I had such mixed feelings about this class. I got my first C ever on the first paper and I freaked out and thought I was going to drop the class/fail. But the essays were graded on improvement and I ended up getting a B on the second paper and an A on the final research project/presentation. My overall grade was an A- and leaving the class I was happy I took it. Mott is funny and weird but a good guy and I loved going to lecture. The books were not fun and the class requires a lot of reading but I became better at close reading by the end of the class.

I wasn't a huge fan of Professor Mott mostly because I didn't think his jokes were funny, but this class wasn't bad. The readings covered a good selection of American novels, and the TAs were very generous with essay grading.

I took English 85 in my first quarter of freshman year and it was a great GE! The books we read were generally very good (although I only managed to actually finish 4 of the 6, but you don't really need to finish the ones you don't write an essay on) and it was interesting to analyze them in a social/historical context. The other great thing about this class was that it was only about 40-50 people, much smaller than my other lectures, and Mott took the time to get to know a lot of people's names and joke around with us, so it felt very personable and I really enjoyed going to that class. It's important to have a good relationship with your TA and ask for help on essays if you need it because those are basically your whole grade in the class. I ended up with an A, and I would really recommend Mott (he's so funny! makes the best kind of inappropriate jokes) and taking this class as a GE if you like English.

Take Jacob Lang's section is possible. He actually helps w/ the writing process.

Took the American Novel course as a GE because I thought I was good in English (HS) & that it would be an easy GE. IT WASN'T. It was hard cramming 7 novels in 10 weeks. I was more interested in the ideas behind the typical American novel, and all the grade was based off were essays, as if it were a COMP class. He's cool & funny. But if it weren't for my TA, i wouldn't have passed. Some novels were interesting. BUT if you're looking for easy GE, don't take this class, it's really time consuming.

The reviews for Professor Mott will vary because this course is very subjective (depending on how you like his lectures and how effective your TA is). Personally, I thought the lectures were a joke. He spends the majority of his time on topics that are close to irrelevant to the texts read. My TA was alright. She is new so I will give her a pass on what she could have done better. Nonetheless, what I say or anyone else says here will not be true for everyone. So with that in mind, if you think you can handle this course without major problems, take it. But if you are someone who needs a lot of guidance on essay topics and discussions, find another class.

This was the first UCLA GE course I took, and I have to say it was great! It was my favorite class that quarter. :)

Pros:
- Mott's a funny guy (who specializes in dirty humor-- trust me, his book selections have tons of sexual overtones).
- I got a really great TA, so I learned a lot about how to write a compelling thesis statement and how to make an essay flow. TAs will vary. Some will make you take a lot of pop quizzes or make you write your essay/thesis/introductory paragraphs in advance. Others will simply leave it up to you to consult with them during office hours.
- Instead of following that cut-and-paste AP English Lit/Comp format they have you follow in high school, this class taught me how to think more analytically, formulate an argument, find appropriate evidence for my argument, and present it all in a logical manner. After a summer of doing nothing, this class whipped me into shape.

Cons:
- You will never get through a whole lecture. Ever. With all the shenanigans Mott pulled during lecture, I considered it a good day if we got to the third-to-last slide.
- Mott's arguments for his theses can get a bit obscure. Ask your TA for clarification if you need to.
- Mott's got some favoritism towards specific TA's/honors section students.

Overall: Seven books in 10 weeks is certainly no bueno, but it's doable. If there's one book you really can't get into, it's pretty much fine if you don't read it if you a) attend lecture and b) go to discussion. I made the mistake of not reading five books until the weekend before Week 10. Managed to finish 4/5! :) Just remember that the point of lecture is to show you the thought process behind the formulation of a strong thesis. I recommend showing up to every lecture (if possible) and every discussion.

Pretty good. Really depends on your TA, some TAs give weekly reading quizzes some don't. You read 7 books which is really unrealistic if you have other classes and a life. I happened to have a TA that didn't give quizzes so I never even read an entire book. Lectures are not the best, although not a class where it's a good idea to completely blow off going to lecture. Going about 70% of the time is usually a good idea. Mott is a nice guy, tries to be funny during class, loves to go off on tangents and make references to things that no one knows about. There are easier GEs but this is not a bad option.

I personally do not think Mott is an effective professor. I received an A- in his class. We had 7 books in 10 weeks, which was too much for us to really analyze each of the books we read, especially towards the end of the quarter. Most of his lectures were focused a thesis statement which never really related to our papers, so I didn't see the point of them. If you get a good TA, they can help you a lot with your writing, but even that has a limit due to only 2 papers assigned the entire quarter. I didn't have a good experience with this class, and wouldn't recommend it if you are looking for a useful GE to take.

I thought I would like Mott because he was fun, congenial, and energetic, but I didn't. His lectures didn't help us understand the themes in the books, and the discussions were too short to really go over anything. We had 7 books in 10 weeks, which was too fast to grasp the concepts. He even admitted when he hadn't finished the books before lecture. His focus on lectures was picking one topic and arguing it. We rarely made it past a couple of slides because he always got distracted and sidetracked. He often talked about deep philosophical arguments that were above most of the students' heads. Luckily, the essays were not difficult once you learn his style, and the final was predictable if you took time to plan it out. I still know nothing about those books, which is a shame because some of them were actually good.