[1] Have you ever experienced, in all your education, a great teacher who lives their subject in the way Edmundson discusses it in "Exemplars"?

     One of the most impressive teachers I've ever had was a lady named Willie Earl Bolick- (you get the impression her parents may have been wanting a boy?) I had her for English, and she also taught French for the 9th grade at Grandview Middle School (Hickory NC). She was a gem. She kept an upright piano in her classroom, and would occasionally sit down and give an impromptu performance. She was bawdy- (would have made a great madame at a brothel), and suffered no fools; yet would go out of her way to give praise when it was due. You never knew what she was going to do or say next, and in hindsight that was probably a calculated approach. Students never nodded off under her watch... Probably near retirement age when I encountered her, she had also taught my mother three decades earlier.

     She often read aloud to us, from whatever the work of our focus was, and would go into character for the narration or the dialogue. Teaching entailed a degree of theater for her. The passion that she had for her job was what set her apart. I will never forget my disappointment when I drew another instructor for French- the number-two guy was so bad in comparison that I just gave up and withdrew... She would do things like serve a French meal, or go into some outrageous soliloquy (in French) when she first stepped into the room. (I only heard about these episodes second-hand from my luckier friends).

     Whether or not Mrs.Bolick is exactly what Edmundson had in mind when he says "The kind of teaching I endorse entails impersonation" (92), she is the closest example from my experience.

     And finally, Professor McKinnon- I would have to say that you have been the most engaged and "beyond the call of duty" instructor I've encountered in my three years of online learning. That's not said to win favor- I know I'm going to do well in this course; but you contribute more to these discussions (this is my third class with you) than any other teacher has.

[2] Are teachers "propagandists" for their own interests and enthusiasm or "critical thinkers who enjoin critical thought" (100)? As a student, is the distinction always clear to you? What impact does it have on your approach to a class and learning?

     Teachers, like those in any other line of work, can run the whole gamut of potentialities. I've never experienced any teachers in the public school system that exhibited overt agendas (perhaps I've been lucky). Now if you want to talk about "Sunday School"- a Southern Baptist invention, that would be a whole other matter...

     I think of campuses such as Liberty University, or Bob Jones University, when I consider this prompt. It is sad for me to imagine how such concepts as evolution or women's rights might be presented in such a program. But in all fairness, I have no idea how they do so- maybe I'd be pleasantly surprised... or not.

     I had a music teacher in high school who was quite unique. He ran into considerable trouble for his very left-wing views (I was quite enamored of him myself, but then again, he lent me a private studio to practice guitar in for my entire senior year). The biggest bit of controversy for Mr. Eugene Preble was his habit of hypnotizing students during class. (I suppose that some paranoid parents envisioned a Svengali-type scenario). It was all in good fun, until one particular student became so suggestible that almost any of us could "put him under." Those were the days, people... Hickory High School even had a "smoking section" for the students. Things have gone more rigid since then.

     The public school systems, including the state-run universities, are going to have the least propaganda in their curricula. I think we would find the most instances in home-schooling and in private schools (especially the religious ones).

[3] Throughout Why Read? Edmundson makes reference to many literary works, authors, theorists and critics. How familiar have you been with these references? What might explain why he references so many authors?

     Edmundson serves up quite the smorgasbord of references- my familiarity runs a fairly predictable course, with authors at the front; and the theorists/critics mostly unheard of. I have to further admit that even the authors he references are mostly unread by me, although I know of them. It makes me feel inadequate, to be honest. I've read a lot of stuff over the years, but Goethe and Proust- nada... Wordsworth only in passing... Walt Whitman I have read at some length, (so there's one at least). Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton- I have some limited experience there. But how do I determine what I've missed, and what needs remedial action the most? There's no definitive "reading list"; so what is one to do?

     Edmundson is trying to give us the full palette possible. I admire his repertoire, and wish I had such a bank to draw upon. He's showing us how many options we have.

     But the older I get, the more I realize- even within a college course, I have to pick and choose. There are simply not enough hours in the day. I attempt to find the "meat" of these readings, first and foremost. I make mental notes to myself to follow through and research the other writers/critics mentioned, if I ever find the time.