writing essays
Bulldog
Hash: SHA1
I need help writing a body pargraph for my essay on theme....
The body paragrpahs are supposed to make use of three litarary
devices (point of view, dialogue, descriptive writing) and i have 2
quotes for each of these, but i dont know what to do with them... i
have a horrible english teacher who doesnt teach...
so, what would a layout of the paragraph be?
intro
quote
examine quote
quote
examine quote
conclusion
?
any help at all would be appreciated!
- --
Listening to rap is like having your teeth pulled...
without the cool drugs! ****
icq: 70six3oneate4
msn: rand...@DIGNITYhotmail.com
remeber to get rid of dignity when msging me...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBPBKC7pGNUytZf2WVEQJ6jACg9SDlmw1rxKj74XdZggQxl7qivVMAn2NX
1fDji7d31QiZHZkUU20UOzjt
=dJhF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Agelmar
although I wouldn't complain were I you...
I had to submit a draft for my essay by midnight last night, so I did, it
was 11 pages. Today, it came back via email with comments, and it was 16
pages. Not only this, but I should somehow edit out four pages of it and
replace it with four pages of something else, and more clearly define my
argumentative structure :-) I've a wee bit of work to do.... due 11am
Wed.... on top of finishing Plato's Apology for 11am Wed...
"Bulldog" <rand...@dignity.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uqvQ7.31630$KT.79...@news4.rdc1.on.home.com...
Rob
news:uqvQ7.31630$KT.79...@news4.rdc1.on.home.com...
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I need help writing a body pargraph for my essay on theme....
> The body paragrpahs are supposed to make use of three litarary
> devices (point of view, dialogue, descriptive writing) and i have 2
> quotes for each of these, but i dont know what to do with them... i
> have a horrible english teacher who doesnt teach...
> so, what would a layout of the paragraph be?
> intro
> quote
> examine quote
> quote
> examine quote
> conclusion
> ?
> any help at all would be appreciated!
I haven't done stupid English assignments since highschool, and come
to think of it my not doing it then is what eventually led to my failing
of English classes, and my almost not graduating highschool. So I'd take
Agelmar's advice on this one. Anyways, when you're finished and I can see
exactly what you've done, feel free if it pleases you to post it up here
and I'll give the whole thing a look over and editing, as some others
would probably be willing to do on a short paper. If you finish a draft by
tonight I most likely will be able to find some time to go through it
before tomorrow morning as I'm guessing this is due Monday.
Bulldog
Hash: SHA1
"Agelmar" <ia...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:BxvQ7.40374$cU4.4...@typhoon.mw.mediaone.net...
> Yes, that would likely be an appropriate layout...
> although I wouldn't complain were I you...
> I had to submit a draft for my essay by midnight last night, so I
> did, it was 11 pages. Today, it came back via email with comments,
> and it was 16 pages. Not only this, but I should somehow edit out
> four pages of it and replace it with four pages of something else,
> and more clearly define my argumentative structure :-) I've a wee
> bit of work to do.... due 11am Wed.... on top of finishing Plato's
> Apology for 11am Wed...
>
You wouldn't complain, but I always complain when it comes to
school...
like why the hell did we read some crap book about China town in
English (jade peony) and why learn shakespeare? it's not even that
good, and it's english anymore, we should read Tom Clancy and John
Grisham in school...
Anyways, thanks for the advice and ouch, sucks to be smart...
- --
Listening to rap is like having your teeth pulled...
without the cool drugs! ****
icq: 70six3oneate4
msn: rand...@DIGNITYhotmail.com
remeber to get rid of dignity when msging me...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBPBKG95GNUytZf2WVEQLLcwCfUbWqQCuaiA4KP+QxrLELnTt6Aj8An0T2
zlMv7flBb6Rm0enXVV+5qK5m
=3BRG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Bulldog
"Rob" <r...@lvcm.com> wrote in message
news:u151n2h...@corp.supernews.com...
monday, but not the good copy...
and so far i'm about 2/7 of the way done...
Agelmar
> You wouldn't complain, but I always complain when it comes to
> school...
> like why the hell did we read some crap book about China town in
> English (jade peony) and why learn shakespeare? it's not even that
> good, and it's english anymore, we should read Tom Clancy and John
> Grisham in school...
> Anyways, thanks for the advice and ouch, sucks to be smart...
beautiful. Go pick up a tape of the play or something, if you can't watch it
live. Don't bother reading it, it's not meant to be read.
As for books that you have to suffer through, just be glad you didn't have
to read Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian War and Herodotus' History
of the Persian War (you will, in due time... in college...)
I would much rather read Robert Jordan, C.S. Friedman, and the like, but
we're stuck with what we're given by the profs, so oh well...
Rob
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> "Agelmar" <ia...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
> news:BxvQ7.40374$cU4.4...@typhoon.mw.mediaone.net...
> > Yes, that would likely be an appropriate layout...
> > although I wouldn't complain were I you...
> > I had to submit a draft for my essay by midnight last night, so I
> > did, it was 11 pages. Today, it came back via email with comments,
> > and it was 16 pages. Not only this, but I should somehow edit out
> > four pages of it and replace it with four pages of something else,
> > and more clearly define my argumentative structure :-) I've a wee
> > bit of work to do.... due 11am Wed.... on top of finishing Plato's
> > Apology for 11am Wed...
> >
> You wouldn't complain, but I always complain when it comes to
> school...
> like why the hell did we read some crap book about China town in
> English (jade peony) and why learn shakespeare?
Shakespeare is one of the greatest writers out there, his reputation
is earned. It's tougher in schools because they delete a lot of his stuff
due to making reference to sex and religion. On top of that, two of the
three highschool Shakespearean fodders, MacBeth and Romeo and Juliet,
aren't all that good.
English teacher's also usually don't understand Shakespeare well
enough, and they tend to push him as being intellectual reading. He's
actually the opposite, which is probably why he chose plays, because I
person need not be able to read or even understand the words too well to
get the gist of what's going on. His plays work on different levels. There
is a side that's strong with theme, there's symbolism, and there's parts
that you'd have to go through and really think over to find his true
meaning, and there's some of the best poetry ever written contained with
in. But then there are parts that are light comedy, and action, and a
tension and themes less lost in the subtext, that can easily be
understood. His plays weren't meant to be enjoyed by the intellectuals,
they were meant to be enjoyed by everyone. The reason why the still stand
proud today is because he did a lot of stuff right in making it enjoyable
to everyone, and a lot of the modern formulas are derived from
Shakespearean plays.
If you want a light read by Shakespeare go take a look at a Midsummer
Night's Dream. In it Shakespeare creates a complex love trying involved
with four characters. A man and a woman who are in love. A man betrothed
to the woman who is in love with her though the feeling isn't mutual. And
the woman's best friend who is in love with her betrothed though he
despises her. They all meet up in the woods and things are complicated by
fairies who have a misunderstanding with a sort of love potion, thus
setting the stage for three's company episodes yet to come.
Take a look at the Merchant of Venice, and forgot about the whole
marriage subplot because that sucks and is just there to fill up the play.
The real story lies in Antonio, and whether or not he'll have his life
taken after making a pact with his enemy, the Jew Shylock. The whole play
builds up to that point, and by the time you reach the trail Antonio he's
been portrayed as such a good man that it's almost impossible for a person
not to get tense as his friends try to reason with Shylock for mercy only
to be turned away.
And Hamlet being the only really good Shakespearean play to make
Highschool fodder really needs mention. It's my favorite of the bunch. The
humor of the early parts of the play is enough to sell it by itself.
Unfortunately most actors tend to not understand Shakespeare and view him
as overly intellectual, and thus most of the humor is lost on their
portrayals. And even being made several hundred years ago Shakespeare was
able to do what most modern authors can't, carry a story with a passive
protagonist.
Of course it helps to have some guidance from someone who's studied
Shakespeare. Sometimes the obvious becomes lost when a person is just
glancing through things. It is somewhat difficult to realize that "To be
or not to be" is really about Hamlet contemplating whether or not he
should commit suicide unless if you really read into the passage, or
someone tells you and you can look back and find the proofs to back it up.
Great man that Shakespeare though.
it's not even that
> good,
Blasphemy. Shakespeare was good, and is good, especially considering
some of the modern competition he has coming up against him.
and it's English anymore, we should read Tom Clancy and John
> Grisham in school...
Grisham is a bore and his work lacks any real meaning. I can't see
Grisham's work valuable on an intellectual level, a literary level, or an
entertainment level. His characters are cut and dry, and lack any realism.
His work lacks any theme or higher meaning. He writes like a lawyer
writes, in other words boring legal documents. And his plot isn't crafted
well enough for his conflict to be of any interest. Granted since his
characters are just cardboard cut-outs that say and do whatever's
necessary to move his plot along, which usually isn't all that interesting
either, there's really no reason to care about any of it. The fact that
someone would compare a hack like Grisham to a master like Shakespeare is
bad enough, but the fact that someone would rather be reading Grisham is
inexcusable.
Clancy OTOH is okay if you're into spy stuff. Not Shakespearean level,
but okay.
Bulldog
Hash: SHA1
"Rob" <r...@lvcm.com> wrote in message
news:u15754...@corp.supernews.com...
> "Bulldog" <rand...@dignity.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:FGvQ7.31639$KT.79...@news4.rdc1.on.home.com...
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
wow, long as my essay
>
<snipped stuff thats probaly right>
> it's not even that
> > good,
>
> Blasphemy. Shakespeare was good, and is good, especially
> considering some of the modern competition he has coming up against
> him.
not Clancy... say it, say it... You can read and watch Clancy's
stuff... and his english is understandable
>
> and it's English anymore, we should read Tom Clancy and John
> > Grisham in school...
>
ahahah
he was the only author on my book shelf beside all my clancy stuff, I
found The Client interesting...
> Clancy OTOH is okay if you're into spy stuff. Not Shakespearean
> level, but okay.
Well, I guess we've both got are opinions, but a lot of people would
understand Clancy better than Shakespeare, and it's not /just/. spy
stuff, through in politics, and the military and some sex and there
yeah go...
btw i'm just talking about the Ryanverse one's, netforce is ok,
opcenter i forgot all the characters and dont want to relearn, and
PowerPlays is too political, I've read 4 shakespeare plays couldnt
even finish ruthless.com....
- --
Listening to rap is like having your teeth pulled...
without the cool drugs! ****
icq: 70six3oneate4
msn: rand...@DIGNITYhotmail.com
remeber to get rid of dignity when msging me...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBPBKfppGNUytZf2WVEQKVKgCgwbnfihfCpH0ynyvpI9nCYkassJsAoNqR
B0C0GLfozRI4/ocjn2eb7lLw
=3BwJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Agelmar
"and it's not /just/. spy stuff, through in politics, and the military and
some sex and there yeah go..."
You better proofread your paper :-)
through = in one side and out the other (pronounced throo)
throw = to propel through the air, i.e. to throw a ball, or to throw in some
politics ;-) (pronounced thro)
yeah = slang, yes
ya = slang, you
hehe :-)
Bulldog
Agelmar
>
> "Agelmar" <ia...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
> news:HJxQ7.40441$cU4.4...@typhoon.mw.mediaone.net...
> >
> > "Bulldog" <rand...@dignity.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:rdxQ7.32194$KT.80...@news4.rdc1.on.home.com...
> >
> > "and it's not /just/. spy stuff, through in politics, and the military
and
> > some sex and there yeah go..."
> >
> > You better proofread your paper :-)
> > through = in one side and out the other (pronounced throo)
> > throw = to propel through the air, i.e. to throw a ball, or to throw in
> some
> > politics ;-) (pronounced thro)
> >
> > yeah = slang, yes
> > ya = slang, you
> >
> > hehe :-)
> >
> >
> >
> lol, this is usenet, it's sposed'a be spellt wrong, duh
lol :-)
Wenn ich Professor wäre, dann könnte ich ein besseres Referrat schreiben...
Spectre
>
> Shakespeare is one of the greatest writers out there, his reputation
>is earned. It's tougher in schools because they delete a lot of his stuff
>due to making reference to sex and religion. On top of that, two of the
>three highschool Shakespearean fodders, MacBeth and Romeo and Juliet,
>aren't all that good.
Never did cover MacBeth in high school. Did R&J, Caesar, Hamlet, and
it seems like there was another, but I can't think of it. And I don't
think any of them were edited at all. I know when we did Caesar I was
reading my own copy instead of the literature book, since the lit book
was big and bulky and I didn't want to bring it to class.
> English teacher's also usually don't understand Shakespeare well
>enough, and they tend to push him as being intellectual reading. He's
>actually the opposite, which is probably why he chose plays, because I
>person need not be able to read or even understand the words too well to
>get the gist of what's going on. His plays work on different levels. There
>is a side that's strong with theme, there's symbolism, and there's parts
>that you'd have to go through and really think over to find his true
>meaning, and there's some of the best poetry ever written contained with
>in. But then there are parts that are light comedy, and action, and a
>tension and themes less lost in the subtext, that can easily be
>understood. His plays weren't meant to be enjoyed by the intellectuals,
>they were meant to be enjoyed by everyone. The reason why the still stand
>proud today is because he did a lot of stuff right in making it enjoyable
>to everyone, and a lot of the modern formulas are derived from
>Shakespearean plays.
Yup. In school I might have bitched and moaned about having to read
it(usually cause we were reading it out loud, and a high school
student reads in monotone, very, very, very boring.) , but when you
come right down to it, Shakespeare can be damn entertaining.
> And Hamlet being the only really good Shakespearean play to make
>Highschool fodder really needs mention. It's my favorite of the bunch. The
>humor of the early parts of the play is enough to sell it by itself.
Heh, yeah, we did Hamlet my senior year, 'twas an enjoyable read. Has
lots of humor in it. We also watched two different movie versions of
it. The Mel Gibson version sucks, they cut too much out of it, and
Gibson is not a Shakespearean actor. We also watched the Kenneth
Branagh version of Hamlet, which is complete. Branagh played Hamlet
and directed the damn thing, and he did a good job in my opinion.
--
Josh
~All you've ever known...
all your tiny secrets...
all those little hands that did your dirty work...
will soon come around and strangle you.
-Colour, by Fingertight, a kickass local band.~
~Cot0Sig#18~CotSRSig#39~CotBSig#80~CotCSig#200~CotSSS#7~
~ICQ # 36one2one84~AIM: Spectre45~
Spam blocking in place
Bulldog
hhmmm...
indeed
Rob
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> "Rob" <r...@lvcm.com> wrote in message
> news:u15754...@corp.supernews.com...
> > "Bulldog" <rand...@dignity.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:FGvQ7.31639$KT.79...@news4.rdc1.on.home.com...
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> wow, long as my essay
>
> >
> <snipped stuff thats probaly right>
> > it's not even that
> > > good,
> >
> > Blasphemy. Shakespeare was good, and is good, especially
> > considering some of the modern competition he has coming up against
> > him.
>
> not Clancy... say it, say it... You can read and watch Clancy's
> stuff... and his english is understandable
Well I doubt you're reading pure shakespeare at a highschool level,
which is something that's written in an entirely different language, and a
dead one at that. What you're reading is a translation into high english,
and it seems incomprehensable for a couple different reasons. First is in
the translating of Shakespeare's poetry. Any translator of forgien works
will admit that poetry, especially that which is derived from a specific
style as opposed to free verse, is one of the hardest arts to translate.
If for no other reason that a word can have multiple meaning in one
language, and only one in another, and that a word can be very specific in
one language, and very broad in another. There's a fine line that had to
be watched in making Shakespeare understandable to the modern english
speaker, while at the same time trying to retain as much of the original
intent and beauty of the poetry as possible.
The other is just the guy's large vocabulary. I think the study showed
that the average American with a bachelor's degree today has a far
inferior vocabulary to the average shakespearean play, which was even
worse in his time when education was much less and less widely
distributed. This is one of the arguements against Shakespeare coming from
a poor background. If you don't know a lot of the words in a sentence it
gets hard to read it, but Shakespeare predates the minimulism movement in
literature by a long shot. If you take the time to look up all the words,
you'll get a much better understanding of what he meant, but in actuallity
Shakespeare only intended most people to be able to pick out bits and
pieces of what was being said, and have the rest explained through context
and action. And as for Shakespeare you usually have to read deeper than
the surface to figure out what's going on.
And if you can manage to see either a play or a movie adaption of one
of Shakespeare's works that's done well it becomes a lot easier to
understand, as the actors will better clue you into the meaning of the
lines. It won't help any if it's done bad though, since Shakespeare done
badly is worse than reading the work. Try to stay away from anything that
has a cast of screen actors, like Mel Gibson, and look for ones with
famous stage actors instead, especially those with Shakespearean actors.
> > and it's English anymore, we should read Tom Clancy and John
> > > Grisham in school...
> >
> ahahah
> he was the only author on my book shelf beside all my clancy stuff, I
> found The Client interesting...
With the little kid who's thirteen but manages to act as if he's five
or as if he's thirty as the plot dictates neccessary? There's far better
literature out there than Grisham's turning out, even that which has been
written recentally and is in the modern vonacular. If you read, and watch
as film, theater, and television are concerned, enough of it you'll
hopefully develop enough of an apprieciation for it to see flaws in the
stuff that a lot of popular authors do. Of course at that point all
television seems to turn into crap, except for Welcome Back Kotter when
you're intoxicated. There's nothing as funny as a good delivery of "Up
your nose with a rubber hose" once you've been drinking. I intentionally
get drunk when they do the marathons.
> > Clancy OTOH is okay if you're into spy stuff. Not Shakespearean
> > level, but okay.
> Well, I guess we've both got are opinions, but a lot of people would
> understand Clancy better than Shakespeare, and it's not /just/. spy
> stuff, through in politics, and the military and some sex and there
> yeah go...
A lot of people would understand the see spot book a lot better than
Clancy, but that doesn't make one book better than the other. But you
really have to define what you mean by understandable. You can mean a work
that isn't understandable by a person because the language is beyond them,
you can mean a work that isn't understandable because the concepts are
unknown to them, or you can mean a work that isn't understandable because
the themes and symbolism and such are beyond the mental reasoning
capabilities of a person.
As for the first two they deal only with learned knowledge, and are
pretty much nothing more than an assumption of either the vocabulary or
education of the audience. If you mean the later though, that's really
something that can't be helped. Algebra isn't a better form of math than
Geometry because some people can't understand spacial concepts any more
than Clancy isn't better than Shakespeare because some people can't
understand themes and concepts beyond the stated obvious.
If on the other hand you mean that a work can have too large a
vocabulary, such as Shakespeare does, or a work can rely too much on a
person's own knowledge of a particular field, that's what the minimulism
movement was about. The first part of the movement, anyways, is based on
the belief that a work shouldn't try to challenge the vocabulary of a
person and limit itself to only a select group of individuals, but rather
the work should challange a person on their ability to decipher its
meaning and be open to the largest possible group of people, and be a true
test of intellegence as opposed to just knowledge.
The second part of the theory, which I am somewhat in disagreement
with, is an arguement against adjetives and adverbs in any work except in
rare neccesary cases, because in most cases they're unnessecary filler.
The forerunner of the movement was Hemmingway if you want to see it in
action. I think his book with the highest vocabulary is now considered to
be at the third grade reading level if you want to see how adamant this
guy was in his belief of focusing the intellectual side of his work in
things like theme as opposed to vocabulary.
Hemmingway was admitedly no poet though, and even the strongest
followers of the minimulistic movement will admit that it falls apart when
you consider that it doesn't leave any room open for lyrical works, which
is much of what Shakespeare is.
> btw i'm just talking about the Ryanverse one's, netforce is ok,
> opcenter i forgot all the characters and dont want to relearn, and
> PowerPlays is too political, I've read 4 shakespeare plays couldnt
> even finish ruthless.com....
As for Clancy I've only read "The hunt for red october", and that was
a long while back. Most of it has honestly been forgotten to me. I will
say the guy is far better than Grisham, but then I have a very low opinion
of Grisham in every possible regard, as seen as an artist, entertainer,
and person in general. And by Shakespeare's philosophy a guy like Grisham
should be killed, so you see that Shakespeare got at least one thing
right.
Rob
news:2h061usall6s0oirm...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 8 Dec 2001 14:40:39 -0800, "Rob" <r...@lvcm.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Shakespeare is one of the greatest writers out there, his
reputation
> >is earned. It's tougher in schools because they delete a lot of his
stuff
> >due to making reference to sex and religion. On top of that, two of the
> >three highschool Shakespearean fodders, MacBeth and Romeo and Juliet,
> >aren't all that good.
>
> Never did cover MacBeth in high school. Did R&J, Caesar, Hamlet, and
> it seems like there was another, but I can't think of it.
Ceaser was another popular one. I forgot its mention, probably
partially due to the fact that I somehow managed to skip reading Caesar
all together due to my switching around of English classes in highschool.
Other one I'd think might be King Lear, or possibly one of the Richards.
I think Romeo and Juliet are only choosen because society has choosen
that play as a pop-culture icon generation after generation. It has a lot
of mass appeal to an audience, and that's why there's a new Romeo and
Juliet film every ten years or so. But it's far from one of Shakespeare's
best works, and definetly not his most powerful piece, especially
considering everybody already knows the ending.
The other works are all choosen I think because they don't deal too
heavily with sex or religion, which along with violence were Shakespeare's
favorite topics.
And I don't
> think any of them were edited at all. I know when we did Caesar I was
> reading my own copy instead of the literature book, since the lit book
> was big and bulky and I didn't want to bring it to class.
Romeo and Juliet is one of the works that seems to get the highest
level of editing in the highschool system. It'd be interesting to compare
a version in your school's standard lit book with that of an unabridged
copy translated into high english. I've heard of worst case scenerios
where a quarter of the words in the play were removed. Being a love story
Romeo and Juliet deals a lot with sex, and a little bit of religion on the
side some people don't like too much. For one thing check to see if the
school version has the masterbation line, "The gaudy hand is on the prick
of noon." That one seems to be taken out more than half the time.
> Yup. In school I might have bitched and moaned about having to read
> it(usually cause we were reading it out loud, and a high school
> student reads in monotone, very, very, very boring.) , but when you
> come right down to it, Shakespeare can be damn entertaining.
It's honestly better to read Shakespeare to yourself than have someone
who doesn't comprehend most of it read it out loud to you. Most of it was
meant to be said not read, it's true. But it was also meant to be said by
people who could understand the lines and had an affinity for acting. A
good actor will clue the audience into what a line means even if they
wouldn't understand the line as it is written. Some highschool student
isn't going to do anything but bore you.
> > And Hamlet being the only really good Shakespearean play to make
> >Highschool fodder really needs mention. It's my favorite of the bunch.
The
> >humor of the early parts of the play is enough to sell it by itself.
>
> Heh, yeah, we did Hamlet my senior year, 'twas an enjoyable read. Has
> lots of humor in it. We also watched two different movie versions of
> it. The Mel Gibson version sucks, they cut too much out of it, and
> Gibson is not a Shakespearean actor. We also watched the Kenneth
> Branagh version of Hamlet, which is complete. Branagh played Hamlet
> and directed the damn thing, and he did a good job in my opinion.
I saw the first half of the Gibson version, and I had to turn it off
to show some respect for my brain cells that have survived despite my
numerous attempts to kill them with various substances. Needless to say,
it was icky.