for this assignment you have to write an essay about a poem you can choose any poem. so I'm giving you the choice of what poem you want to write about.
Essay 1: Close Reading 50% of Final Grade (25% 1st submission, 25% revision) Task: Write a formal close reading of a poem, with a clear, arguable thesis statement, well-organized analytical paragraphs, and conclusion that reiterates the thesis statement and situates the paper within a larger point. Consider especially the following: 1. Choose a specific image or character or word(s) or other formal aspect of the poem and make a creative and nuanced argument about it. 2. Support your argument through detailed close reading of the text. 3. Address objections or alternative interpretations that may arise, again by paying close attention to the text. 4. Address the question “so what?” what larger insight can be gained because of your close reading? Role and audience: Imagine your audience is very familiar with the text you’ve chosen, both its content and some of what has already been said about it. Your goal is to persuade them to see the text in a new way that they may never have never thought about before. The purpose of this exercise is to develop your skills at making an analytic argument about a specific text and supporting it through insightful close reading and effective writing. Format: 4-5 pages, double-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font, one-inch margins, and consistent citation style; see a variety of guidelines online: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/585/2/ Papers that do not meet the page minimum will be penalized one full letter grade (e.g. A- to B-). Expectations: 1. Bring a full draft to class on Friday September 20 for Peer Review 2. Bring a full draft with questions to our classroom or my office during the week of September 23-27 for a writing conference (location and time dependent on whichever slot you sign up for) 3. Submit the paper as a Word doc on Canvas by 11:59pm on Friday September 27 4. Submit the revision as a Word doc on Canvas by 11:59pm on Friday October 18 (further instructions about revision will be discussed in class) Criteria for evaluation: An A paper is superior work: · The paper has a strong introduction that builds to a thesis statement or interpretive claim about the text that is sophisticated and purposeful; it develops an arguable stance that shows great creativity and insight. · Author shows awareness of objections or possible alternative interpretations and addresses them skillfully and smoothly. · Author demonstrates deep familiarity with the text under discussion. · The author uses textual support with considerable skill and with serious thought about its appropriateness. Textual evidence is closely analyzed. · The paper is extremely well-organized. The argument flows seamlessly with no ruptures in thought. · The conclusion reiterates the thesis statement gracefully and situates the paper within a larger point about the text, a “so what.” · Sentences are pithy and clear and show a superior command of phrasing and vocabulary. The paper is almost entirely clear of grammar and punctuation problems (perhaps one or two in the whole paper). · Paper is consistently formatted. A B paper is good to very good: · The author describes a position on the text and engages it. The thesis is present but might need strengthening. The introduction stimulates interest in the author’s position. · The author may identify objections or alternative interpretations but does not adequately address or dismiss them. · The author cites appropriate textual evidence for their points, although at times they may need to pause and analyze the evidence more closely. · The paper is generally well-organized but is at times choppy; transitions between paragraphs or ideas may need more attention. · The conclusion reiterates the thesis or the main points but creates an abrupt ending to the paper; it may attempt to address a “so what” but could do so in a more insightful way or be better warranted by the reading done in the body paragraphs. · Grammatical or punctuation errors are present (a couple per page), but author overall shows a relatively strong command of grammar and punctuation. Sentences are mostly clear and strong without wordiness, though at times the author succumbs to confusing or overwrought sentence structures. Author shows a good command of vocabulary. · Paper is generally consistently formatted, though some deviations may be present. A C paper is adequate: · The author identifies a thesis statement, but the thesis is too broad, too vague, or is more of an observation than a contestable argument. The introduction itself may be vague or unfocused. · The author does not venture beyond a conventional understanding of the text or merely reproduces ideas from class with little attempt at analysis. · The author fails to identify or only superficially mentions objections or alternative interpretations to their points. · The paper contains references to the text, but the author does not analyze them with depth. Rather than offering a close, careful reading of the relevant sections of the text, the author focuses on their own broader ideas without grounding them in the language of the text. · The author has organized their material in a relatively coherent fashion but without much attention to transitions between different parts of the paper. Author is vague and moves away from claims without developing them. References may not be appropriate for the specific claims. · The paper’s conclusion is under-developed and/or abrupt. · Grammar and punctuation problems are present but do not detract from the paper in the fashion of a D paper. Sentences may be long and confusing or abrupt and monotonous. · Paper is not consistently formatted in multiple respects. A D paper is poor: · The paper at least hints at a theme, although it does not develop it into a position in anything like the depth required. The introduction is unfocused and does not build toward a solid thesis statement. · This paper does demonstrate that the author has read the text but not carefully or with a critical eye. · The paper shows a greater attempt at organizing thoughts than an F paper, but such attempts are tentative and fragmentary. · Paper often falls into summary or long descriptions. · The paper may not contain a recognizable conclusion. · The paper has serious problems with grammar and punctuation (sentence fragments, problems with subject/verb agreement, seeming lack of knowledge about usage of commas, semicolons, and colons). · Paper ignores consistent formatting. An F paper has no thesis or recognizable argument: · The paper does not show evidence of a serious understanding of the texts nor does it show any attempt at textual support for the claims it makes. Ideas are not organized in any coherent fashion. The paper is riddled with grammar and punctuation problems and ignores consistent formatting.