2008. In a literary work, a minor character, often known as a foil, possesses traits that emphasize, by contrast or comparison, the distinctive characteristics and qualities of the main character. For example, the ideas or behavior of a minor character might be used to highlight the weaknesses or strengths of the main character. Choose a novel or play in which a minor character serves as a foil for the main character. Then write an essay in which you analyze how the relation between the minor character and the major character illuminates the meaning of the work.
Essay 3A:
The essay works to answer the question of the work, but much of the explanation of how the two characters are foils is just summary. The writer gives a good explanation of how Huang affected Lindo, but the explanation of how they are foils is lacking some.The concluding paragraph does more to explain the characters as foils than the rest of the essay does. The writer switches between tenses when talking about the novel. Most of the essay discussed the novel in past tense, which takes away from the overall message. The quick changes to another tense also distract from the piece. This is shown in the essay with, "All the actions in the relationship between Huang and Lindo illuminated the meaning of The Joy Luck Club. The book is all about..." The changes between the tense of the verbs in the adjacent sentences show the student's lack of understanding of essay syntax and confuse the reader. The explanation of theme for the piece is explained well compared to the other aspects. It has a mixture of summary and analysis, so the evidence and the argument are more clear. Overall, the essay answers the question, but the analysis is less “perceptive” than it should be.
Essay 3B:
The essay does not clearly label two characters that are foils. One paragraph focuses on the father’s effect on Celie and the other focuses on Shug’s effect on Celie. The first paragraph does not set up the piece with a clear thesis that addresses the prompt, but instead labels Shug as “friends”. Instead of immediately going into the explanation of the thesis statement, the writer focuses on the father’s influence. Though this may be important to address, the writer spends just as much space setting up this explanation as he/she does explaining Shug’s influence. There is not a clear discussion of theme. The writer analyzes how Celie is affected, but does not explain what it means for the entire novel. Because the writer fails to adequately address theme, he/she fails to address the prompt completely. There are a few grammatical mistakes, as shown in this excerpt: "Shug has a domineering personality who does not listen to any men". This mistake is large enough to distract and confuse the reader from the message of the sentence.
Essay 3C:
This essay fails to offer enough information and does not address the complexities of the novel. The explanation of theme consists of the writer saying the novel is about “loyalty and friendship”. This statement does not address what the author is saying about friendship and loyalty, only that the two things are part of the novel. The “analysis” for the theme statement is only the writer saying Hassan and Baba are loyal characters. The writer uses Baba and Hassan as foils, but Amir and Hassan would be better representations of the novel and there is more evidence for how their relationship affects the theme. Even the summary of the book is too sparse. It is not well represented with a clear plot that furthers the writer’s point. Instead, random plot points are brought up in relation to Hassan and Baba to try to shape the argument. The writer uses contractions, like “wasn’t”, that take away from the piece as as well. Overall, the essay fails to address theme or how the characters affected each other.
Lindsay,
ReplyDeleteYou concisely analyzed each essay and gave excellent feedback. I like how you picked up on the tense change in the first essay. While it does not change the meaning of the essay, it is a sloppy mistake that takes away from what the student is communicating. You also noticed how the essay was heavy on summaries and how it should be more analytical. It’s great that you can pick up on that because analyses are essential to receiving a 9. Your comments on the second essay are great and I like how you realize that the essay jumps around the question instead of being straightforward. This is a common mistake and the more we recognize how to clearly answer a question, the more likely we’ll be to ace our essays. I like your third response and how you again recognize the summaries and lack of analyses. You also have evidence from the essay to fuel your argument. Try to include evidence from the essays in every response so that the reader knows exactly what flaw you are citing in the essay to help smooth and strengthen your argument. Add a few quotes and this post is golden!
Lindsay,
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I expected better. But with you I always expect perfection, and that’s probably not fair. I think this post fell a little flat though. You did a great job telling the faults of these essays, but that’s the only thing you did. How do you feel about these essays? What did you like about them? What could they do to make their essays better? How do you feel about the scores they received (agree/ disagree) and why do you feel that way? And try to get those sentences that might change tense as quotes in your post. It will help you to make your argument stronger, and it will put those mistakes under a spotlight, where a reader might have just skipped right over it on their initial reading of the essay.
Lindsay,
ReplyDeleteYou did a great job of giving feedback on these three essays. The problems you found in the first essay with the author not having enough of an explanation of one of the topics and the switching back and forth between the tenses was very impressive. I would not have thought to look at the tenses, but when I read it back I noticed it and you were correct in saying it was a distraction from the overall point of the essay. With the second essay, as you pointed out, the author did not do a good job of answering the prompt. The whole purpose of the essay is to answer the prompt, but it can be hard to stay focused on that so I understand the author’s mistake. The third essay you pointed out that the essay was more of a summary of the book. This is a mistake that is important to avoid, and it was a great thing to identify. Overall, these were good responses; the only thing I would say is you could add more evidence from the essays so that you points are even stronger.