VCE Stuff > AN’s Language Analysis Club

2017 LA Club - Week 1

<< < (4/9) > >>

Anonymous:

--- Quote from: remi on May 02, 2017, 09:56:30 pm --- My own attempt, not that confident after rereading but whateverrr:

Charles Slack’s letter to the editor rejects The Washington Post’s claim that the publication of ‘Go Set a Watchman’ tarnished Harper Lee’s legacy as an author who challenged the status quo, and exposed and condemned the inherent societal prejudices of her time. Instead, he praises the new release as similarly might sound nicer if you change it to: as being equally as thought provoking to Lee's first. The phrase 'as similarly thought provoking' just sounds a bit odd thought provoking as Lee’s first.

The Trumbull resident,however, prefaces this assertion with an establishment 'by establishing the literary merit' might sound smoother of the literary merit of Lee’s work. Suggesting that her first novel was “beloved” by many, and still is “more than a half-century” after, audiences are positioned to deduce that literary merit must at least factor into why there is such deep admiration of her work that has even been able to persist through ages of changing literary preferences. This is a little clunky. Perhaps you could be more succinct. Also, you'd be better to start this clause with 'Slack positions audiences to...' When you start it with audiences, it seems as though you're saying that the audiences have made the suggestion, not Slack. Slack’s use of hyperbole in claiming that her work has created “the greatest movies of all time” further reinforces this. Exaggerating such movies’ quality as almost legendary and mythical in transcending time, this I would omit the this and the comma. It's unclear what the 'this' is referring to. If you want to keep the 'this,' I'd change it to: The exaggeration of .... (then we know it's the exaggeration you're talking about) serves to present Lee’s work as equally or greater so as they led to such movies.

In underscoring Lee’s ability to create quality literature, Slack then rebuffs assertions that ‘Go Set a Watchman’ mars her image as an author who spoke out against societal norms. Immediately though 'though' is too informal. Perhaps change to however. , Are you missing a word here? Maybe, the positioning positioning of this argument after establishing her abilities already inclines audiences to accept this assertion; it is as if they are positioned to generalize that all of Lee’s works, including ‘Go Set A Watchman’, embody her great literary ability to question inherent prejudices of society. Nevertheless, the Trumbull resident furthers his assertion by citing ‘Go Set a Watchman’s’ ability to spark “impassioned conversations”. The word “impassioned” connotes a sense of unrestrained emotion, and serves to allude to the provocative I'm not sure if provocative is the right word here. Maybe captivating or enthralling. nature of Lee’s highly praised original work. Thus, an association is drawn between the two novels, conveying that both are similarly thought provoking and challenging of their respective time periods challenge their respective time periods sounds nicer . Slack however then acknowledges that it is “lesser” so, hence acknowledging of an omit of an. Just say: acknowledging opposing viewpoints. opposing viewpoint to present himself as diplomatic and logical and therefore his assertion as similarly so. Seeing Slack’s argument as founded on logical thinking, audiences are hence positioned to more likely accept it. This last part is a bit generic. You could add some extra details to give it some zing.

On the whole, this is a good analysis. Just watch out for your expression. Sometimes the clunkiness/inarticulate nature of your sentences detract from your actual analysis.  :)



--- End quote ---

clarke54321:
Sorry must be extra-tired or something. I forgot to tick the box twice..........  :-\

Gogo14:
I wrote this up before looking at the other essays. Thanks x10 to whoever corrects my essay!!!

Charles Slack argues that despite the publication of To set a watchman, Harper Lee’s legacy still remains preserved. Slack claims that Lee “continues to move millions of new readers each year”, suggesting that her popularity is unwavering. By mentioning that “Hollywood… translat[ed] the book into one of the greatest movies of all time”, slack invites the readers to measure the success of Harper Lee’s novels to be so extensive that Hollywood, a distinguished movie capital, has produced a successful movie about it. As such, bringing the novels into context with Hollywood and movie production, the readership is positioned to perceive the novel as significantly influential. Furthermore, Slack exaggerates the extent of Lee’s legacy by describing her literature to be “beloved by readers”, “move millions of new readers”,”shatter[ing] sales records” and is “one of the most beloved works of American literature”. This constant emphasis on her success establishes an admirable, appreciative tone that evokes awe in readers for the success of Harper Lee. Also, the fact that Lee allegedly still has such a profound influence on the literature world “more than half a half-century after publication” demonstrates to the audience that the success of Harper Lee is unquavering, thus lingering to be a legacy. Slack then reinforces his argument by suggesting to readers with opposing views to consider why other “writers [are] hoping to experience the same tragedy”. Tragedy is satirically labled in this article to denote success, and Slack manipulates this in a humorous manner to position the audience to view that Lee’s literature success is long lived and her influence is not a tragedy, but an ambition.

zhen:

--- Quote from: Gogo14 on May 06, 2017, 11:06:02 pm ---I wrote this up before looking at the other essays. Thanks x10 to whoever corrects my essay!!!

Charles Slack argues that despite the publication of To set a watchman, Harper Lee’s legacy still remains preserved. Good sentence introducing the contention of the piece. Slack claims that Lee “continues to move millions of new readers each year”, suggesting that her popularity is unwavering I don't think this is sufficient analysis for a quote. You've just provided half a sentence analysing the quote which I don't think is enough and shows a lack of depth of analysis.By mentioning that “Hollywood… translat[ed] the book into one of the greatest movies of all time”, slack invites the readers to measure the success of Harper Lee’s novels to be so extensive that Hollywood, a distinguished movie capital, has produced a successful movie about it. As such, bringing the novels into context with Hollywood and movie production, the readership is positioned to perceive the novel as significantly influential. Some really good analysis here.  :) Furthermore, Slack exaggerates the extent of Lee’s legacy by describing her literature to be “beloved by readers”, “move millions of new readers”,”shatter[ing] sales records” and is “one of the most beloved works of American literature”. Here you're just listing quotes, which is something you don't want to do, as it just seems like you're retelling what the writer said. Also, by listing quotes you limit how much you can analyse of each quote, as it forces you to give a broad statement analysing all the quotes. This constant emphasis on her success establishes an admirable, appreciative I don't think this word is used right, since appreciative means that they are grateful for, which I don't think is an appropriate description of the writer's tone tone that evokes awe in readers for the success of Harper Lee. Also, the fact that Lee allegedly still has such a profound influence on the literature world This sentence sounds like it isn't analysing the piece, since the first part of the sentence sounds more like a fact. I think through establishing that Lee still has such a profound influence on the literature world..., Slack demonstrates to the reader.... would be a better sentence“more than half a half-century after publication” demonstrates to the audience that the success of Harper Lee is unquavering, thus lingering to be a legacy. Expression here is weird Slack then reinforces his argument by suggesting to readers with opposing views to consider why other “writers [are] hoping to experience the same tragedy”. Tragedy is satirically labled in this article to denote success, and Slack manipulates this in a humorous manner to position the audience to view that Lee’s literature success is long lived and her influence is not a tragedy, but an ambition. You haven't really mentioned how Slack manipulages the word tragedy humorously or provides sufficient evidence to support this idea.

--- End quote ---
I felt like you started really strong, but then towards the middle, the of your essay your quality dropped. Anyway, good job and keep working at it (not that I need to tell the god himself).  :)

clarke54321:

--- Quote from: Gogo14 on May 06, 2017, 11:06:02 pm ---I wrote this up before looking at the other essays. Thanks x10 to whoever corrects my essay!!!

Charles Slack argues that despite the publication of 'To set a watchman' , Harper Lee’s legacy still remains preserved. Slack claims that Lee “continues to move millions of new readers each year”, suggesting that her popularity is unwavering I think it would be worth devoting one more sentence to this piece of evidence. If you could tease out some finer details as to why it is unwavering, it would add a lot more strength to your analysis. . By mentioning that “Hollywood… translat[ed] the book into one of the greatest movies of all time”, slack invites the readers to measure the success of Harper Lee’s novels to be so extensive that Hollywood, a distinguished movie capital, has produced a successful movie about it. As such, bringing the novels into context with Hollywood and movie production, the readership is positioned to perceive the novel as significantly influential. Good! You've stretched out the impacts of the example. Furthermore, Slack exaggerates the extent of Lee’s legacy by describing her literature to be “beloved by readers”, “move millions of new readers”,”shatter[ing] sales records” and is “one of the most beloved works of American literature”. While your examples help illustrate your point, you could make it stronger by analysing a single adjective or verb to really underscore the exaggeration of her legacy. This constant emphasis on her success establishes an admirable, appreciative tone that evokes awe in readers for the success of Harper Lee. Also, the fact that Lee allegedly still has such a profound influence on the literature world “more than half a half-century after publication” demonstrates to the audience that the success of Harper Lee is unwavering , thus lingering to be a legacy Bit of an awkward expression. I would use this clause to talk about the effect on the reader. . Slack then reinforces his argument by suggesting to readers with opposing views to consider why other “writers [are] hoping to experience the same tragedy”. Tragedy is satirically labelled in this article to denote success Might sound clearer if you said: To kindle a sense of humor in readers, Slack paradoxically implies that tragedy is a kind of success, thereby provoking/coaxing/positioning readers....... , and Slack manipulates this in a humorous manner to position the audience to view that Lee’s literature success is long lived and her influence is not a tragedy, but an ambition.

--- End quote ---

This is a good analysis. You've picked out examples, which clearly illustrate your points. If you can tease out your evidence to a greater extent, it will really strengthen your work!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page