Essay Topic Two
Discuss the characters and roles of Moses and Aeneas.
NOTES ON ESSAY WRITING
As I was reading my first batch of papers, I noticed
some problems that I hope you will be able to solve in your second
papers.
At a technical level:
1. Characters’ names were
confused, e.g. Rachel was confused for Rebekah. This looks very
bad, since it is an indication that you did not read the passages in
the text carefully.
2. There was carelessness about basic grammar,
e.g. where sentences end. I often read “sentences” like, “Abraham
sent a slave to find a wife for Isaac, he found her at a well.”
The comma here must be a period, or a conjunction like “and” must be
added.
3. There were dangling participles, e.g.
“Having fallen in love with Rachel, Laban gave Jacob Leah.” The
participle “having fallen” is supposed to modify Jacob, but because of
the proximity of Laban, it looks like Laban has fallen in love with his
own daughter.
4. Apostrophes were very widely abused.
This is very annoying to the reader, since it should not still be a
problem in college. I was very severe with these errors.
The dog bit its tail.
It’s (i.e. it is) a tail that the
dog bit. (By the way you should not be using contractions like
“it’s”, “won’t”, “didn’t”, etc., in formal prose.)
the girl’s house
the girls’ house (the house of
the girls)
the man’s house
the men’s house
James’ house
5. You should not be using contractions like “it’s”,
“won’t”, “didn’t”, etc., in formal prose.
6. Spelling was sometimes a problem,
especially where spellcheck did not catch the mistake. Using
“there” for “their” was a common and very annoying mistake.
7. Words were frequently misused and did not conform
to standard idiomatic usage. The cure for this problem is copious
reading of good prose.
8. Proofreading is absolutely essential.
At the level of thought and argument:
1. Thesis paragraphs were often a simple restatement
of the prompt: “The marriages of x and y exhibit many similarities and
differences”. This is not a thesis, since it is already
presupposed by the prompt. Nor is it an adequate thesis to
enumerate the similarities and differences. You need to
find some fairly general (but not so general as to say nothing about
the particular passages, e.g. “These two marriages were between males
and females”) idea that will allow you to organize all or most of the
interesting observations you made in your close reading.
2. Sometimes even when there were coherent
thesis statements, the thesis did not govern the argument and the
structure of the paper. I often saw clue words in the opening
paragraph that led me to expect certain arguments, which never
materialized.
3. Most frequently there was little connection
between the sentences and between the paragraphs. Paragraphs
began with no sense of the purpose of the paragraph, usually with some
element of plot summary, then wandered around aimlessly because there
was never any sense of what the paragraph was intended to say.
Always ask yourself, “How does this sentence follow from the
previous? Can I expect someone else to be able to follow my train
of thought? Have I signaled the transitions from paragraph to
paragraph clearly enough?”
4. Fortunately most of you avoided excessive
plot summary, and were usually picking and choosing evidence. But
that evidence was not fully integrated into an argument and was often
left to speak for itself (which it did badly). Always ask
yourself, “Why am I using this evidence? What does it proof? What
is its significance?”
5. Often observations on the text, which are
the shining gems of a paper, lacked luster, because you did not
practice close reading. Now in many cases, I thought you did take
my advice about close reading to heart, but this was not
universal. If you did not read closely, you generated haphazard
and obvious observations, which tend to bore the reader. Some of
you made observations about the text that I had not made, and that
really made me sit and take notice.
6. There is a certain magic element to a good
paper that cannot be taught as a formula. It comes through a
combination of intelligence and hard work over a long period of
time. This element is frustratingly elusive. Nevertheless,
we can all write better papers by sticking to the rules that are
available.