For this final assignment, you’ll write a critical analysis, 7-8 pages long, of one to three of the plays you’ve read for this course. I’ve included topic suggestions below but encourage you strongly either to tailor them to your own interests or to develop your own focus for this paper. You should choose a topic that you find interesting. You do not need to do extra research for the paper, but I encourage you to draw on the contextual readings you’ve done to date to give your textual analysis more depth than a new critical reading would allow. Use the contextual materials we’ve covered to complement your close readings of the play(s) you focus on.

A full draft of your paper (see Format and Workshopping below) is due at the beginning of class on Monday, May 6.

Your final paper is due at the beginning of class on Tuesday, May 7.

Format
Please make sure you do the following:

Workshopping your papers
Please bring four copies of a completed rough draft to class on Monday, May 6. We will divide into six groups and do a draft revision workshop for each of your papers. I’ll explain how we’ll structure this in class.

. . . . have some main idea or thesis for your paper. This might be a point you want to make or a question you want to answer about the play(s) you write about. Choose a topic you care about. In any case, you must have a clear idea of what you want the reader to learn from your paper. You should be able to state your main idea in a sentence or two.

. . . . include an introduction that lets your reader know:

1) what play(s) you're discussing
2) what aspect of the play(s) you'll focus on (your topic)
3) what point you intend to make about your topic (your thesis)

. . . . support your general statements with specific evidence from the text. Back up your assertions with quotations where possible, paraphrase where necessary. Start with the text and stay close to it. Respond to it honestly. Test your impressions by re-reading it, perhaps several times. Be sure you explain how the quotation you've chosen supports your point. For example, if you say that the Eve in the Jeu d'Adam is a "sneaky rhetorician" you need to explain why; give your reader specific instances as evidence of these traits. One example is the minimum; more than three are usually superfluous. If a character's specific words are important, you should quote them directly and explain what is significant about them.

. . . . include line references for all direct quotations (see the second handout: How to Type, Document, and Punctuate Quotations). If your paper deals with more than one play, be sure your reader can tell which one you're quoting from.

. . . . write in the present tense ("When Eve greets Adam after her meeting with the devil, she says . . . ."). When you do this, it makes your reader feel as if he or she is reliving the action of the play.

. . . . arrange your points in a logical and coherent fashion. Some common ordering strategies are:

*from least important to most important
*from least interesting to most interesting
*from most obvious to least obvious
*from simplest to most complex

Be careful when you apply these kinds of strategies, though. You shouldn't let your paper become a shopping list of unrelated ideas and observations. In a paper which weighs both sides of some question, it's often most effective to save your side for last.

. . . . retell the story or explain who the characters are. Only summarize plot or emphasize relationships between characters when doing so contributes to the point you're making. You can always assume that the reader of a critical literary analysis is familiar with the primary work you're discussing; your object is to make your reader understand some aspect of the work that might be puzzling or problematic. (Along these lines, distinguish between critical judgments and value judgments; you don't need, for instance, to persuade your reader that a given play is 'good' or that Shakespeare is a 'great' playwright.)

. . . . make the organization of your paper conform to the plot of the play you're writing about. In other words, if you want to discuss the fall from paradise in the Jeu d'Adam before the creation, feel free to do so. You don't need to follow the plot order unless you are arguing that an earlier scene significantly alters our perception of a later event. In this Jeu d'Adam example, discuss the creation first if you want to show how certain elements in it ultimately intensify the sense of nostalgia for the audience when they see the fall from paradise played. You should use any organization that supports your thesis effectively.

. . . . quote an entire speech or passage when all you really need is a single sentence. In fact, you need not quote an entire line or sentence if all that is required is a word or a phrase. Only quote what is essential to make your point.

1) Type all papers double-spaced with one-inch margins on all sides.

2) All quotations from the plays should be followed by a line reference (for Medieval dramas) in parentheses or by an act, scene, and line reference (for Renaissance dramas) in parentheses. It is traditional to use Roman numerals for act and scene numbers (I.i.44), but you may find Arabic numerals more convenient (1.1.44).

Ex.: By the end of the play, Parolles calls himself "a man whom Fortune hath cruelly scratched" (V.ii.26-27).

Note the end punctuation in this example. The final period comes after the parenthesis, so as to include it in the sentence to which it belongs. If you are writing about more than one play, you need to include an abbreviation of the title in your parenthetical reference. Quotations from any critical essays you refer to should include the author's name and a page number:

Ex.: (Greenblatt 209).

3) Indicate short quotations by quotation marks; type them normally, as part of your double-spaced paragraph. Use slashes and capital letters to indicate the line divisions in poetry.

Ex.: Before leaving, the Duke advises Angelo "so to enforce or qualify the laws / As to your soul seems good" (I.i.65-66). He explains that in his absence, Angelo will be "at full ourself" (I.i.43), but cautions him that "mortality and mercy in Vienna" should "live in thy tongue, and heart" (I.i.44-45).

4) Long quotations should be set off from the main body of your paragraph by indenting (ten spaces in from the margin) and single spacing the body of the quote (as opposed to the double spacing used throughout the remainder of your paper). Do this with any prose quotation long enough to occupy five or more typed lines (that's about fifty words), and with any poetry quotation of more than three lines. Be sure to type a long poetry quotation line-for-line, just as it appears in the original text. In other words, do not convert it to paragraph form. When you indent this way, you do not need to use quotation marks. The indentation and single spacing are enough to distinguish your words from somebody else's. Note in particular where the act, scene, and line reference is positioned in relationship to the quote: parenthetically, but in line with the right-hand margin.

5) Unless you are dealing with parenthetical material like that in items 2 and 3, apply the following rule:

periods and commas INSIDE the quotation marks;
ALWAYS put colons and semicolons OUTSIDE the quotation marks.

6) Place question marks and exclamation marks according to the context:

If your whole sentence (but not the quotation within it) is a question or exclamation, put the punctuation outside the quotation marks.

Ex.: Why is Helena so in love with a man described by her elders as "proud" and "scornful" (II.iii.151) or as a "rash and unbridled boy" (II.ii.26)?

If the quotation itself (but not the sentence surrounding it) is a question or exclamation, put the punctuation inside the quotation marks.

Ex.: Petruchio's clever question draws a colorful picture of Kate's shrewish personality: "Who knows not where a wasp does wear his sting?" (II.ii.213).

In addition to lucid focus and organization of its argument, an "A" paper is stylistically superior as well. The writer uses fluent, idiomatic English. Sentence patterns vary with appropriate subordination and coordination to reflect the structure of the writer's argument. The writer avoids choppy or overly colloquial prose, working instead toward clear and direct expression of her/his ideas. Vocabulary is interesting and varied. The author is aware of the connotations of the words she/he uses. There are almost no mechanical errors.

B
Solid. The "B" paper is competent but not quite all together yet. The opening establishes the context and includes a thesis that makes clear the writer's point of view although the argument may be less compelling. The paragraphs that follow develop the main idea of the paper for the most part, although there are occasional lapses in coherence or problems with organization which result from weak conceptual links or superficial transitions. The writer includes some close readings from the text(s) discussed. These examples, however, may lack depth or detail, or may not be as clearly connected to the main idea as in an "A" paper. As a result, the paper will leave questions in the reader's mind and may not fulfill the expectations raised in the opening paragraph(s).

The writer uses clear, fluent and generally idiomatic English but may be unsure of the connotations of the words she/he uses. (Consequently, the prose will seem too formal or stilted in places.) The syntax of sentences may not reflect the logical relationships of their discreet clauses. There may be minor or infrequent mechanical errors or a single error repeated throughout the paper.

C
Weak. The writer will present her/his focus in the opening paragraph(s) of the paper, but the main idea may be simplistic (perhaps underdeveloped), the analysis too superficial to convince the reader. The writer uses few examples to support her/his points and shows a poor grasp of the text(s) she/he is discussing. Organization is random, repetitious. Careless use of abstract language may result in illogical sentences; excessive plot summary may lead to badly focused paragraphs. Paragraphing may seem arbitrary; individual paragraphs may not consistently develop a unified idea.

The writer's style is excessively casual or excessively formal. The writer uses lots of state-of-being verbs. She/he may have problems with idiomatic usage. Mechanical errors are so frequent that they are distracting.

D
Inadequate work. The writer has difficulty establishing context, purpose, and point of view. She/he does not have a clear main idea for the paper or, conversely, may present the reader with too many unrelated general ideas. Individual paragraphs are fragmented, and there are few real connections between paragraphs. Individual sentences may seem redundant. The writer uses virtually no examples from the text(s) being discussed. She/he shows little grasp of the issues involved or a poor sense of audience. The essay may stop without concluding anything or may have a false, mechanical conclusion tacked on at the end.

Sentences are short and choppy or long and incoherent, even incomplete. Word choice is unidiomatic. Mechanical errors abound.

F
A complete catastrophe. The writer may not understand the subject she/he chooses to write about and has no idea how to focus, organize, or develop a topic. She/he is unable to control even short sentences and cannot detect or does not correct mechanical errors when proofreading.