1978. Choose an implausible or strikingly unrealistic incident or character in a work of fiction or drama of recognized literary merit. Write an essay that explains how the incident or character is related to the more realistic of plausible elements in the rest of the work. Avoid plot summary.
In Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein there is booth an implausible event and an implausible character. The character of Frankenstein’s monster is the most implausible character. Mary Shelly uses Frankenstein‘s monster to show that humans ultimately destroy the world.
First the monster relates to the other characters by being a symbol of evil. In a moment of Distraught Dr. Frankenstein tries to create new human life but ends up creating a great foe. Later the monster kills Dr. Frankenstein’s brother. This shows that even when the intention is good the things humans create are destructive. In the end of the novel the Monster asks Frankenstein to make him a wife. Frankenstein refuses and the monster kills Frankenstein’s friend. The more plausible events are the birth and life of humans. The way that this relates to the other events is when humans play God and create life our creations end up being evil.
Next the monster relates to other characters by because he is the antagonist. He prevents his creator from of having a clear conscious. This is a symbol of everything Humans create is destructive. Frankenstein cannot shake the feeling that he has done something wrong. He is to blame for his brother’s death and the other deaths caused by the monster. Mary Shelly uses this quilt to create a sense of guilt in the reader.
Mary Shelly uses the relationship between Frankenstein and his monster to prove that humans are to blame for all destruction. She shows that we as a race should feel guilty and that everything we do will eventually come back to haunt us.
Your introductory paragraph lacks that hook that grabs people's attention. Your first sentence is rather bland and just a restatement of the prompt; something that one should definitely avoid doing. Furthermore, is the concept of humans destroying the world as plausible as you think it is? You provide no indication of how you will support that, so I guess I can't really tell where your thesis is at all. Though I personally think that humans will probably destroy the world with global warming, not everyone is on the same boat with me there. You need to provide some kind of support in the thesis so that we at least can see where you're going.
ReplyDeleteYour essay is laden with small mistakes that are distracting and also distort what you originally were trying to say. Doing a quick read through at the end of any writing piece is a good skill to pick up so you avoid small trivial mistakes (which can add up and make you look like a careless writer).
I completely agree with Jiaxin about your introduction. We really went over in class what an intro needs. A thoughtful but broad statement, something that relates it to your piece that you choose, and your thesis. And your thesis is funky. It would have been better to say how the author uses the monster or what about the monster make it something improbable that relates to something probable. You didn't really answer the prompt and Thesis MUST answer prompt. I would also watch out for your topic sentences. I think it is just bad writing to "first" or next". We work so hard on sentence variety in previous years that it seems silly to throw it away in an AP.
ReplyDeleteI think some of your ideas, and how you try and explain, them need work. You put forth the opinion "Next the monster relates to other characters by because he is the antagonist." That is a very broad statement that could be picked apart and you do not do much to support it. I think you should try and narrow down your thoughts so your evidence can be more specific and will make are argument better.
You got some great peer input here--I wish you'd used it to do some revision.
ReplyDelete