Posted by Kristi Vang (67.174.158.14) on June 24, 2005 at 7:58:45 p.m.:
In Reply to: Essay 2 Rough Draft posted by Paul Kennedy on June 23, 2005 at 10:00:16 p.m.:
Reader's Name: Kristi Vang
Writers Name: Paul Kennedy
1) Review the assignment requirements. Read the essay. In your opinion, does the writer answer the essay assignment in this piece? Explain.
In my opinion, I feel that the writer attempted to answer the essay questions as he saw it. The writer saw the conflict between Walter and Mama identifying them as the protagonist and antagonist resecpectively. I think that this is an effective utilization of the essential elements of drama, I personnally feel that Walter was both the protagonist and antagonist. The writer feels that the conflict between the two character revolves around their central idea on how to make their family happy. This does contribute to the sub theme of the play, deferred dreams. The writers explanation of the pyramidal pattern of the play is essentially correct as I see it; however, I see the climax of the play occuring when Walter refuses the money from Mr. Lindner versus the writers idea that the climax occurs when Walter looses the $6,500.00.
2) Write the thesis statement here:
The hopes and dreams of characters can be thwarted by a lack of economic opportunities.
3) Does the thesis attempt to prove a specific idea, or is it too general?
I feel that the thesis does attempt to prove a specific idea and it is centered around the disposition of the $10,000.00.
4) What specific evidence does the writer provide to support the thesis?
He makes several quotations and reference from the play on pages 1395, 1401, and 1405.
5) Does the writer explicitly show how this evidence supports his/her view? Are connections made for the reader?
The writers quote specific references from the play, they all have to deal with the allocation of the money. I do feel that these are valid connections to the reader and will help the reader to understand the writers view points.
6) Does each paragraph connect with the thesis?
I feel that each paragraph did connect with the thesis and that the writer did analyze the theme with respect to two elements of drama as defined in the Meyer text.
7) Is there additional evidence which the writer has missed?
There is additional evidence that the writer missed, but I wonder if the length of the essay precluded further definition.
8) Does the conclusion sum up the writer's point?
The conclusion was somewhat short, but he did use the elements of drama as I understand them in the proper fashion to summarize his points.
9) Give the writer at least one suggestion for improving this paper.
I think that the writer may benefit from looking a little deeper into the psychological make-up of his character and not take them so superficially. I think that these characters are very deep and have many levels of complexity.
>Paul Kennedy
>English 301
>Jeanne Guerin
>Essay 2 Rough Draft
>06/26/05
> In A Raisin in the Sun by Lorraine Hansberry the author uses conflict to help us see the theme of the play: No matter how hard people try to improve their lives they must not forget their family or their past. To emphasize this point so use the conflict between the newer generation of the family, Walter Lee, and the older generation, Lena (mama). To show this the author uses a protagonist, an antagonist, conflict and a pyramidal pattern.
>Walter is the protagonist of the play who wants to better himself and his family but can’t find a way until a $10,000 dollar check shows up for the death of his father. Walter wants to take the family’s money and invest it in buying a liquor store, but he comes across one problem his mother. Lena is the antagonist who doesn’t feel that she needs the money for herself, but at the same time refuses to give Walter all the money for his investment. “I’m sorry ‘bout your liquor store, son. It just wasn’t the thing for us to do.” (1395) She wants to do something for the whole family and investing in a liquor store isn’t in her plans. Instead she does everything opposite of what Walter wants to do with the money.
>In the play the conflict is strongest between Walter and his mother. The conflict between them is their different ideals on how to make their family happy. Walter feels that in order to make his family happy they need to out of their economic oppression by investing in a liquor store where he feels they will make a lot of money and be happy. Walter feels that in order to succeed in making their life’s better for him and his family he must, “Invest big, gamble big, hell, lose big if you have to, you know what I mean.” (1401) On the other hand Lena is from a older generation that feels that working hard and saving will make the family happy. Lena wants to strengthen the family bond and morale by buying a house. But, in order to keep the house the family will have to stay in their current economic oppression and work more hours than before if they want to make the house payment. “…It’s just a plain little old house-but it’s made good and solid-and it will be ours. Walter Lee-it makes a difference in a man when he can walk on floors that belong to him…” (1405) Lena feels that with a house they will have something of their own that they can take pride in and that will make the family happier than all the money in the world.
>There is a distinctive pyramidal pattern with in the play. The first is the rising action in which Lena gets $10,000 for husbands death. She is not quite sure what to do with the money. Walter knows what he wants to do with the money he wants to invest it in liquor store, but Lena won’t give him the money. The second is the climax where Lena finally gives Walter $6,500 after using $3500 for a down payment on a house. Lena tells Walter that half the money is to be used for his sister schooling. Walter doesn’t listen and uses all the money on the liquor store and loses it. And comes to an end with the falling action where Walter wants to take the white mans offer to buy their house so they won’t move into his all white neighborhood. In the end Walter isn’t able to take the white mans offer because his family helps him realize that they come from a hard working family that are proud to be who they are.
>With the use of a protagonist, an antagonist, conflict and the use of a pyramidal pattern the author was able to show us, that in the end after all the money is gone and the family is at their lowest point they are able to come together and rise up to be the proud family that has existed for six generations.