?

Of course, you may come up with more questions like this, and answer them instead of, or as well as, the four questions in the bullet points above. But the questions should help get you started.

I am expecting a balanced essay that represents your own ideas and those in Dillard and Sacks equally. I am looking for original thinking about the two assigned essays which builds on your close reading of specific passages of the readings.

Heather Robinson, Fall 2005

Dillard and O'Brien: I Know This Much is True

In any war story, but especially a true one, it's difficult to separate what happened from what seemed to happen. What seems to happen becomes its own happening and has to be told that way. The angles of vision are skewed.

Tim O'Brien, How to Tell a True War Story , p. 389

It is all a stage – we know this – a temporary stage on top of many layers of stages, but every year a new crop of sand, grass and tree leaves freshens the set and perfects the illusion that ours is the new and urgent world.

Annie Dillard, The Wreck of Time: Taking Our Century's Measure , p. 125

Both Annie Dillard's essay and Tim O'Brien's story suggest that we cannot understand the worlds in which we live by merely looking at facts; facts are less important than our ‘angles of vision' in helping us to understand how to live and how to function in the world. For this paper, I'd like you to consider if or when facts become irrelevant in the construction of our own narratives, the stories that we tell to make our lives make sense. Please develop a project that considers how truth, illusion and subjectivity interact in the construction of the narrative of our lives.

Your paper should respond to Dillard's essay and O'Brien's story in thoughtful, original and ‘connective' ways.

Other, related questions, to help your thinking:

•  What is the relationship between truth and fact?

•  When are facts and truth less important than other things?

•  What are they less important than?

•  Why are facts important and unimportant? What else counts?

•  How much fact do we need to get at the truth?

•  Why is truth and fact sometimes unimportant when compared to the illusions we create in order to live?

•  How do we use truth and fact to help us to live?

•  How might truth hinder us?

Heather Robinson, Fall 2005

Dillard & Tenner: The Complex Character of "Revenge Effects?"

Edward Tenner writes of the technological disasters he calls “revenge effects” and states, “Human culture, not some inherent will of the machine, has created most revenge effects” (655). In facing the future, he considers one question to be especially important: “How can we break out of ruts and change our thinking?” (633). Does this attitude jive with Annie Dillard’s sober assessments of human life?

Imagine a conversation between our authors. Can Tenner’s ideas be applied to Dillard’s world? Does the cycle of intensity—disaster—precaution—vigilance disclose a complexity to the universe that is unavailable in Dillard’s stark statistics? Are revenge effects a blessing in disguise or just another indication that “the might of the universe is arrayed against us”?

Edward De Rosa, Fall 2005

For more assignment ideas involving this essay, please visit the Dillard link-o-mat.

Back to top