In class you have received 3 student essays. Your homework assignment is to edit/critique the samples. (A random sample of essays has been selected and they are xeroxed in random order.) You are to read the 3 essays and annotate (keep track of observations, suggestions, strengths, weaknesses and
adherence to the prompt.) After Reading all three essays post your blog response to the the following task:
Your Task:
For each essay, provide:
- A general reaction to the selected literature
- A comment on the strength of the thesis statement (opening paragraph)
- A reaction to the writer's one sentence overview of the selected literature
- A reaction to how well the writer did or didn't support the identified thesis
- A general compliment (something the writer did well)
- A general suggestion (something the writer could do to improve his/her essay)
In your blog, refer to the samples as essay 1, essay 2 and essay 3. Blogs must be posted by 7:30 am on
Wednesday, 2/15/12.
Prompt #1
ReplyDeleteThe writer of the first prompt seemed to have a clear sense of what the task at hand was and incorporated it nicely into their introductory paragraph. After reading the first paragraph I noticed that I had an idea of what the writer was going to say next which was good because I did not feel lost about what I was reading. The writer of this essay did a really nice job when writing without going deep into plot and other unnecessary characters. The writer did a nice job of explaining how the major and one minor character in Hamlet were Foils of one another and how their actions illuminate the plot. The author identified the thesis inside of their second paragraph, “Laertes, like Hamlet, had his father murdered, and so began his early familiar mission to avenge his father.” This is the first time, besides the introductory paragraph, that the writer mentioned anything about the minor and major characters being foils of one another. I think that the writer of this essay did a nice job of incorporating metaphors into their essay. I think that next time the writer of the essay could make some improvements to their conclusion by re-stating what it is that they were trying to prove throughout their entire essay.
Prompt#2
The writer for the second prompt about Catcher in the Rye did not recall the task at hand in their introductory paragraph. The writer of this essay wrote about Holden and Phoebe as being foils of one another but failed to connect that to the task. They did not mention anything about how the characters being foils helped to illuminate the plot in the story. I think that the writer of this essay misinterpreted the task and thought that the prompt was asking to write about how the characters as foils helped to illustrate the plot in the novel instead of illuminate. Given that the writer seemed to have misunderstood the prompt they still went deep into plot and explaining things that happened that have no relation to what the prompt task was asking. I think that for next time the writer should take the time to analyze what it is that the prompt is asking and also plan out some ideas about what they are going to write to make sure that they understand what the prompt is asking for.
Prompt #3
The writer of the third prompt mentioned the task at hand in their introductory paragraph which was good because it gave me a sense of what I was reading and what they were going to lead me to. The writer chose to write about Hamlet and Young Fortinbras as foils of one another and how they illustrate the plot of the play. The writer, like the second writer, also seemed to have misunderstood the task at hand. Although, they begin their prompt by stating the task they drift away in the second paragraph and eventually begin talking about how the characters illustrated the plot versus illuminating the plot. Although, the writer did a nice job of explaining the relationship between Fortinbras and Hamlet next time they should also plan out their prompt before hand and have a good idea of what the prompt is asking.
- Jasmine :)
Essay 1
ReplyDeleteThe writer selected Hamlet as the piece to analyze and the writer talked about Hamlet and Laertes. I think there are a lot of potential topics in these characters. The thesis statement mentioned how the interactions with Hamlet and Laertes illuminated the meaning of the work but failed to analyze in what way it brings out the meaning of the work. He/she could have analyze the commentary to the audience or the effects of the mentioned interactions. If the thesis was analyzed this would have greatly increased the potential score of the writer. This writer was pretty good at identifying the points where the characters are foils but failed to analyze it; they instead drifted into plot summary and general retelling and commentary about the play. This essay would be greatly improved if analysis was done since the writer already has the sense of what is important.
Essay 2
The writer in this essay chose to write about Holden and Phoebe in Catcher in the Rye; this is an interesting choice because there is a distinct difference in the characterization of both characters. A thesis that pertained to the task in this essay was none existent. Instead the writer talked about Holden but does not make any claim. Most of the essay is plot summary and i think the analysis began in their conclusion where they said that the foil "illustrate that innocence is a fleeting beauty, but one must be ready to let children grow," I believe that the author should have analyzed this and this would have greatly improved the essay. I suggest that the author should think about what they want to talk about first so they wont drift into plot summary. It was good like the first essay the writer knew that pertinent things towards the accomplishment of the task but failed to analyze what the meaning of the work is.
Essay 3
The writer talked about the darkness of both characters and claimed that Fortinbras illuminates Hamlet which in turn emphasizes the message about life and death. I think the writer could have been more specific in the claim and that they are assuming too much when writing. The arrangement of the paragraph seemed to emphasize one point which is good but also bad because this made the second and third paragraph seem weak. However the conclusion brought the essay together which made the piece more complete and on task. The thesis was more or less general so the body paragraph supported it. actually knowing what to write before writing the essay would make this writer write in the right direction.
Essay 1 chose an appropriate piece of literature for this prompt, Hamlet. While Essay I is very well written, the author dose not support their thesis fully. In the opening paragraph, there is a clear and concise thesis statement. “He [Laertes] serves as a foil, and thus illuminates deeper meaning to the play by his interactions with Hamlet and characterization as a whole.” This is a strong thesis statement. The overview of the plot summary was slightly too long. However, it does a good job at summarizing how the characters are involved with one another. The author starts to delve into the deeper meaning that this foil brings out, but starts to fall back into retelling the story of Hamlet. The author gives little support to his or her thesis statement. One thing that this author does very well is write! There is very descriptive language and the author was able to articulate his or her self very clearly. However, the substance of the essay was lacking. This could be because the author ran out of time, or they did not spend enough time planning what they were going to say.
ReplyDeleteEssay 2 picks a good novel, The Catcher in the Rye, for this prompt. However, in the introductory paragraph there is no clear thesis. While the author does suggest a connection between Holden and Phoebe, the author never mentions that they are foils of each other or how that characterization illuminates a deeper meaning in the novel. The plot summary seems to span the entirety of this essay. Also while there was no clear or relevant thesis, the author had no direction with the rest of their writing; it seemed to just retell the novel. The author of this essay does know a good amount about The Catcher in the Rye, and is able to recall a lot of information. However, the author fails to clearly answer the question and does not even mention anything about a foil until the conclusion.
Essay 3 picked an appropriate piece of literature for this prompt, Hamlet. This essay also has a very strong thesis statement. The author picks a truly minor character, Fortinbras, and shows how he is a foil of Hamlet. The author also states how this characterization illuminates the meaning in the play. The plot summary is very short and not very informative. The summary does not tell the reader any information and has some information that is slightly shaky in its truth. However, the author does connect it back, in a way, to the main topic of the essay. The author doses support their thesis, but the support is limited and a little hard to follow. The writer picked a good literary work to use for this prompt, and had a very strong introduction and thesis. However, the author lost focus and seemed rushed. Another thing that was difficult for the reader was the handwriting. In a lot of places it was difficult to see where one sentence ended and another began.
Essay 1
ReplyDeleteThis first essay picked a solid piece to work from, and appropriate characters to analyze. The opening paragraph was a bit wordy, and could have been faster to reach the thesis, but overall did a decent job explaining the purpose of the essay. There seemed to be some retelling in each paragraph, but it was done in such a way that it led into the analysis. The analysis itself was brief, but not that thorough. More elaboration and direct detail from Hamlet could have improved clarity. He/she clearly knew the task at hand, and did his/her best to adhere to it. However, “wordiness” could be reduced and clearer analysis would benefit reader understanding.
Essay 2
Catcher in the Rye is a great piece to pull from for this sort of essay, and a comparison between Holden and Phoebe has a lot of potential. However, the writer seems disorganized and unaware of the purpose of the prompt. Sure, writing was clearly focused on how Holden and Phoebe relate to each other as characters, but not much analysis was done. By extension, little of the essay discusses how Phoebe illuminates the plot. The writer’s knowledge on Catcher in the Rye is quite evident, but the application of that knowledge needs to be more refined. The last paragraph is sad and underdeveloped, which leads me to assume time constraints were a problem. Perhaps moving forward, the writer could spend less time explaining plot and more time tying it all back to the original thesis.
Essay 3
Like the first essay, Hamlet is used as the sample literature. Fortinbras is compared to Hamlet, which is not a bad idea, and could produce a great essay. While the thesis was a little shaky, as well as it’s support, he/she knew enough about each character to adequately analyze Fortinbras as it pertains to the prompt. Plot summary was minimal, and done in such a way that it assisted the message he/she was trying to get across. Handwriting made it difficult to understand, but this is not a gradable element. The middle was a blur, but the solid start and end made it easier in the end.
-Josh Pelton
Essay 1- I felt that this person can definitely write in that he is grammatically correct for most of his essay and he/she has a strong vocabulary but I felt that his entire essay deviated from the purpose of the prompt. He started with an appropriate piece of literature for this prompt, Hamlet. From his thesis statement, he/she does seem to understand what the prompt is about when he says “thus illuminates deeper meaning to the play by his interactions with Hamlet and characterization as a whole” but does not fully support this thesis. He does not sufficiently display how Laertes is a foil to Hamlet when introduced, not including a one sentence overview of the literature. Also, he does not specify what some of the “interactions” are between Hamlet and Laertes and his body paragraph doesn’t seem to support that either. However, he or she did explain the relationship between vengeance and the two listed characters sufficiently but at moments in the body paragraphs, he wrote too much of the plot of the story. I believe that his main point was greatly established towards the end of the essay where he analyzed death/vengeance with the relationship of Laertes and Hamlet. Overall, his/her essay was somewhat inconsistent from start to finish but established great points. I felt that this person didn’t have enough time to establish his thoughts onto the paper.
ReplyDeleteEssay 2- This person chose the Catcher in the Rye as the piece of literature for this prompt but he/she doesn’t even know the name of the book (calling it the “Catcher and the Rye”). He doesn’t explain how Phoebe and Holden are foils but it seems to be implied but he does not specify in his thesis statement that he will analyze the 2 characters to bring out the true meaning of the story. His/her entire body paragraphs contain plot instead of substance and only towards the end he/she explains how the two characters illuminates the meaning of the book. What I thought this person’s strong points were is that he seems to understand this book very well and by including more substance and analysis, this person can easily receive a exemplary score. Also, this person clearly didn’t have enough time to formulate all his thoughts due to his conclusion (don’t worry; my essay didn’t have a strong conclusion either).
Essay 3- This person used Hamlet as their piece of literature to guide his discussion about the prompt. This person clearly know how to writ a thesis statement where he displayed how the contrast between Fortinbras and Hamlet illuminated the message of life and death. His concise discussion about the plot is questionable in terms of its validity but he brings he always connects it back to his main points. He kind of went on a tangent in the second paragraph, not supporting his thesis. Overall though, I believe that he included allot of substance in terms of analyzing the relationship between Hamlet and Fortinbras and how their relationship illuminated the meaning of the story, however, some parts deviated from the thesis. Overall, this person did a great job but needs to formulate his thoughts better.
Essay 1:
ReplyDeleteI think that Hamlet was a good choice for this essay, given its topic. Regarding the essay itself, the thesis statement is near the end of the first paragraph, but it is clear and strong in what it is trying to say. The writer neglected to limit their plot summary to only one sentence and drifted into plot for a bit too long. The thesis was supported in the essay, but only at the very end of it. It felt a bit rushed and shallow, as if the writer ran out of time for writing their full analysis and explication. The essay was, however, well-written with fairly high and academic diction. It may have been better if the writer focused more on the essay’s topic than on the plot of the chosen literature.
Essay 2:
My initial thought was that Catcher in the Rye was not a good choice for this prompt. Although there was a thesis, it didn’t seem to address the core issue of the prompt. Instead of summarizing the plot in a single sentence, the writer used a lot of their time summarizing it in detail over two paragraphs. The writer succeeded in supporting their thesis though it wasn’t a thesis that was responding directly to the essay prompt. The writer did well in analyzing the relationship between their chosen characters, but it would have been better if they responded to the prompt properly.
Essay 3:
I thought that this writer’s choice of Hamlet, just like that of the writer of Essay 1, was a good one. The thesis statement of this essay was fairly clearly written. The summary of the plot is somewhat missing in the form of a single sentence and instead the plot is referenced within the analysis of the relationship between the chosen characters whenever more explanation of it is needed. It is still a bit vague, however. The writer does okay in supporting their thesis, but the language seems a bit strained. In the end, the essay has interesting takes on the interpretation of the original piece. It would be easier to understand if the wording of certain phrases were clearer. It also has a call to action in the last paragraph which makes the essay feel as if it is a persuasive essay instead of an analytical one.
1.) I feel that this writer made an excellent choice in choosing Hamlet. The use of Fortinbras vs. Hamlet as a foil fit perfectly with the question. This writer also made a great first impression by constructing a coherent and concise introduction. They implemented their thesis statement very clearly in the introduction, “Laertes the son of Polonius proves that Hamlet is not entirely unique. He serves as a foil, and thus illuminates deeper meaning to the play.” With a strong thesis statement the writer really set their essay up for success. Also, the writer did a wonderful job summarizing the plot of Hamlet but failed to include it in their introduction. This student also offered a strong amount of plot summary but did a good job in not straying away from their overall topic. The essay generally contained an adequate amount of support and flowed smoothly between arguments. I really liked the opening sentence of paragraph body paragraph two, “The Snowball of grief eventually succumbs under its own weight.” this metaphor helps to explain the emotions of Hamlet and provides room for deeper analysis. In the end, the student did a superb job in tying the foil of Hamlet and Fortinbras back to the overall meaning of the play. However, I would suggest adding more arguments and further analysis of the characters to help generate a better understanding of how their foil contributes to the general meaning of the play.
ReplyDelete2.) Initially, I was very intrigued by the use of Catcher in the Rye to answer the question. I feel that overall the use of Phoebe as a foil to Holden was accurate and fit well with the dynamics of the question. The thesis statement summarizes too much of the story but clearly demonstrates an argument. The thesis statement also addresses the overall meaning of the novel and the concept of the search for innocence. However, as the introduction foreshadowed the body paragraphs went too far into plot summary and strayed away from the main plot. The writer had more than one sentence to summarize the plot of the story and did an excellent job in supporting their arguments. However, you cannot fully recognize their arguments due to the overuse of plot summary. The author did do a good job with addressing overall themes of the novel such as childhood innocence and how it is expressed by Phoebe. I also like the writer’s explanation of the merry go round as a symbol of life and its failures. Ultimately, this student had a general idea of the question but lacked solid arguments and lost their focus by drifting into plot summary. Therefore the writer could add less plot summary and also construct a more coherent conclusion.
3.) The writer’s use of Hamlet was a perfect fit for this specific question. The introduction had a very unique hook that drew me into the thesis statement, which was clearly and concisely stated. The writer left a very good first impression and did a fairly decent job in summarizing the plot, even though it was more than one sentence. The author did an excellent job in supporting his thesis, “Shakespeare uses the image of young Fortinbras to illuminate the main character Hamlet making the message of the play Hamlet about life and death to be emphasized.” The writer supported this claim with an ample amount of support and for each argument they explained how it related to an overall message of the play. Overall, the writer did an excellent job in explaining how Shakespeare’s use of Fortinbras as a foil to Hamlet emphasized the meaning of the play. The student explained multiple examples, such as Hamlet’s self reflection upon himself and how it portrays, “The value of life for every individual”. This demonstrates that the writer had a strong understanding of the question and the play. One thing that I feel this student needs to work on though is explaining more specific plot based examples of how the relationship between the major character and minor character illuminates the meaning of the work.
~Russell
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteEssay #1
ReplyDeleteI believe that the writer of the first prompt tackled the introduction extremely well. I enjoyed how they echoed the assignment within the intro, with how Leartes is Hamlet’s foil and that this illuminates the deeper meaning of the play. However, the overall view of the play was not present within the introduction, but rather it was introduced in the second paragraph of the essay. I felt as though it was an effective tactic that made the transition into describing the characters a lot smoother. As I read further, I believe that the essay was organized and stayed focused to the topic. However, I don’t believe the writer accurately discussed how Leartes and Hamlet are foils of each other. I think there could have been more evidence that demonstrated how their characteristics interact with one another and how the highlight each other’s strengths and weaknesses. Overall, I do believe this was a great first draft of an essay.
Essay #2
I believe the writer of this essay had a rough time trying to convey how Holden and Phoebe are foils of one another. In the introduction there wasn’t a clear thesis statement which made it hard to really grasp the overall meaning of the essay. Rather than discussing how Holden and Phoebe are foils of one another, the writer simply described the relationship between the two characters which did not effectively address the assignment. I believe that the writer incorporated too much of Holden’s ambitions and desires without describing how it connects to Phoebe and how she serves as a foil. Overall, the essay was well written and organized but it did not effectively address the essay assignment.
Essay #3
I believe that the introduction of the essay was well written. The into introduced a strong thesis statement that provided the foil of the main character. However, I think that there should have been a quick one sentence summary of the play and why it was important for Shakespeare to include foils within the play. There could have been a lot more specific examples of how the characters are foils of each other and how this plays into their overall relationship with one another. I also felt as though that the essay did not address the assignment correctly and the topics presented in the essay were unfocused and drifted away from the assignment. To enhance the essay I believe that the writer should have expressed what makes the two characters foils of one another and how they are similar and different.
Essay 1
ReplyDeleteI thought that essay 1 was relatively good, especially in regards to the structure of the essay and the organization of paragraphs. The thesis argues that the foil between Hamlet and Laertes “illuminates deeper meaning to the play”. It would have been better if the author specifically mentioned what meaning, rather than just saying it was deep, in order for there to be something arguable in the sentence. There is no sentence summarizing the plot in the introduction, but the first sentence in the second paragraph (1st body) covers the entire plot concisely. The author supports his thesis statement well with the ending sentences of each of his body paragraphs. He or she states that the crimes in the play spur another to revenge, thus illuminating the theme of death and revenge. The writer’s handwriting was perfectly legible, got quickly to the point in each paragraph, and remembered to underline Hamlet as the title of a play. The biggest improvement that can be made would be to strengthen the thesis statement so that it is taking a clear stance.
Essay 2
Unlike what others have said about the focus of essay 2, I think that it can be argued that Phoebe and Holden are foils, since they are both apparently incredibly smart, but are complete opposites in regards to maturity. That being said, the last sentence of the introduction that is supposed to be the thesis really has nothing to do with the foil between the two. The sentence should be modified so that it mentions how the foil impacts the theme as a whole, rather than explaining some of the themes of the Catcher in the Rye. In regards to the main body paragraphs, good evidence is given, but both tie back to the thesis that does not show how the foil connects to the meaning of the novel as a whole. I think the writer did a good job explaining the themes that the foil strengthened, as well as providing evidence to support his or her claims. The overall trouble with essay 2 was just that the writer forgot to elaborate on the meaning of the themes that he or she presented.
Essay 3
In my opinion essay 3 was difficult to read at parts, which means that the test graders likely would also have trouble reading this. The thesis was strong in this essay, as the writer mentioned how Fortinbras, the minor character, illuminates the main character Hamlet, which strengthens the overall meaning of the theme of life and death in Hamlet. Unfortunately, the play was not really summarized within the essay. The ending sentences of each body paragraph tied back to the meaning of the play as a whole, and evidence is used in the three body paragraphs to support the claims. However, they were not as concrete as they could have been, and I think that two well developed paragraphs would have been better suited than three lesser developed paragraphs. Overall, I did find this essay well written, although a bit sloppy, and it stays with the topic of how foils illuminate the meaning of the play as a whole. I would suggest including more specific evidence in the body paragraphs, as well as less “fluff” in the beginning.
~ Davide Roccapriore
It was a good decision for the author of essay one to choose Hamlet and Laertes. Laertes is a minor character and has strong similarities to Hamlet as well as many differences. I felt that this author’s thesis statement was too general. They should have at least included which, “deeper meaning” of Hamlet that Laertes illuminated. It would have been good if they had also explained a little how, or in what instances the relationship between Laertes and Hamlet illuminates the over-arching theme of the play. The author has a concise and precise summary of the play, but it is not located in the introductory paragraph. If the author had started their essay with that paragraph they could have same some time. I like that the author explained how Laertes is the foil of Hamlet, but then they become a little long-winded and unnecessarily builds drama. I think the author spent too much time discussing how the book is received and how Shakespeare wanted his audience to see his play, where they lacked to fully expand on the relationship between Hamlet and Laertes. The one thing that would have made this essay better is more explanation of what Laertes and Hamlet illuminated about the play as a whole. Though the author did discuss this, I felt that they only discussed one or two points briefly where there should be three major, well-developed arguments.
ReplyDeleteThe Catcher in the Rye was a good choice for this essay. The author focuses more on explaining the relationship of Holden and Phoebe and assumes the reader understands the connection to the overarching theme. The thesis statement was vague and did not mention how the relationship illuminates the novel as a whole. The essay, much like the thesis statement focused on the relationship between the two and less on how that illuminates the theme of the novel. The one sentence overview failed to describe the plot, and instead described Holden. However, if the argument is to persuade the reader that the relationship between the main character and his/her foil illuminates the work as a whole, it is necessary that you argue both cases, that they are foils and that they illuminate the work as a whole. The author would have benefited by a brief explanation of how Phoebe can be considered a foil of Holden. The author also does not have clear organization in the essay. There are many different examples in the second paragraph that could be split up and described further. The author would have benefited if they constantly re-iterated or if they kept coming back to how the relationship illuminates the meaning as a whole.
Hamlet and Fortinbras was a great selection for the essay. The author had a phenomenal thesis statement and upheld to it throughout the essay. The one sentence summary is concise and only explains what needs to be explained in order to understand the rest of the essay. This author’s handwriting was a little difficult to understand, especially towards the end, and sometimes the word choice was a little awkward, so it was sometimes difficult to understand what the author is trying to convey. The author should not have focused so much on how they sounded on the paper and focused more on being clear and concise with prose that they are comfortable with.
Prompt #1: The writer of the first prompt did a good job answering the question fully as well as using a lot of supporting evidence, while avoiding superfluous plot summary. I could find few weaknesses in the essay, however one point to note was that the writer did end quite a few sentences prepositions, which may influence a graders perception of the essay as a whole. That being said the essay was still well crafted, and should be graded highly
ReplyDeletePrompt #2: Unfortunately I do not feel that the choice of comparing Holden and Phoebe Caulfield as foils of each other was a wise choice for this prompt. Although an argument can be made that they are foils of each other, the strength of the argument within the essay will be lacking compared to the selection of other pieces of literature such as Hamlet. On the bright side, although the reasoning that Phoebe and Holden were foils of each other was weak, the analysis of how the themes of the novel were illuminated by there relationship was good. One problem a grader may take away from reading the essay however was several misspellings of words.
Prompt #3: I very much enjoyed the introductory paragraph of this essay. The writer did a very good job grabbing my attention as a reader with their skillful analogy. Unfortunately the introductory paragraph focused a lot on the question, and not so much on the answer. If the analogy could be shortened, and the writer could deliver a thesis to their essay a little sooner I do not think a better introduction could be written. Other than that I thought the essay was very well written, and all the major points for grading were present
Essay (1)
ReplyDeleteI was a little shocked about the literature selection for essay 1 because, yes ok Laertes is a foil but i felt that you really do not see Laertes foil Hamlet in nothing else but the whole father death part so I felt that it must of been difficult to write about it. I think the Thesis statement was their somewhat but more towards the end when he actually mentions Laertes being the foil to Hamlet. The one sentence sum up of the play made sense considering that it was a draft. I think the writer had a hard time trying to get the 2 paragraphs done nevermind 3 and in the writing you can see that the writer starts to talk more about death and revenge and really does not bring up how it illuminates the play. A suggestion would be to try to say how it illuminates the play after every idea he introduces.
Essay(2)
I can honestly say i was not surprised to see The Catcher in The Rye chosen as a choice. I had completely forgotten that Phoebe was a foil to Holden, maybe if I would of remembered I might of gone in that direction. I think the Opening thesis was excellent it went straight to the point and then in the next sentence he goes straight to his foil as opposed to trying to drag it out. I like the ideas brought up but it seems impacted by the time crunch maybe. I think this writer should pace themselves a little more because it is obvious that they fall into time pressure.
Essay (3)
Had a good intro but it is worth nothing if one cannot read it. I was shocked to see that he was trying show the foil between Hamlet and Fortibras because throughout the play the only real foil you see between the two is the fact that they both had their throne relieved of their command and that they both wanted revenge for their fathers death that is it. I do not think the writer had a one sentence overview unless I missed it but if I had to guess I would say it would involve life and death. General suggestion I guess would be to try to pick characters whom he might have more "meat" to write with.
1.
ReplyDeleteThe first essay is fairly well written, but its flaws come in actually addressing the topic. The choice in literature, for one, is a very good choice. It is familiar to most of the AP graders and we covered it in depth in class. Also, the book features many of foils of other characters in the book which is also good.
The writer’s thesis statement was very clear in my opinion. It goes: “However, Laertes, the son of Polonius, proves that Hamlet is not entirely unique.” This seems to be a clear set up that Laertes is to be said to be Hamlet’s foil, but the wording is ambiguous. I believe it would have been simpler for the writer to say that Laertes is has many opposing characteristics than to put a statement like this which forces them to be on a similar plan of actions and qualities. I would like to include that the choice of Laertes and Hamlet as foils is not one that I would have expected, and that if it is carried out fully and correctly, then this could be a great help to this writer’s score.
The writer’s plot summary comes at the very beginning of the second paragraph, still early enough to place the piece in context: “The primary plot of Hamlet revolves around the untimely death of King Hamlet, and his son’s quest for answers and vengeance.” This very succulently puts the perspective of the piece together for us and well illustrates the main points in the book.
However, the writer is quite lacking in his general support as his supporting evidence begins to wander towards a new topic. The second paragraph is on topic and decides to focus on their common quest for vengeance due to the death of their father’s, but the next paragraph goes into the dangers of revenge and how consuming it is. This goes so far even as to get into the final paragraph where the writer continues talking about revenge only linking the discussion back to foils quickly at the end of the paragraph.
One thing that was consistent throughout the essay was the flow of it. It was very easy to read and flowed well from one topic to the next, both through handwriting and diction. This allowed for it to flow through our minds similar to a thought and very easy to comprehend.
As one point of suggestion, I would personally like the plot summary to be inside the actual introduction of the piece. It is my belief that the introduction is an area where you set up the essay, similar to setting up the plot for a piece of literature. In this way, you may proceed through the rest of the piece not needing to give more information along the way.
2.
ReplyDeleteThe choice of The Catcher in the Rye is an excellent choice as the graders are familiar with it, and the book is a basis on self reflection and people that Holden Caulfield does not relate to. For this reason, there are a plethora of characters that could be his foil and much to choose from.
The thesis statement is also easy to understand and point out: “His younger sister Phoebe highlights by comparison the innocence of childhood that is lost in the many minor characters Holden comes in contact with during the novel.” I have two major problems with this thesis though. For one, it does not example Holden in the sentence rather foiling Phoebe and “the many minor characters Holden comes in contact with.” This leads for a confusing thesis and uncertain ground on where you actually stand. Secondly, if you are choosing Holden and Phoebe, I would call Phoebe the second largest character in the book and Hamlet the primary one, so this is not fitting the minor character criteria.
The closest thing I could find to a plot summary was the final line in the first paragraph stating, “Holden’s life is a constant search for childhood innocence and the preservation of it while he himself aspires to be a part of the adult world.” This does allow for the plot to summarize briefly, but also makes it confusing in the questioning of whether or not this is the plot or it is actually Holden’s entire life, which honestly, both are true. However, the summary is well placed and works well in the introduction.
The writer does a better job of supporting his piece, not only with two truly solid points of evidence, but also supporting detail and elaboration. This was key to a good essay. The first paragraph deals with how Phoebe is mature enough to feel compelled to assist her brother with her problems and the second shows how she is actually taking care of him and helping him grow, both of which should be the opposite. The points were well made and well supported.
As a compliment, I really enjoyed the specific points of detail from the book. Part of this was in choosing major characters, but even still you were able to think from the top of your head to two specific instances of this being shown in the book demonstrating deep understanding of the text.
As a suggestion, I feel as though your specific evidence in your third paragraph began to fall into the side of retelling the story which should be avoided. This did in the end assist the main point, but I feel that it could have been accomplished in a way that bordered less on retelling.
3.
ReplyDeleteThe choice of literature is a good one, as I illustrated before. The very choice of a different foil in the same book verifies my posturing that the play has many great foils to choose from.
In addition, this person did a fantastic job of drawing my attention to the piece and to their first paragraph. Their thesis was clearly stated as, “William Shakespeare uses the image of young Fortinbras to illuminate the main character Hamlet making the message of the play Hamlet about life and death be explained.” The thesis, although clearly stated, provides creative and somewhat indirect course for the essay to carry through. The writer chooses to not only highlight the foil, but show how it illuminates the main point of the play. While this is a great idea for a research paper on the foil, this is a timed prompt and not a lot of time is given to the writer to accomplish all of this in a short time. I feel as though this is reflected in the briefness of the final paragraph.
The closes thing I found to a plot summary was, “The hero of the story, Hamlet, is lost in his environment because everything around him seemed to be a bright parade that hides the dark truth about life.” Although this is a true analysis to the beginning of the play, it does not detail the plot of the entire story leaving much to the grader’s imagination. Although it is almost impossible for a grader to not know of Hamlet it is important to detail the plot as you can take from this description and it is part of your score as well.
The writer has a way to wander through their points nonchalantly when providing evidence. In the second paragraph, the writer wanders to the point that there are foils due to the quest of vengeance for their father’s deaths. The next paragraph eventually comes to the point that the book says that you must go out and get what you want. The next paragraph begins with this thought and ends with the thought that you must “maintain the resolve of that decision.” This wandering did lead to some great points, but it felt disorganized to me. I feel that five minutes of planning could have given the essay key direction and given this essay a much better score in total.
The piece had a fantastic opening which really caught my attention and made me want to read the rest of the piece because its imagery was so strong and related directly to your thesis through analogies of light and illumination in a creative and descript format.
As for a suggestion, I thought that the writer’s handwriting was difficult to read and hindered my understanding of the text. It would be a good idea to attempt to write neater for the essays even though I understand that it is no the most simple thing to ask.
--Brandon Harris
1.) After reading the first essay, the first reaction that I had was that it was well written by had flaws that needed to be overcome in order to reach a perfect score. An example of this would be the fact that the writer seemed to incorporate the prompt nicely into the introduction paragraph of the essay. The thesis on the same hand, was also well written and it was well understood what your objective was and what you wanted to prove all together. But the paragraph after is where the flaws set in place. Where you were supposed to only have a one to two sentence book overview, you as the writer wrote a paragraph essentially on the background of Hamlet. Along the same lines, the thesis was not strongly supported with the arguments but rather only told and not analyzed. However, like I had said before your uses of words are well placed but the whole encompass of the essay was not well built. What is suggested to do is focus on more analysis and less expansion and explanation of the back-story. Assume that the reader knows the story already.
ReplyDelete2.) After reading the second essay the reaction throughout the entire essay was that it seemed like it was not on topic. The opening introduction for example did not once mention the word foil in relation to the characters talked about, and the thesis drives the reader to the conclusion that this essay is about Holden’s struggle for childhood innocence, not foils. The thesis would have been great if it was for an essay on childhood innocence, but however this is not the case. The author seemed to be supporting the thesis by using examples of childhood innocence from the book to expand on the already off topic thesis as well. Along the same lines, it seemed like all the paragraphs were geared towards just plot summary and book overview, were the writer should have only mentioned that in just one or two sentences. The writer did well at somewhat expanding on the topic of childhood innocence but that is not going to help here. The essay was attempted to be tied back to foils in the conclusion, but the conclusion should be just a revision of your thesis and should not be introducing new topics. Therefore if what you had stated in the conclusion but just reworded in the introduction, the essay would have made a lot more sense to the reader.
3.) After reading the third essay the reaction of the essay was that it was well writing but again with some flaws that could be improved on. But in this essay it was clear as to what the topic was through the well written introduction and thesis expanding on a good example of light and dark contrast illuminating each other. The written did also a nice job a limiting the plot overview to only one sentence that way it does not get carried out of hand. Along the same lines, the writer did a great job at staying on topic and supporting the thesis that was stated in order to make a more fluent essay. A general compliment would be that the writer seemed to understand what the essays topic was about and well supported that in the writing, but the one comment that should be given would be that the hand writing does affect how the essay was read and sometimes made it difficult to read. But besides that the writer did a great job at formulating this essay.
-Brandon Simone
Essay 1
ReplyDeleteThe author of essay one selected Hamlet as the piece of literature for their prompt. This is a good selection as it provides a different combination of foils of which they chose Hamlet and Laertes. The thesis statement is fairly strong. The author identifies what a foil is, what the purpose of the foil is, and which foil they picked. The one problem with the thesis is that while they mention that the relationship between the foils illuminates the meaning of the work they never actually state what the meaning is. The author’s overview serves as their downfall. The first body paragraph provided a sufficient enough overview, in fact it is a little much. While the author shows is accurately able to represent the relation between Hamlet and Laertes they do not actually answer the question of how the relation illuminates the meaning of the work until the very end of the paper. The author here shows a deep understanding of Hamlet as well as a good writing ability. In the future I suggest that the author try to more accurately represent the question in the body paragraphs instead of addressing it solely in the intro and conclusion
Essay 2
The author of this essay chose Cather in the Rye as their piece of literature and Holden and Phoebe as their foils. While Cather is a classic piece of literature I don’t think it is best suited for this prompt. Something like Hamlet or Macbeth would have been better suited for this prompt. The thesis statement of this essay is weak. While the author does note that Holden and Phoebe are foils and attempts to answer the question of how the relation illuminates the prompt it is hard to follow and not quite clear. While the plot is basically covered throughout the body paragraphs the author never really addresses it directly. This leaves the reader attempting to understand the plot by the little bits that are given to them making it quite confusing. While the author attempts to support their thesis it is hard to really understand what they are saying. The author clearly possess the analytical required to complete the prompt I just suggest that they try to not drift into plot summary and clarify a little more
Essay 3
The author here chose Hamlet as their literary piece. As stated above this is a very good choice. The thesis is very strong as the author covers all the bases. They explain what a foil is, identify the foils they are using, and state what the relation between the foil illuminates. Maybe this is just me but I never got even a basic plot summary out of this essay. The author references plot points in the play that serve to their purpose but never really gave that one or two sentence summary. Besides that the essay and the support for the thesis are top notch. The author brings up multiple examples of how Fortinbras foils Hamlet and analyzes them clearly and thoroughly given the time constraints. Overall the author is superb writer with great analytical skills. The only suggestion I can give is that they expand on the plot just a little bit.
Essay #1
ReplyDeleteThe first essay was the person who wrote this wrote about Hamlet and I thought the introduction was well written and the author of this essay definitely understood what was the task. I felt like when I was reading the essay I almost knew what was coming next. The sentences just flowed all together and I never found myself getting lost or ever being confused. The author of this essay did a really good job in restating his thesis in his second paragraph, "Laertes, like Hamlet, had his father murdered, and so began his early familiar mission to avenge his father."After all compliments, I feel like the author could have been better with the conclusion. I felt like the author should have restated what the moral of the essay was.
Essay #2
For this essay the author chose to write about The Catcher in the Rye. Like Micheal said, I too forgot that Phoebe was a foil to Holden. Like the first essay this introduction was great as well, the thesis was well established and I knew what the essay was going to be about. The author of this essay should just take less time brainstorming appose to writing quickly because it was kind of obvious that the author was running out of time.
Essay #3
This author chose to write about Hamlet as well, and also chose to write about the darkness of both characters and stated that Fortinbras helped illuminate Hamlet which in turn the claim that emphasizes the message about life and death. Although, the author did an ok job in the introduction I felt like the conclusion made the entire piece better, the thesis was very basic and general and I didn't really know where he/she was going. The 2nd and 3rd paragraph seemed very weak the arguments were well supported in my opinion. The writer should write knowing what to write before so he/she heads in the right direction.
Essay 1:
ReplyDeleteIn this first Free Response I felt that the use of Hamlet was great because Hamlet (major character) and Fortinbras (minor character) are the main foils in the play. The introduction of this piece was well-worded but the claims for the body paragraphs weren’t clearly written and the thesis which was used was effective (two sentences) but I feel it could’ve been better condensed into one sentence. This author is successful in implementing a connection back to the thesis in each body paragraph, which is essential in having a centralized FRE. Overall, this essay was very well written for a first draft, and the author should be pleased with the outcome. My two suggestions for this author would be to: Organize the conclusion a bit better, it seemed very scattered, and to introduced the body paragraphs effectively in the introduction.
Essay 2:
For the second Free Response I felt that the choice of literature The Catcher In The Rye was great, but the characters weren’t fit for the description of the foils needed to write this free response, which was a major character and a minor character [ Holden (major character) vs. Phoebe (main character)]. The thesis statement seemed to be lacking in the introduction because the introduction paragraph itself seemed to be a bit disorganized and under-explained (ex: “Phoebe highlights by comparison the innocence of childhood that is lost in the many minor characters Holden comes into contact with during the novel.” No minor characters were mentioned, so there is no support for this statement). Also, there is a plethora of plot used in this essay, and it probably would’ve been more acceptable in the piece if the author properly placed in encompassing connections back to the thesis, which wasn’t the case. Though I do have to compliment the author for having an excellent understanding of The Catcher In The Rye as a whole. Two suggestions I would make to the author are: be conscious of grammar mistakes and try to consolidate the two body paragraphs and implement a third body paragraph if possible!
Essay 3:
For this Free Response Hamlet was a great choice because there are multiple foils that could’ve been used and our knowledge of this play is fresh in our minds so it gave the author an advantage in using it. I felt that the Introduction paragraph was fantastic because the author used imagery and a great hook to reel the reader in and then delivered a concise thesis statement which made sense [Hamlet (major character) vs. Fortinbras (minor character)]. The author also did not go overboard with plot use until later in the body paragraphs (at about the midpoint of body paragraph two to body paragraph three). Where I found problems was when the body paragraphs started to change the thesis, making it not connect back to the main thesis which was conveyed in the introduction, which then resulted in a conclusion which did not even highlight the initial thesis. Though I have to say that this author did an excellent job at using higher vocabulary and great sentence structure throughout the entirety of the essay. My one suggestion would be to centralize the thesis because it should remain static from the introduction to the conclusion and also make penmanship a bit clearer.
Hi. Got a problems with approval essay to college here is nice service for writing essays www.uk.essay-writing-place.com. Well-designed essay in the short term with guaranty!
ReplyDelete