I ne’er have been confident with my composing accomplishments. Although I have received above norm classs in past authorship classs. I have ne’er been confident in the manner I present my thoughts on paper. The authorship classs based on literary text that I have taken therefore far at the college degree have seemed to be an extension of high school in that they merely have dealt with proper authorship construction. such as MLA format. Introduction to Comparative Literature nevertheless has analyzed text in a far deeper mode than I have of all time been accustomed to. The class has enabled me to see how the construction. subjects. manner. and temper of a text work as a cohesive whole. I have had the chance to utilize the information gathered on these elements and use them to develop my ain writing voice.
Before taking this class I had ne’er reflected upon my how my ain values and unfavorable judgment have played a function in my review and analysis of a literary text. Other categories ne’er seem to cover with the signifier of psychological deepness that his class utilizes. I found that the 3rd paper assignment was polar in binding together all that was absorbed and learned in the class. By revisiting the text of The God of Small Things every bit good as response documents. I came to the realisation that I place importance on societal and cultural constructions and autumn in line with the Marxist school of Criticism. Bing able to hold the opportunity to take the clip and analyse how my manner of review falls in line with assorted schools of unfavorable judgment has been of import as I can pull upon Marxist Criticism in documents I write in the hereafter. Through the procedure of composing the long critical documents. I have had the ability to derive a greater apprehension on what my composing manner deficiencies.
I have ever gone though life with the slogan that “you ever learn the most from your failures. non your successes. ” This has proven to be true due to my ability to recognize the mistakes of my authorship manner and better adjust to rectify future errors. In the first two documents my word use was sloppy and miscalculated. my construction did non capture the paper as one cohesive statement. and my insufficiency affecting the rectification of grammatical errors detracted from my overall statement. Through the remarks left on my work. I have received a heightened sense of what is needed to do my paper a strong cohesive statement. Although I have non mastered the inclusion of a solid cohesive statement. the mere realisation of what I need to work on to has been critical to my advancement. For case. through having remarks on my 2nd paper. covering with Oedipus and Hamlet. I realized that I tend to confound the reader with words which were used out of context.
I would utilize phrases such as “Hamlet attains towards the calamity of Oedipus the King” which confused the reader and hindered the patterned advance of my statement. In past classs I have been told that the most of import facet of a paper needs to be your statement and the textual grounds to back up your claims. On the contrary. if a paper is non clear and concise in its construction and word use. so an statement no affair how strong will be hindered. Taking into history my demand to simplify my composing manner to stress and supply power to my statements. I have attempted to compose my 3rd paper in a simplistic signifier similar to that of John Steinbeck’s work. By composing this essay in a simplified signifier I have provided a clear representation of my thoughts and statements. therefore giving them increased strength and lucidity. By seting my composing manner to a simplistic signifier I hopefully have solved many jobs stemming from the confusion involved in my early work in the class. A cardinal component in my advancement throughout the class has lied in the response documents.
For illustration. my apprehension of the dichotomy of vision within Oedipus would non be a strong if it had non been for my response paper covering with the subject. This assignment enabled me to revisit the text after reading it and research profoundly the nature and deduction of the loss of sight within the text. These exercisings forced me to halt looking at a text in a superficial mode and to spread out on my reading of the text. By looking closely at the dichotomy of words and the societal and mental intension related to them I grasped an apprehension of the multidimensionality of Oedipus’ debatable character. Another response paper that was critical in my advancement was my response paper # 9. covering with The God of Small Things. This paper gave me the ability to pull together the societal. political. and cultural jobs within India and utilize that cognition to link subjects to the flow and construction of the text. By simply composing about these subjects I was able to pull together the literary elements of the text and derive a steadfast apprehension of how those elements work as a cohesive whole.
The inclusion of treatment within the category added to increased degree of textual analysis in the category. Although I am a inactive subscriber within a schoolroom environment. an facet of my acquisition that I am seeking to alter. I benefited greatly from the treatments in the category. These treatments have allowed me to pull upon and connect assorted facets of the text and position how they relate to a cohesive whole. The treatments were critical in clear uping inquiries and jobs that I had with the text. The little group treatments particularly allowed me to spread out upon my readings of the text.
I tend to acquire nervous when speaking in forepart of a category and the smaller environment put me more at easiness. I can remember the treatment covering with Oedipus and whether his hunt for the truth was brave or iniquitous pride. I felt that in that little group treatment I added much to the elucidation of the topic for those in my group. I was persuasive in my history of Oedipus’ unconscious actions and the motivations behind them. Although I may non hold contributed much in measure I feel as though I have contributed quality responses to the treatments taking topographic point in the little groups.
One thing that I felt that distracted from my acquisition in the class was the abundant sum of spiritual mentions made in relation to the texts covered. I can remember many times while discoursing The God of Small Things and Hamlet where spiritual Bible and fabrications were compared to the text. I have no job with spiritual stuff as I am a reasonably spiritual individual. If we draw upon spiritual text it would be worthwhile to cover and discourse the spiritual illustrations in greater item so that everyone may have a better apprehension to how they work in relation to the text being covered.
Through this category I have found a monumental leap in my literary technique and cardinal realisations of the stairss that I need to take farther heighten my composing accomplishments. This category entirely has brought to my attending the jobs that I have with organisation. construction. sentence structure. and compatibility of texts. This class although holding minor hinderances has helped me to come on in footings of overall authorship manner and my effectivity as a author and critic.