Blog 12

The topic my students were given to discuss, civil disobedience in comparison to breaking the law, pulled out strengths in the students’ writing because they seemed to be passionate about the subject. [APPOSITIVE SET OFF MY COMMAS]. Each paper is strong in its own way. This is interesting because the students appear to come from different backgrounds. Student 1 is clearly an English as a Second Language (ESL) student [APPOSITIVE SET OFF BY PARENTHESES]. While he has a strong and interesting argument, he makes mistakes most native speakers would not. Student 2 grew up in a different atmosphere – her argument and syntax, strong and interesting, indicates that she grew up in a middle-class community, and interacted with many adults throughout her childhood [ADJECTIVES OUT-OF-ORDER]. Student 3 grew up somewhere in the middle of Students 1 and 2; he grew up a native English speaker, but in an environment with not a lot of adult speakers and writers for him to feed off of. He is a strong writer, but has some issues with verb tenses that Student 2 does not.

Paper 1: “Civil Disobedience VS. Breaking The Law”

Student 1 grew up in a household where English is not the first language; this is especially clear in some of his word choices. For example, he refers to Beth as pleading “innocence” rather than “innocent” [PRESENT PARTICIPIAL PHRASE NOT CONNECTED TO THE MAIN VERB] [USE OF ‘THAN’]. Most native speakers would know the phrase – “pleading innocent” – from simply hearing it throughout their life [APPOSITIVE SET OFF BY DASHES]. It is a common phrase in English, but not necessarily in other languages. Another common English phrase Student 1 attempts to use is “on the other hand”. He changed the word “on” to “in”. The way he changed the common English phrase is another indication that he did not grow up in an English speaking family. He had probably heard the phrase before from native English speakers, and misheard it. Young speakers have a tendency to muddle their words when speaking, so it is no surprise that Student 1 confused the phrase in his writing [PAST PARTICIPIAL PHRASE NOT CONNECTED TO THE MAIN VERB]. Other words Student 1 mixes up are: “indeed”, “been”, and “thought” [APPOSITIVE SET OFF BY A COLON]. In the context, the words he was looking for were “in need”, “being”, and “think”. Native English speakers would not make these confusions because they can be fixed by a familiarity with the spoken language. When students grow up hearing the language spoken all around them, there are certain rules they understand but can’t articulate because they can just hear what the sentence is supposed to be. How would our writing change if we weren’t hearing the language spoken all around us every day? [RHETORICAL QUESTION].

…

Student 1’s use of varying sentence structure indicates that he is becoming more comfortable with the English language – enough to explore [DASH TO EPHASIZE THE LAST ELEMENT OF THE SENTNECE]. He also experiments with punctuation. English punctuation is very different from other languages, so the fact that he is willing to do show also indicates his growing relationship with English. Toward the end of the paper, he uses a semi-colon and appears to be using it correctly. He says, “Chris knew what he was doing; he knew that he was risking a ticket because…” He understands that when using a semi-colon, the writer should be relating the first part of the sentence to the second part. He uses the second part of the semi-colon to expand on the first. Then, he makes sure that both sides of the semi-colon are complete sentences – it cannot be determined for sure that the second part is a complete sentence because it is cut off, but it appears as though it is going to be a complete sentence [USE OF ‘THEN’].

Blog 11

Both Mary Shelley and Charles Dickens use delusion to add complexity to their characters in Frankenstein and Hard Times. Victor Frankenstein and Thomas Gradgrind start out as rational characters, but eventually turn to madness and irrationality as the novels develop. Both Victor and Gradgrind structure their lives around Utilitarianism ideas which in turn lead them to act irrationally and even go mad.

            Gradgrind’s irrationality spawned from the way he structured his school curriculum around the Utilitarian ideas of the 19^th century; Utilitarianism is essentially the idea that people should structure their lives and society to do the greatest good for the greatest number of people [COMPOUND SENTENCE – TWO SENTENCES OF MIRRORING LENGTH CONNECTED BY A SEMICOLON]. However, this is a problem because the individuals who are not part of the greatest number of people are forgotten and not taken care of. Utilitarianism is fundamentally arguing that there is no point to try and satisfy everyone because it is impossible, so instead they should try to satisfy as many as they can [DIRECT OBJECT (IT)]. As both Gradgrind and Victor later exemplify, people instead need to believe that everyone can be made happy, and then strive to do so in as many ways as possible rather than initially setting their standards low. However, to the people of Coketown, Utilitarianism ideas would be the perfect way to structure a society. Coketown’s school system is completely factually based, and Gradgrind, the school principal, sees no value in concepts such as: grief; affection; anger; desire; or empathy [SEMICOLON USED AS A SUPER COMMA]. He is very logical, so a society based off numbers makes perfect sense to him. However, because Gradgrind structured his life around Utilitarianism ideas, his children made irrational decisions based off that upbringing, such as robbing a bank and marrying an unstable, greedy man.

            A society based off Utilitarianism essentially strips all the value from the individual and leads people, such as Tom and Louisa Gradgrind, to act selfishly because they are trained to believe that they do not need to worry about individuals around them, only the greatest number of people. Because Gradgrind taught these values in his school and in his home, his children grew up with the same beliefs [SENTENCE BEGINNING WITH ‘BECAUSE’]. Tom Gradgrind grew up to be narcissistic and egotistical. He showed this when he asked Louisa, his sister, to marry Bounderby as a favor to him even though he knew she did not love Bounderby at all. Louisa, on the other hand, is actually rather selfless because she agreed to marry Bounderby for her brother [USE OF A SUBJECT COMPLIMENT]. However, this is because she was naturally born selfless, and as a result of her father’s upbringing, she led a confused life where she was always fighting her emotions and selfless nature because it was what she had always been taught [‘HOWEVER’ USED IN A SENTENCE]. Despite her selfless nature, she blindly followed what her brother asked of her because it was a logical idea, and eventually lived a childless and depressed life during her marriage and thereafter [OBJECT OF THE PREPOSITION USED IN A COMPOUND SENTENCE].

Utilitarianism, the idea of creating happiness for the greatest number of people possible, seems like the ideal way to structure government because the largest amount of people possible are made happy; however, numbers aren’t everything [COMPOUND SENTENCE - ONE LONG SENTENCE CONNECTED TO A SHORT SENTENCE BY A SEMICOLON]. Life is more complicated than Utilitarianism’s cut and dry way approach to happiness. Sissy Jupe was right when she said it in fact matters a great deal if there are a few deaths per one thousand men; for the families of those few men, the deaths are devastating. Everyone should be happy, instead of just the greatest number [COMPLEX SENTENCE WITH 10 WORDS OR FEWER]. There is more power in the individual than Utilitarianism allows; each individual has the ability to have a profound impact on someone or something. Then he individual all the power in the world [FRAGMENT USED AS A RHETORICAL DEVICE].

Blog 11

Both Mary Shelley and Charles Dickens use delusion to add complexity to their characters in Frankenstein and Hard Times. Victor Frankenstein and Thomas Gradgrind start out as rational characters, but eventually turn to madness and irrationality as the novels develop. Both Victor and Gradgrind structure their lives around Utilitarianism ideas which in turn lead them to act irrationally and even go mad.

            Gradgrind’s irrationality spawned from the way he structured his school curriculum around the Utilitarian ideas of the 19^th century; Utilitarianism is essentially the idea that people should structure their lives and society to do the greatest good for the greatest number of people [COMPOUND SENTENCE – TWO SENTENCES OF MIRRORING LENGTH CONNECTED BY A SEMICOLON]. However, this is a problem because the individuals who are not part of the greatest number of people are forgotten and not taken care of. Utilitarianism is fundamentally arguing that there is no point to try and satisfy everyone because it is impossible, so instead they should try to satisfy as many as they can [DIRECT OBJECT (IT)]. As both Gradgrind and Victor later exemplify, people instead need to believe that everyone can be made happy, and then strive to do so in as many ways as possible rather than initially setting their standards low. However, to the people of Coketown, Utilitarianism ideas would be the perfect way to structure a society. Coketown’s school system is completely factually based, and Gradgrind, the school principal, sees no value in concepts such as: grief; affection; anger; desire; or empathy [SEMICOLON USED AS A SUPER COMMA]. He is very logical, so a society based off numbers makes perfect sense to him. However, because Gradgrind structured his life around Utilitarianism ideas, his children made irrational decisions based off that upbringing, such as robbing a bank and marrying an unstable, greedy man.

            A society based off Utilitarianism essentially strips all the value from the individual and leads people, such as Tom and Louisa Gradgrind, to act selfishly because they are trained to believe that they do not need to worry about individuals around them, only the greatest number of people. Because Gradgrind taught these values in his school and in his home, his children grew up with the same beliefs [SENTENCE BEGINNING WITH ‘BECAUSE’]. Tom Gradgrind grew up to be narcissistic and egotistical. He showed this when he asked Louisa, his sister, to marry Bounderby as a favor to him even though he knew she did not love Bounderby at all. Louisa, on the other hand, is actually rather selfless because she agreed to marry Bounderby for her brother [USE OF A SUBJECT COMPLIMENT]. However, this is because she was naturally born selfless, and as a result of her father’s upbringing, she led a confused life where she was always fighting her emotions and selfless nature because it was what she had always been taught [‘HOWEVER’ USED IN A SENTENCE]. Despite her selfless nature, she blindly followed what her brother asked of her because it was a logical idea, and eventually lived a childless and depressed life during her marriage and thereafter [OBJECT OF THE PREPOSITION USED IN A COMPOUND SENTENCE].

Utilitarianism, the idea of creating happiness for the greatest number of people possible, seems like the ideal way to structure government because the largest amount of people possible are made happy; however, numbers aren’t everything [COMPOUND SENTENCE - ONE LONG SENTENCE CONNECTED TO A SHORT SENTENCE BY A SEMICOLON]. Life is more complicated than Utilitarianism’s cut and dry way approach to happiness. Sissy Jupe was right when she said it in fact matters a great deal if there are a few deaths per one thousand men; for the families of those few men, the deaths are devastating. Everyone should be happy, instead of just the greatest number [COMPLEX SENTENCE WITH 10 WORDS OR FEWER]. There is more power in the individual than Utilitarianism allows; each individual has the ability to have a profound impact on someone or something. Then he individual all the power in the world [FRAGMENT USED AS A RHETORICAL DEVICE].

Blog 10

Shakespeare appears to be cynical about the human race in his portrayals of the characters in some of his most noted plays. To name a few, Richard III, Aaron, and Bolingbroke all act in ways that would send them to the most internal circles of Dante’s hell. Some believe that even his comedies, such as A Midsummer Night’s Dream, have cynical qualities that make people question whether or not Shakespeare believes “true love” exists.

Shakespeare spends most of A Midsummer Night’s Dream convincing the audience that love is fleeting, and he pokes fun at the idea of true love with Oberon’s use of “love juice” on the lovers and Titania [COMPOUND SENTENCE]. However, in the last act he gives the sliver of hope that is “Pyramus and Thisbe;” this leads me to believe he does not have a concrete idea of what love is. Who are we to decide what love is anyway? [USE OF ‘WHO’] Because he only gives dialogue and no stage direction, the play-within-a-play is left up to the audience’s interpretation. We must decide who is in love with whom, and which love is real [USE OF ‘WHOM’]. Shakespeare recognizes the fact that there are many different types of love in the world, and it is not up to one person to decide whether or not that love is “true.” It is up to the lovers alone.

The portrayal of “Pyramus and Thisbe” in performance is pivotal to giving meaning to the play; when a director misunderstands Shakespeare’s notion to keep love a mystery, the whole point of A Midsummer Night’s Dream can be missed. Michael Clemons’ 1999 version [USE OF POSESSION ON A SINGULAR NOUN ENDING IN ‘S’] captures the essence of Shakespeare’s underlying message in act five, whereas the British Broadcasting Corporation version released in 1981 misses its mark [USE OF ‘ITS’].

BBC’s version of “Pyramus and Thisbe” has no departure from the themes in the rest of A Midsummer Night’s Dream. Theirs does not grip the audience or give them anything to think about. Similar to the previous acts, the clowns are dopey yet good-natured [USE OF ‘THEIRS’]. During Quince’s prologue, he is nervous and enthusiastic about showing his play. He fidgets frequently and his voice shakes, yet when his comrades enter the stage he becomes more confident. During Quince’s character introductions, the actors accentuate their poor acting skills by using pantomime to indicate emotions. When the play begins, Pyramus and Thisbe are mediocre. They use voice infliction, but with little body language to show the passionate love they feel for one another – they spend most of the play facing downstage. Pyramus has a direct departure from his character when he corrects Theseus – he says, “No, in truth, sir, he should not [curse again]. ‘Deceiving me’ is Thisbe’s cue” (A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 5.1.182-183). The director accentuates this departure by having Bottom take a bit of food from Theseus’ table before resuming his character. This small act follows suit with Bottom’s passion for the play and constant desire to be in the spotlight.

….

The over-dramatization of “Pyramus and Thisbe” is countered beautifully with Thisbe’s final monologue after she finds Pyramus dead. Flute begins his lines, “Asleep, my love? What, dead, my dove” (A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 5.1.320-321) in his high-pitched girl-voice. Provoked by the audience’s cruel laughter at his performance, Flute shifts his whole character persona to become tender and sensitive and hurt [SERIES OF THREE ITEMS CONNECTED WITH ‘AND’ AND NO COMMAS]. He takes off his wig and assumes a softer voice, filled with emotion when he says “Come, trusty sword, Come, blade, my breast imbrue” (A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 5.1.338-339). This character shift is glaring after 200 lines of farce. He portrays true, unabashed love. In ten lines, Flute causes the audience to question the idea that Shakespeare had been driving home throughout the whole play; love is cursory.

It is the nature of human beings to strive to find the good in each situation we encounter. Shakespeare allows the audience to find the good in A Midsummer Night’s Dream through “Pyramus and Thisbe.” He provides an opportunity to find hope that true love exists. There are many different types of love in the world, all unique in their absoluteness. Shakespeare is right in suggesting that you cannot judge whether true love exists based off the stories of others. We must ask ourselves whose responsibility it is [USE OF ‘WHOSE’]. True love is something you must find yourself – the responsibility is yours [USE OF ‘YOURS’]. It is a secret shared between the two lovers [SIMPLE SENTENCE]. No one else in the world will understand that love, because we can only understand our own [COMPLEX SENTENCE]. Thank you for your attention, Max.

            Most sincerely,

                        Emily Neeleman

Blog 9

Shakespeare appears to be cynical about the human race in his portrayals of the characters in some of his most noted plays. To name a few, Richard III, Aaron, and Bolingbroke all act in ways that would send them to the most internal circles Dante’s hell; some believe that even his comedies, such as A Midsummer Night’s Dream, have cynical qualities that make people question whether or not Shakespeare believes “true love” exists. I don’t think he knows [Loooong SENTENCE FOLLOWED BY A SHORT SENTENCE].

Shakespeare spends most of A Midsummer Night’s Dream convincing the audience that love is fleeting. Shakespeare pokes fun at the idea of true love with Oberon’s use of “love juice” on the lovers and Titania. However, in the last act he gives the sliver of hope that is “Pyramus and Thisbe;” this leads me to believe he does not have a concrete idea of what love is [SENTENCE USING HOWEVER]. Because he only gives dialogue and no stage direction or acute audience reaction, the play-within-a-play is left up to the audience’s interpretation. Shakespeare recognizes the fact that there are many different types of love in the world. Who are we to decide what love is true? [RHETORICAL QUESTION] It is not up to one person. It is up to the lovers alone. The portrayal of “Pyramus and Thisbe” in performance is pivotal to giving meaning to the play

If a director sees “Pyramus and Thisbe” as merely a funny antidote rather than Shakespeare’s notion that love a mystery, the whole point of A Midsummer Night’s Dream can be missed [USE OF “THAN”]; Michael Hoffman’s 1999 version captures the essence of Shakespeare’s underlying message in act five, whereas the British Broadcasting Corporation version released in 1981 misses the mark [ONE SENTENCE PARAGRAPH].

BBC’s version of “Pyramus and Thisbe” has no departure from the themes in the rest of A Midsummer Night’s Dream. It does not grip the audience and give them anything to think about and provoke a deeper meaning from the play [SIMPLE SENTENCE WITH COMPOUNDED VERBS CONNECTED BY “AND”]. Similar to the previous acts, the clowns are dopey yet good-natured. During Quince’s prologue, he is nervous and enthusiastic about showing his play. He fidgets frequently and his voice shakes, yet when his comrades enter the stage he becomes more confident. During Quince’s character introductions, the actors accentuate their poor acting skills by using pantomime to indicate emotions. When the play begins, Pyramus and Thisbe are mediocre. They use voice infliction, but with little body language to show the passionate love they feel for one another – they spend most of the play facing downstage. Pyramus has a direct departure from his character when he corrects Theseus – he says, “No, in truth, sir, he should not [curse again]. ‘Deceiving me’ is Thisbe’s cue” (A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 5.1.182-183). The director accentuates this departure by having Bottom take a bit of food from Theseus’ table before resuming his character. This small act follows suit with Bottom’s passion for the play and constant desire to be in the spotlight.

….

The over-dramatization of “Pyramus and Thisbe” is countered beautifully with Thisbe’s final monologue after she finds Pyramus dead. Flute begins his lines, “Asleep, my love? What, dead, my dove” (A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 5.1.320-321) in his high-pitched girl-voice. Provoked by the audience’s cruel laughter at his performance, Flute shifts his whole character persona to become tender and sensitive and hurt. He then takes off his wig and assumes a softer voice, filled with emotion when he says “Come, trusty sword, Come, blade, my breast imbrue” (A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 5.1.338-339) [USE OF “THEN”]. This character shift is glaring after 200 lines of farce – and gives the entire play a different meaning [DASH TO EMPHASIZE LAST ELEMENT OF SENTENCE]. Shakespeare uses Thisbe to provoke that vital question from the audience, “does true love exist?” [REAL QUESTION] In ten lines, Flute causes the audience to question the idea that Shakespeare had been driving home throughout the whole play – that love is cursory.