Here is an excerpt from W Sh's paper. What are the strengths of his argument? How could he empower it?
"Sultan, the protagonist in 'Burning Books' is an enemy of the government in that he sells illegal propaganda. This propoaganda is in the form of narratives. All the opinions he held, all the beliefs he had, were subject to imprisonment, yet he continued to get his message out through books. The uneducated Talban soldiers who seized Sultan's bookshop could not read, and did not help the economy of modernize Iran, but they knew that Sultan influenced many educated Iranians. His narratives were such an essential part of Iranian culture that they influenced many political stances and Sultan made a name for himself through narratives."
It is a little difficult to realize what the argument is from this excerpt. Either way, it is strong in its references to the actual narrative as well as the interesting analyses of that part of the narrative. There are some grammatical/typo errors. Also, I disagree with the sentence regarding the modernization of Iran's economy. I believe the Taliban was much more concerned with influence of the books and I don't believe one man's bookstand would affect too much of Iran's economy while it would affect its culture. All in all, it is strong in its use of evidence and analyzation directly from the piece.
ReplyDeleteThe excerpt is strong and has a good analysis toward the part of the narrative. There are a few grammatical mistakes in this excerpt. I disagree with the sentence having to do with the modernization of Iran's economy because the Taliban were concerned with how book's would affect and influence the people of Iran. In the end it is a good piece of evidence.
ReplyDeleteThe topic sentence states the information that will be written about but it does not present the argument that he is going to debate. This sets of the paragraph to be weak and indecisive. The pros of this excerpt that was written so many months ago is that he connected the readings back to his topic at the end of the paragraph which helped wrapped it all up in a nutshell so the reader has a basis to remember at the end of the essay.
ReplyDeleteWill explains his argument ineffectively. i am concerned as to what his purpose is. His argument seems unnecessary, as he only walked in circles. He stated how the Sultan is an enemy of the government in his first sentence and by the end i felt i had learned nothing since then. I did like how he connected the narratives to the argument
ReplyDelete