Critique question 3

Example 3A

In this example, the author focuses heavily on the plot of one play. Though the analysis that the author provides is somewhat weak, they make up for it by providing abundant examples that are taken from a play extremely well suited for the question, that highlights and builds off of the original question. The opening sentences “The use of a symbol has the ability to deliver a potential message. Used in a work of literature, it has the ability to profoundly affect and alter the mindset of the audience” is weak and far too broad, as is the thesis “In his play, The Wild Duck, author Henrick Ibsen uses an overarching symbol of a wild duck in order to highlight the events and developments of characters throughout”, but the analysis improves as the essay progresses. Later analysis is directed, accurate, and relevant, showing how Ibsen “uses the duck as a symbol to guide the play, revealing several of the characters’ deepest emotions.” The plot detail, while a bit excessive, contributes to the meaning of the play.

Example 3B:

The author brings up many valid points in their analysis of A Streetcar Named Desire. However, these are marred by a shortage of analysis and confusing sentence structures. Many interesting points are raised in the introduction, such as “Blanche’s obsession with youth”, and her need to “make everything in life appear better than it is”. While valid, they lack the explanation necessary for the reader to connect them fully to the final paragraph of analysis. Blanche’s obsession with youth is never raised again, and her need to improve upon the appearance of life, while touched upon, is not adequately explained. The author states that Blanche uses the lampshade to “cover the flaws in life”, yet it seems that the lampshade would only dim everything, flaws and strengths alike. Very likely this is an intentional move by Williams, but it remains unexplored. The structure of the sentences is very often flawed and occasionally confusing – sentences like “Making everything fairy-tale like and better than it is is her coping with the fact that because she exposed the truth of her husband she lost him” are distracting and detract from the analysis provided by the essay. On the whole, however, the essay does a good job of explaining the meaning and significance of the lampshade, and I think it does a good job of answering the prompt, although either expanding on or deleting the current dead ends, as well as proofreading the essay, would make it seem a lot more polished.

 

Example 3C:

The given example of analysis of Things Fall Apart places far too much weight on the machete, while spending too little time on how it impacts the meaning of the novel and the protagonist’s development (or lack thereof). It is stated several times that the machete stands for “power, pride, strength, and significance”, but this is never backed by evidence from the book – while it is stated that he used it for defense purposes, why this would lead it to symbolize strength, pride, or power is never explained. Bold statements like “Okonkwo had enemies, he had war, he had lots of fight in him, he wasn’t living in a peaceful world”, and “with the machete, Okonkwo could care for himself” are not supported by the text, though a simple anecdote or example would make them much more effective. Further complicating the matter is the brief mention of Okonkwo’s suicide. The event stands in sharp contrast to the themes that are discussed in the essay, and though it states that he did not have his machete with him, the suicide suggests that there was some inner conflict that the machete was helping to regulate. Including this would have made the essay more interesting and less bland than it is. Cutting down on the repetition would have made the essay feel more effective.