Here is an excerpt from WS's paper. What are its strengths? How could he empower the paper?
"Christina Thompson writes about the colonization of New Zealand in her passage from Come On Shore and We Will Kill and Eat You All: A New Zealand Story titled 'A Dangerous People.' Even the title suggests the Maoris of New Zealand were be much more fiercely opposed to colonization than the aborigines. We will also find out they would use weapons with the intent to kill. Captain Cool described the Maoris thus: 'the act of throwing volleys of stones at so great and novel an object (The HMS Beagles) and their defiance of 'Come on shore and we will kill and eat you all,' shows uncommon boldness.' The Maoris were hostile to the settlers as soon as they landed, as opposed to the aborigines being passive. The used 'patoo patoos' to kill or at least to show their intent to kill to the colonists., While the aborigines and the Maoris were similar in that they were both hostile to the colonists of their respective lands after a time the aborigines became aggressive after a time, the aborigines became aggressive after a period of destruction inflicted upon them by the convicts. It seems the Maoris were more effective in deflecting the settlers from these passages."
Aside from some grammatical/editing issues, Will made some good points. He used good examples although I would have liked to see another quote. Overall, he was able to effectively prove his point and did so within a decent connection between the aborigines and Maoris. I did not like the fact that he used the first person though but, besides that and a few other errors, he wrote a pretty good piece.
ReplyDeleteWill uses powerful diction that makes me feel like he really knows about the topic, this way of writing is a great way to say an argument effectively. Some of Will's sentences are structured strangely and some have minor grammatical errors. The quote, even though there was only one, was strong and provided emphasis to his views. This piece was well written and worked the purpose well and proved it.
ReplyDeleteWill is able to clearly separate the Maoris with the Aborigines by using the examples. I would have liked to see a quote regarding the Aborigines to further the distinction between the Maoris and Aborigines.
ReplyDeleteWills paper is weakened by the fact that he uses the first person, "we." this wasnt fatal to his argument, it just wouldnt pass as a grade. His argument is strengthened by his relevant connections between the maoris and aborgines. The quotes show that he understood the material, as they connect the purpose to this particular passage
ReplyDeleteThere are grammatical issues in Will's paper but he made some good points such as the examples he used. Will could of used a another quote to help his paper. He does good when he connects the Aborigines and the Maoris
ReplyDeleteThank you for the constructive criticism. I re-read my paper and noticed some of the flaws you all pointed out. I will try to incorporate less first-person and more quotes connecting to my purpose in the future.
ReplyDeleteWell firstly the paper flowed pretty nicely, until that last but at the end where you almost repeated your thoughts (see third and fourth to last lines). Otherwise like the others said you had some grammatical flaws and another quote would have been nice but the ideas came to together nicely. The ideas coincided beautifully, they just need a little more work to be perfect.
ReplyDelete