Instructions for low stakes reflection

10-12 sentences (3-4 on each of the 3 elements)

Your improvement this (or desire for further improvement) in 3 elements of writing:

Thesis statement

Supporting the thesis with evidence from the literary text

Supporting the thesis with evidence from critics (secondary sources)

Use of comparison/contrast

Organizing body paragraphs--for example, use of outline

Using transitions between ideas or units of the paper

Avoiding repetition of ideas

Using topic sentences in body paragraphs (that do not merely summarize plot but interpret)

Avoiding word repetition

Using literary terms

Avoiding word waste

Increasing variety of sentence structure

word choice

Subject/verb agreement

verb endings

use of irregular verbs

use of helping verbs

run-ons

fragments

sentence-structure errors

singular/plural

punctuation in general

reflection

What have you learned and/or improved in several of  the following  areas:

thesis-statement and quality

development of support for your thesis and evidence from the text

use of topic sentences

overall organization (of sequence of paragraphs)

organization of each body paragraph

use of transitions

avoiding wasted words

avoiding word repetition

using literary terms and the proper formal language

grammar (run-ons, fragments, verb errors, singular/plural)

Course Schedule

ePortfolio deposit

EPORTFOLIO DEPOSIT

Put your Word doc or docx on your desktop and eliminate your name and the professor's name from the inside of the document itself and the file name.

Go to your ePortfolio and log in.

Click on ENG 102.

Click on Assessment-- Inquiry and Problem Solving

Click on Step 1

Find the "choose file" button, then click it to browse.

Upload the document and then you should see the file name.\.

Go to the bottom of the webpage and click Complete and Submit.





GROUP WORK


A. & B. The subject matter of Chinua Achebe's "Vultures" is very clear: how good and evil can exist in one person. How does Achebe use trope, image, and allusion to convey this realization about human beings? Present and analyze one example of each (trope, image, and allusion).


Achebe uses the "vulture" as a trope to convey how good and evil can exist in one person. The reference to the commander working at the concentration camp is an allusion. Even though he operates an oven, he picks up sweets for his children at home. Achebe uses this example to portray how good and evil simultaneously exists in a person. He also uses image to compare the commandant to an ogre and a glow-worm for what he does at the concentration camp.
Achebe uses the glow-worm in contrast to the ogre as a trope to show how even a nasty and awful person has small traces of goodness in them. "The icy tavern of a cruel heart" is the image of the type of cold hearted nature the person has regardless of whether there is some good in them.

C. & D.  Is Kim Hye Soon's "Sand Woman" a feminist poem or the representation of an apolitical nightmare? Why? To illustrate your response, identify and analyze 3 tropes/images.

"Sand Woman" can be described as a feminist poem and a nightmare. The imagery in the poem describes a woman who persists after losing a loved one, perhaps her husband in a war. The woman suffers from her surroundings and she refuses to give in to the atmosphere. "People came and took her./ They stripped her and placed her in saltwater/ Spread her legs cut her hair and opened her chest" (Kim)/ Yet she refused to open her eyes or keep breathing. Her suffering and her persistence make this a feminist poem. The fact that she does not open her eyes and refuses to breathe symbolize her resistance to the politics around her. Additionally, this woman could be a metaphor for resistance.

sample paper on a play

EXCELLENT ESSAY ON A PLAY

R S

Professor Fink

English 102.0867

April 11,2016

“A Number,” by Caryl Churchill

The play, “A Number,” by Caryl Churchill, proposes the question, what defines a person? Is an individual solely defined by their genetic makeup or is whom they are influenced by their environment? The playwright introduces this theme of nature versus nurture by depicting three individuals, one being the original child, B1, and two of his clones, B2 and Michael Black. These three characters, even though genetically identical, have extremely different personalities, due to the environment in which they are raised. Therefore, their reactions to cloning or being cloned are unique to whom they have become.

“The Body in Pieces: Contemporary Anatomy Theaters,” by Amy Strahler Holzapfel, analyses “A Number;” providing the reader with a brief understanding of Churchill’s literary techniques and use of structure as a trope, for cloning: “Churchill’s broken dialogue, with its cut-off endings and repetitive internal motifs, mimics the underlying themes of fragmentation and cloning within the drama” (Holzapfel 12).  Churchill has written the play in five parts; giving the idea that although similar each clone has its own part in the world, which is supported in Holzapfel’s critique: “Structured in five parts, the play dramaturgically reflects its own subject of cloning by presenting a series of eerily similar variations, or mutations, of the father/son relationship…” (Holzapfel 12). Holzapfel’s use of “mutations” explains the variances in the relationship each “son” has with the father; eluding to the need to use psychodynamic analysis when attempting to understand B1’s, B2’s and Michael Black’s relationship with Salter and their involvement with cloning.  

All three characters had varied upbringings and their relationships with Salter greatly differed from one another. B1 and B2 both considered Salter to be their father, as opposed to, Michael Black who was unaware of Salter’s existence. B1 had a very traumatic childhood, which resulted in the “birth” of B2. 

As it turns out, B1, was indeed the “original son,” who at age four and following the suicide of his mother, Salter had rejected and given away to the child welfare system. In hopes of starting over, he had another son cloned from the cells of B1, who had been, in Salter’s opinion, a perfect baby turned demonic child. (Holzapfel 12-13) 

B1 experienced the loss of a mother, father and his mind at a very young age. He developed a mental illness due to a traumatic incident, which may not have happened, had his mother not passed. 

Salter:…You’d nearly stopped speaking do you remember that? Not speaking not eating I tried to make you. I’d put you in the cupboard do you remember? Or I’d look for you everywhere and I’d think you’d got away and I’d find you under the bed. You liked it there I’d put your dinner under for you. But it got worse do you remember? There was nobody but us. One day I cleaned you up and said take him into care. (Churchill    )

He experienced abandonment and rejection, which may have further worsened his mental illness. Where as, B2 experienced the “good” side of Salter, who felt he was given the chance to “start over.”

            Salter: but then later I

            B2: later yes

            Salter: I did try that’s what I did I started again I

            B2: That’s what

            Salter: I was good I tried to be good I was good to you

B2 had a loving, caring, and supportive father, who raised him, and no signs of any mental illnesses. As a child, he had a sense of security knowing he was his father’s son. On the other hand, Michael Black, has had no physical, mental or emotional interaction with Salter. It can be presumed he was raised in an environment, which was completely isolated from B1, B2, and Salter. 

            B2’s initial reaction to the dialogue between him and Salter, about cloning, was of insecurity and uncertainty. 

B2: yes I know what you meant, I just, because of course I want them to be things, I do think they’re things, I don’t think they’re, of course I do think they’re them just as much as I’m me but I. I don’t know what I think, I feel terrible.

He becomes weary of what he thought to be true about his father. B2 becomes unable to define what the other clones are and who he is. As B2 learns about B1’s past, B2’s focus shifts from pondering about defining the clones to the actual acts of Salter committed towards B1. B2 develops a sense of resentment and anger towards Salter. “B2: but I can’t you can’t I can’t give you credit for that if I don’t give you blame for the other it’s what you did it’s what happened” (Churchill     ). B2 was raised with a moral standard, which had been crossed by his own father and believes that B1 may have been different, if Salter had not sent him away. “B2: …I’m saying would he have done the same things who can say he might have been a very loving father and in fact of course you have that in you to be that because you were to me…” (Churchill    ). B2 reacts to the situation true to the way he was raised and does not have any deep-rooted malice towards anyone.

            B1, who is not sound of mind, has a sense of resentment towards Salter, and the dialogue between the two was of superficial matters, ranging from money to dogs. However, when discussing the clones B1, held a deep resentment for them and their lives. 

            

B1: The other one. Your son. My brother is he? my little twin

            Salter: Yes.

            B1: Has he got a child?

            Salter: No.

            B1: Because if he had I’d kill it (Churchill    )

B1’s anger for Salter translated into hatred for the clones. B1 resented the clones and towards the end of the play, the audience learns B1 has murdered B2. The actual act of murder ban be due to B1’s illness, however, the anger may have come from a feeling of abandonment at a young age. 

            Michael Black has his own identity, which is completely different from B1 and B2. He seems to not be phased by the idea of cloning and finds a sense of joy in it. 

Salter:…what it does to me what am I and it’s not even me it happened to, so how can just, you must think something about it.

            Michael: I think it’s funny, I think it’s delightful

            Salter: delightful?

Michael: all these very similar people doing things like each other or a bit different or whatever we’re doing, what a thrill for the mad old professor if he’d lived to see it, I do see the joy of it. I know you’re not happy at all. (Churchill   )

Michael has a different perspective on cloning which can directly relate to his happiness and life style he is living. His life is full compared to the other two and he holds no resentments. However, he is unable to relate with Salter, as he is a complete stranger to him. 

B1 and B2 both hold a certain amount of anger towards Salter, which is directly related to their relationship with him.

            

Salter: You remind me of him

            B2: I remind myself of him. We both hate you.

            …

B2: I don’t blame you it’s not your fault but what you’ve been like what you’re like I can’t help it.

            …

B2: Except what he feels as hate and what I feel as hate are completely different because what you did to him and what you did to me are different things. 

The feeling is the same but the way it originated is different and how the two deal with the anger is different. Michael has an entirely different perspective towards cloning. 

He sees the glass have full, where as, B1 sees it as half empty and B2 is unsure of what to think.  

It can be concluded that each individual has a reaction, which is unique to his or her being. Using the idea of nature, an individual should react exact in the same manner as its clone; however, “A Number” disproves this theory. All three individuals have a different reaction to cloning. One can only conclude that there environment in which they were raised in and their personal experiences, allowed each individual to respond to cloning in a variety of different ways. Due to this outcome, nurture is the dominating factor in the development of a person. 

WORKS CITED 

Churchill, Caryl. A Number. Theater Communications, 2003.

Holzapfel, Amy Strahler. “The Body in Pieces: Contemporary Anatomy Theaters.” PAJ: A Journal of      Performance and Art, 30.2 (May 2008): 1-16. JSTOR.
Klein, Julia M. "Caryl Churchill's Identity Crises." Chronicle of Higher Education 52.38 (26 May
     2006). Academic Search Complete. Web. 25 Mar. 2016.

sample fiction paper

Ignore the underlinings; these denote changes in the revision of the paper.

KJ

October, 2019

English 102

For  centuries men were the only bread and butter winners, but today females are just as responsible for providing for their families. Nonetheless, men still hold incalculable power and say in our modern day society. This power manifests itself in “The Mark of Cain” by Roxane Gay and “The Fun House” by Sherman Alexie. These are two stories that explore the role and oppression of women by highlighting their experiences. In Gay’s “The Mark of Cain” the main character, a woman who remains unnamed, finds herself in a toxic relationship with her husband and begins to find refugee in his brother’s arms. While,“The Fun House” by Sherman Alexie explores the life of a woman who is left to assume all household responsibilities on her own, solely because she is a woman. Rather than being appreciated by her husband and her 30 year old unemployed  son , she is disrespected. Although the two stories unfoil distinct plots, both stories implement flashbacks, and mirroring conflicts and climactic scenes to develop a theme of male domination.

 In “The Mark of Cain” the main character tells us  “I worry about the day when he leaves me, torn apart on our bed, waiting for him to put me back”(Gay). Here, It is obvious that she does not feel whole nor strong without her husband Caleb. In fact,  when she says she would have to wait for him to be fixed she reveals just how dependent on him she is. Caleb seems to be completely in control of her emotions. She even makes the choice to only wear eyeliner and dark lipstick simply because he wants her to look how she did when they first met, despite knowing it to be a memory of her dark past. Caleb has such a strong hold on her that he is easily able to manipulate her to do anything he pleases, including things she might not like or be against.  He hurts her, yet still she is on a never ending journey to satisfy him and feel loved by him. When she comes to the realization that it is unrealistic to feel truly loved by her husband, she finds the elements of love that she could never find in her own relationship in one with Jacob, her husband’s twin. By Jacob’s side she feels the closest to loved. In the same way, the aunt from Sherman Alexie’s story also struggles with the same internal conflict: the lack of love and respect from her significant others. She reminisces about a better time in her relationship with her husband; however, during that earlier period, She asks him“Do you love me?” (Alexie)  She still finds herself feeling uncertain whether she is loved or not and seeks affirmation from his part. The writers showed us that two women with completely different backgrounds and personalities can battle the same fight in their subconscious. 

Gay and Alexie not only showed us both characters share the same internal conflict, but they also dismantle complex characters for the reader’s unserstanding through flashbacks. Specifically, Roxane Gay’s  first-person narrarator says “ He starts telling me a story about himself and his brother sitting in the backseat of their father’s Cadillac while the old man got a blowjob from a woman that was not their mother, and how their father had her give his sons blowjobs as well.” This flashback helps readers understand Caleb’s toxic behavior. With this, Gay unfoils a multi-faceted character who was once a victim and has now become an oppressor of his own wife. The chronological timeline of Alexie’s story is also interrupted for the same purpose. We begin to understand the aunts frustrated attitude towards her husband when she dates back 30 years to when she and her husband got into a car accident because he was drunk, despite all her warnings about him not being in the  condition to drive. Still, she was supportive of him even as this was not the first time he found himself in this predicament. But he could never do the same for her.  Actually, when a mouse runs up her leg and she asks why didn't he help, he says: “I bet when that mouse ran up your pant leg, he was thinking what in the hell kind of mouse traps do they got now”  Through the flashback we are able to further understand both the aunt and Caleb’s behavior.

The two stories demonstrate elements of patriarchy and show us how the female role is exploited. Within Caleb and his wife’s relationship, it is clear that there is both verbal and physical abuse: “Caleb grabs me by my waist , straddles me, and slaps my face.” He then continues to be verbally abusive and tells her  “Don’t be a fucking whore.” He exerts control over her in every way he possibly can in order to regain the control and supremacy he felt he was stripped from by his father as a child. Although, there isn't any domestic violence in the aunt’s relationship in “The Fun House” the aunt struggles with with not conforming to the quintessential and traditional  role of being a woman,but unlike Caleb’s wife, she approaches the situation differently.  Instead she stands he ground and is reluctant to be treated like the only caretaker in the house. When her husband urges her to come out of the water she chooses to not abide by what he says. Instead, she shows independence and courage when she tells him she will be coming out when she wants to do so. She then proceeds to tell her husband and son “ and cook your own god damn dinner.” Unlike the aunt, Caleb’s wife has a more submissive attitude towards her husband’s actions. The aunt in Alexie’s story makes it known that she is not okay with the way she is being treated. While one woman is empowered to speak up for herself, the other woman is left voiceless and discouraged, yet both women are being suppressed by male dominance and need help.

Throughout the stories a feminist appeal is consistant. In fact, the climax in both stories make a strong appeal to the to  male supremacy and feminism In the beginning of Alexie’s story the aunt works on a fully beaded dress that only a strong woman could wear, that woman would be their savior. Sherman Alexie then ends the story by reintroducing the dress of freedom and strength: “She pulled that heaviest of beaded dresses over her head. Her knees buckled and she almost fell from the weight; then she did not fall. ‘No,’ she said to her husband when her husband and son tried to help her.” Within this climactic scene, she defeats the concept male supremacy as she refuses the help of the men in her life that she once desperately wanted, and become her own hero as she danced in the heavy dress that almost dragged her to the ground. In contrast, the first-person narrator in Gay’s stroy does not face that same type of victory. In the climax, she faces the irony of being pregnant with two male twins. Instead of overcoming the beliefs of male chauvinists, it seems that she became deeply immersed in them.

    The authors convey a feminist critique through the use of  literary devices like conflict, flashbacks, and climax. Through this style, “The Mark of Cain” and “The Fun House” tell the stories of two women that are nothing alike, yet share similar experiences. Consequently, raising  awareness to the issues that women face on a day to day basis. Today, women have equal rights as men, but still there is a gap between the law and the actual sexist ideals that are inculcated in some men, but these stories give women a positive and hopeful outlook regarding patriarchy, showing that the power is within women to stand up for themselves like the aunt did to be your own liberator.

Works Cited

Alexie,Sherman. “The Fun House.” The Lone Rangerand Tonto Fistfight inHeaven. Atlantic Monthly P, 1993

Gay, Roxane. “The Mark of Cain.” Difficult Women. Grove P, 2017