--- In quizbowl_at_y..., Doug O'Neal <voltaire1729_at_y...> wrote: So ... what would be the equivalent in physical science? "It is impossible to write a quality tossup on a concept in physical science without having done a problem set based on that concept"? This would eliminate most of the lower-quality science questions written by non-science/engineering students. Particularly the low-quality science questions written by Nathan Freeburg himself. HA HA HA! In all seriousness, I really do have to take issue with the point Nathan brought up about the impossibility of writing good literature questions without having read the works. I don't think reading a work automatically makes you fit to write a good question on it. Writing a good literature question is the result of having a good sense of what's important and worth asking about. If you have a good enough summary of a work (this does not include entries in Benet's in the vast majority of cases), and if you have the aforementioned good sense, it is entirely possible to write a good question based on important symbols, characters, and plot elements without having read the work itself. Developing this sense of what's worth asking about comes with practice and from experiencing other good literature questions, but is by no means exclusive to people who have read the works. Don't get me wrong: there's no doubt that someone who's read a particular work will have a better grasp of the work's themes and ideas than someone who has not read said work. All things being equal, the person who's read it should be able to write a more pyramidal, better-structured question than the person who hasn't. However, all things are rarely equal in this dance of life we call question writing. I would much rather hear a question on The Golden Bowl by a traditionally good writer/editor who hasn't read the work than some ass-clown who's read it twice but has no concept of what makes a good question. Of course, some people would invariably argue that it's an issue of stylistic preferences, but the fact of the matter is that I don't like ass-clowns. Finally, all y'all foolios should stop dissing Benet's. While you shouldn't write questions out of it wholesale, it's still a tremendous reference tool and a valuable source for finding solid question topics. R. Bhan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:46 AM EST EST