Research Method - suggestions for improvement

[Yellow#5]

I'm wondering if anyone has a favorite resource book on doing literary research that they've found particularly helpful.

Also, if people wanted to share their particular approaches that would be great.

Personally, I tend to start with an anthology, either a volume of anthology on the field of literary theory I like, such as narrative theory, rhetoric or structuralists or the essays in the back of a Norton's edition of a literary work, e.g. Norton's critical reader on The Scarlet Letter.

When I find something that interests me and seems to apply particularly well to primary literary work I follow up on the bibligraphical references, searching for theory in that vein that was already written about that novel using that theoretical approach, or if I start with an essay about a novel in particular, I follow the bibligraphic references back to the broader sub field of theory, like narrative theory, and try and find a link to a theorist I am familiar with and tend to like.

Any tips for focussing this process or making sure it's done more thoroughly?

[Comfect]

I tend to do a careful close-reading of my own ideas first, then do a JSTOR search for what seem to me to be the key terms that I would use in my work. From what I find there, I branch out via the footnotes in the articles I find, and refine my searches (for instance if I thought "rebellion" was the main idea and everyone seems to be doing "resistance" instead, I'll start searching more for resistance than rebellion). If that's turning up nothing, then I'll go find a critical edition or a bibliography to find more sources. I pay particular attention to who gets cited by other sources (for example, in my thesis most of my sources cited Stephen Greenblatt's essay "Invisible Bullets." I therefore made absolutely sure to use it).

[jasper.milvain]

What comfect said, plus a healthy dose of mentioning what I'm working on to friends and faculty when given the chance, and following up on any suggestions.

[zoberg]

WIKIPEDIA

Just kidding.

If you have access to the engines, Illumina and Project Muse are great.

[lotf629]

What a great thread.

Basically, I do what everybody else does, it seems. I've formulated it in my head this way: 1) database searches (JSTOR, Google, library catalogs); 2) bibliographies and other people's citations (paying special attention to frequently-cited works and making sure to look at the bibliography for any standard work in the field); 3) the network (profs, other grad students, etc.). I try to make sure to use all three methods on any given project because usually each one turns up something that didn't crop up in results from the other two.

Other things that pop into my head:

1) I've usually produced the best results by resigning myself to the chores of microfilm, microfiche, manuscripts, and other schools' libraries. Obviously there's not always time, but when there is, it's rarely a waste.

2) I've been surprised by how often I've emailed a professor I don't know at all and gotten an immediate, positive, and helpful response. Usually, if I have a question for the author of an article, I figure out where they're teaching and get their email from their website. Recently, for instance, I emailed someone on another continent a query saying basically "Hi, I'm Person X at Y School doing work on Z, and I found your incredibly useful article A. In particular, I was struck by footnote B, because it's exactly like what I'm working on but I don't know of anyone else making these types of connections. Are you familiar with other work in this area?" Within twelve hours the person had written me back something that opened up an entirely new and extremely exciting avenue of research. Sometimes even total strangers (and senior people) are very helpful, as long as it's clear from your query that you've read their work thoroughly and have a serious question. In other words, don't assume that your network is limited to people whom you actually know personally.

3) IMO at least half the battle comes down to your choice of topic. I've had good luck going in to office hours and saying, "I'm interested in doing something at the intersection of X and Y; can you help me narrow my interests down to a specific research question?" That is, as long as it's early enough in the game that you don't look delinquent by doing so.

[lotf629]

One more thing. I don't do this, but I bet it would be really helpful, and I keep meaning to start. I've heard that it's a good idea to spend two hours a week reading the major journals in one's field. I expect that doing so (or, even better, having done so for a good 12-24 months) would give you a good sense of research methods, major sources, etc., and would really help you get the ball rolling on a project.

[lotf629]

One more, more thing! Just to second Comfect on close reading (of one's own ideas, and also, I'll add, of primary sources). I had a professor (Comfect, I'm going to guess it may have been the same one who made the brutal comment you mentioned in your other thread: initials HV?) who gave me a really hard time about relying too much on secondary sources and insisted that I spend more time obsessively reading primary sources. I thought I was spending plenty of time with the primary sources, but it turned out that she literally wanted me to reread them until I was getting pieces of them caught in my head like pop songs when I was on the treadmill. Doing so also turned out, surprisingly, not to be a waste of time: I noticed things on the 100th reading that I hadn't on the 10th. So maybe that counts as research. Sorry for all the postscripts: I just caught Comfect's point and wanted to second it.

[Comfect]

Actually (as lotf629 and I conspire to mob this thread), it occurs to me in light of lotf629's comment that I do tend to do two series of close readings - one before I know what I want to say, and one after I've gotten an idea - and look very specifically in the second for things that might support my idea (or nix it) that I hadn't seen when I wasn't reading with a specific eye to that issue. You really do notice different things when you read with an idea in mind.

[graciado]

I tend to do a careful close-reading of my own ideas first, then do a JSTOR search for what seem to me to be the key terms that I would use in my work. From what I find there, I branch out via the footnotes in the articles I find, and refine my searches (for instance if I thought "rebellion" was the main idea and everyone seems to be doing "resistance" instead, I'll start searching more for resistance than rebellion). If that's turning up nothing, then I'll go find a critical edition or a bibliography to find more sources. I pay particular attention to who gets cited by other sources (for example, in my thesis most of my sources cited Stephen Greenblatt's essay "Invisible Bullets." I therefore made absolutely sure to use it).

This is pretty much exactly how I would go about it. A little bit of wandering through bibliographies/chronologies of contemporary criticism/etc. can be useful, but I really need to know what I'm after before I go there (otherwise I get a bit swamped with too many possible ideas). Following your sources' bibliographies (particularly the things they quote, which seem to be major props for their ideas) is a great way to find out more about whether or not you're actually pursuing a worthwhile (i.e. not wholly plumbed) avenue. I always take lots of notes (with direct quotations) from my readings of sources and return to them after I've done my own writing and more reading. Things that you happened to only note down casually might spring to importance, or you might suddenly find that the author was actually arguing something different to what you'd imagined, based on just the few quotes you'd been working with.

Invisible Bullets (and Prof. Greenblatt) rocks, by the way!

[chinagirl]

I like the friendly and generous atmosphere here very much! The research methods listed above are quite enlightening for me.

My habit is like Compect's, begining with a careful close-reading of the primary resourses. Some ideas may emerge in my mind, then I will check them one by one, locate one or two to focus my attention. Bibliography and footnotes are valuable for further exploration. It is a pity that I don't have as many resourses as you have in the US (JSTOR or a strong library network). The process of data search sometimes may turn out to be frustrating, since more often than not, I can't find the article or book that is pivotal in getting a deeper or fuller understanding of a topic. Although there are plenty of articles written by Chinese scholars on American literature here, I put more importance in reading the first hand materials written by English speaking writers. That is why I am so eager for an acceptance, which now seems to be almost impossible...

[marshmallow]

So none of you use MLA searching? MLA is the most complete cataloger of scholarly articles in English (although it often misses out on single-author books). JSTOR has less than 10% of what is out there. And a lot of what it does have is not good.

[hadunc]

Wow--some of these methods are pretty intense! My research method usually involves coming up with an idea after mulling over a text for a while, then doing lots and lots of searching in the MLA database. Usually it ends there as I've found that internet research usually is the best way of doing things with just about everything being online these days (though my focus is in the 20th century, so that probably makes it a lot easier). I also use bibliographies when I find a very relevant article. Someone above mentioned contacting the authors--I never thought of that, but that's a good idea! I guess I just never had the guts.

[Minnesotan]

So none of you use MLA searching? MLA is the most complete cataloger of scholarly articles in English (although it often misses out on single-author books). JSTOR has less than 10% of what is out there. And a lot of what it does have is not good.

EndNote does it all for me, without the necessity of getting off my ass and putting on real clothes.

Seriously, working in pyjamas is the only way to do it!

[unspeakable]

My approach is similar to Comfect's - I'm really only posting here so I don't lose track of this thread.

I'm hampered by not being affiliated with a University at the moment, which means I can't do nearly enough research in my pajamas. Hopefully that will change soon.

[wrappedupinbooks]

So none of you use MLA searching? MLA is the most complete cataloger of scholarly articles in English (although it often misses out on single-author books). JSTOR has less than 10% of what is out there. And a lot of what it does have is not good.

The MLA is what I use to search almost exclusively. It narrows down the field already, so you don't get chemistry articles by a person who ALSO happens to be named Hilda Doolittle and who ALSO is doing research on flowers.

Ha.

I couldn't live without the MLA database.