SOURCES: Please add a source
This looks pretty solid; remember that the Dr. is Frankenstein and the creature is “the monster” or “the creature”. You do a good job of contextualizing the novel using the Hammond article, though maybe quote directly from it once in your first body paragraph?
CONTENT: This looks pretty solid; remember that the Dr. is Frankenstein and the creature is “the monster” or “the creature”. You do a good job of contextualizing the novel using the Hammond article, though maybe quote directly from it once in your first body paragraph?
The main thing you need to do is work in some direct quotations from the novel to exemplify moments where you think it demonstrates your thesis about “out of control forces”–moments when the monster shows itself to be beyond his creator’s control, or moments that demonstrate the creature as wreaking havoc in the manner of climate change. So look through the novel for a couple of quotes that you can integrate into these paragraphs, and you should be in good shape.
OTHER: Please add onto the conclusion
Comments from Customer
PREVIOUS PAPER INSTRUCTIONS (#484163058): Assignment Description:
Write a 4-5 page paper responding to one of the prompts below. It is essential that your paper have a thesis statement and textual evidence (quotes and/or detailed paraphrases). It is likewise essential that your paper be clearly organized. It should have an introduction paragraph stating your argument or focus and introducing key points of evidence, three substantial body paragraphs, each with critical analysis of the text, and a conclusion paragraph that gestures towards further points of possible consideration (where would you take this in a longer paper?). Because your readers have read the novel carefully, you should only summarize those parts of the book that are directly relevant to your argument.
Prompt: Evaluate an analysis of Frankenstein that has already been offered in the scholarship. The paper should present evidence from the novel that explains how a reader might arrive at this particular interpretation. If you are answering prompt three, do not simply reiterate the argument of the scholar. You should evaluate the argument, finding your own additional textual evidence to develop their analysis or to illuminate its blind spots. It may be productive to present an alternative interpretation or call attention to aspects of the novel that the argument fails to address. You don’t need to quote directly from any scholarly articles, just base your interpretation around what is described in the promts.
The Nonhuman. Readers have argued that Frankenstein warns of the dire consequences of positioning the human species above all who are considered non-human, whether on the basis of their race or species. What aspects of the novel provide evidence in support of this point of view? Does this argument have any weaknesses?
The Pastoral. Frankenstein offers a critique of pastoral literature’s ideal of social renewal through nature, focusing attention instead on characters’ alienation from the natural world. What aspects of the novel provide evidence in support of this point of view? Are there any weaknesses in this perspective on the text?
Climate Disaster. Kim Hammond suggests that the creature might seem to represent the out-of-control forces unleashed by humanity in an era of climate change. Explain what aspects of the novel and of environmental history this framework brings forward for attention. Does the argument have any weaknesses?
SOURCES: Please add a source