Diamond Jacobs
Prof. Silvia
Eng 410
March 5, 2023
Introduction
“The purpose of a storyteller is not to tell you how to think, but to give you questions to think upon.”(Brandon Sanderson,) There are many objectives of a book the most significant part is how a story unfolds . What is the plot , who are the characters , what questions are being raised and other elements that contribute to it’s purpose. More specifically the conet and materiality of a book informs the author’s storytelling. “Materiality of literature refers to book design, printing formats and typography.”(Thomas Bremer) and content is everything included in an author’s work this can be composed in any shap or form . Materiality and content share a unique relationship it is without question if one is more significant than the other. They both allow readers and writers to embrace a story and perceive to their own opinions . S. novel by Doug Dorst and J.J. Abrams and the story Ship of Theseus is a multifaceted piece .Which is a prime example of how materiality and content both inform storytelling and the relationship between both must be closely analyzed to gain understanding of a novel as a whole. The Ship of Theseus takes on the unusual shape of a common book with its many material objects such as postcards , letters etc. This is a story within a story the content of the novel takes readers on an ambiguous journey. The inner text of S. and the outer text of Jen and Eric storytelling affects the reader’s ability to pinpoint whos’ severs as the novels purpose as a whole. In this paper I will be discussing and analyzing many things . Such as how the lack of sequence and consistency of the inner story of S. and the outer story within the marginal notes lacks sequence. Also how the theme of mystery stays within the content to the very end. I will visit the augment of if Straka is a reliable storyteller and if Eric and Jen theorizing throughout this book is filling in the blanks and contributing to the story which makes them authors as well.
This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.
Argument:
Does this paper have a clear, argumentative thesis? Can you identify what kinds of textual evidence will be used to support it?
This paper does not have a clear, argumentative thesis. You mention using the main book as a source, but not any other sources to help support your thesis.
After you’ve read the whole paper, how does the paper sustain the thesis statement? In other words: does each paragraph support and expand the argument laid out in the thesis?
Feedback:
Provide 2 specific suggestions for revision — these can be about organization, style, clarity, or argument.
I suggest you proofread this paragraph since there are quite a few grammar/spelling mistakes, ie “There are many objectives of a book the most significant part is how a story unfolds.” (Should be a period between “book” and “the.” They’re two separate sentences.)
I also suggest trimming down the first few sentences of the intro, since it feels padded, and you don’t introduce the main topic of the essay until later.
Argument:
This paper does not have a clear, argumentative thesis because although you do have topic sentences: “In this paper I will be discussing and analyzing many things. Such as how the lack of sequence and consistency of the inner story of S. and the outer story within the marginal notes lacks sequence. Also how the theme of mystery stays within the content to the very end. I will visit the augment of if Straka is a reliable storyteller and if Eric and Jen theorizing throughout this book is filling in the blanks and contributing to the story which makes them authors as well.”, there is no crux. What is the main point of all this?
Feedback:
Overall, this looks like the basis for just the first paragraph. I like that you provided context for the book’s particular form and what made it stand apart from the typical books. But I am confused by the quotes that you provided in the first paragraph because they lack a title (what external sources are they?) and a summary so that any reader can understand their arguments (without actually reading them all). I suggest you put those quotes in later paragraphs so that they can be used as evidence to support your thesis. Speaking of your thesis, I suggest you provide a main idea for your three topic sentences (“Such as how the lack of sequence and consistency of the inner story of S. and the outer story within the marginal notes lacks sequence. Also how the theme of mystery stays within the content to the very end. I will visit the augment of if Straka is a reliable storyteller and if Eric and Jen theorizing throughout this book is filling in the blanks and contributing to the story which makes them authors as well.”) In other words, what exactly does your three topic sentences support? Why are they important?
Diamond, it seems like you were still in the early drafting stages here. As your peers say, it will be helpful consider what central argument ties together the issues you bring up in this intro paragraphs. Perhaps you can pick up the suggestion from your opening quote and discuss what kinds of questions S raises, and how they contribute to / get in the way of our engagement with the text?